Challenge to Believer 'Pon' on so called "Eyewitnesses"

[Lamprecht]

Has nothing to do with the eyewitnesses. Some time this week I will make a thread challenge to Pon on physical evidence / mass graves. Unless he wants it sooner and isn't done with this topic... Still many unanswered points about his claimed "eyewitnesses"

[Hektor]

...
Yehuda Bakon
Your quote on "Yehuda Bacon" (or Bakon) is from the Eichmann trial in the 1960s. Did he not have plenty of time to go around reading other testimonies to decide what to claim?

Bakon was deported to Auschwitz at only the age of 14, so we are trusting the memory (and, of course, honesty) of a teenager after many decades. Bakon's claims contradict Tauber and Kula's. He claims that the Leichenkeller 1 of Krema III was split into 2 sections, whereas Tauber states that this was the case for Krema II only. Additionally, his claim that they were "pipes" with "four iron columns surrounded by strong wire" contradicts Kula and Tauber. It's just a hodgepodge of these two and Nyiszli (who speaks of "square sheet-iron pipes").

In Bakon's drawings, the supposed 'chimney' in which the Zyklon-B pellets were supposedly poured into is missing, he claimed that the lid was resting directly onto the ceiling. And he claims to have personally witnessed it first-hand, and even going as far to claim he actually opened one and looked inside. He said that the holes were topped with wooden covers, but Tauber claimed that they were concrete lids. Instead of being killed for having allegedly witnessed all of this, Bakon was deported out of Auschwitz and was liberated at Gunskirchen camp.

Why should we believe this guy? The most likely scenario is that he read a few other people's testimonies and then tried to merge them all together by memory at the trial. Maybe he wrote down some notes. Was he adequately cross examined? Eichmann was prevented from having an adequate defense in this trial, more details can be given. But really, pointing out that it was in Israel, so the judge, jury and executioner were all the aggrieved party really explains it succinctly.
....

Yehuda Bacon or Jehuda Bakon at the Eichmann show trial:


Interview for the USC Shoah Foundation:

[Hektor]

....
Yehuda Bakon
Your quote on "Yehuda Bacon" (or Bakon) is from the Eichmann trial in the 1960s. Did he not have plenty of time to go around reading other testimonies to decide what to claim?

Bakon was deported to Auschwitz at only the age of 14, so we are trusting the memory (and, of course, honesty) of a teenager after many decades. Bakon's claims contradict Tauber and Kula's. He claims that the Leichenkeller 1 of Krema III was split into 2 sections, whereas Tauber states that this was the case for Krema II only. Additionally, his claim that they were "pipes" with "four iron columns surrounded by strong wire" contradicts Kula and Tauber. It's just a hodgepodge of these two and Nyiszli (who speaks of "square sheet-iron pipes").

In Bakon's drawings, the supposed 'chimney' in which the Zyklon-B pellets were supposedly poured into is missing, he claimed that the lid was resting directly onto the ceiling. And he claims to have personally witnessed it first-hand, and even going as far to claim he actually opened one and looked inside. He said that the holes were topped with wooden covers, but Tauber claimed that they were concrete lids. Instead of being killed for having allegedly witnessed all of this, Bakon was deported out of Auschwitz and was liberated at Gunskirchen camp.

Why should we believe this guy? The most likely scenario is that he read a few other people's testimonies and then tried to merge them all together by memory at the trial. Maybe he wrote down some notes. Was he adequately cross examined? Eichmann was prevented from having an adequate defense in this trial, more details can be given. But really, pointing out that it was in Israel, so the judge, jury and executioner were all the aggrieved party really explains it succinctly.
....

I'd imagine that talks about 'survivor experiences' laced with horror stories were not uncommon for Jews in Palestine to talk about. Except for real life experiences it is easy to insert all kinds of horror stories into this. And storyteller may even have a competition about this.

Didn't Bakon have something about cannibalism as well in his testimony?
Yes, he did:

Q. Did you encounter at that time or during those weeks, any especially shocking experience?
A. Yes. We were transferred, at the end of March or in April, to a camp called Zeltenlager (tent camp). The conditions there were terrible. The crowding was so great that people preferred to sleep outside, in the mud. Once there was an air raid. Nearby there was a SS camp. One bomb had apparently been dropped a second too early and hence it fell into our camp, inside the Zeltenlager. And the following morning I saw people eating human flesh.
Q. You witnessed cannibalism?
A. Yes.
Q. By prisoners of the camp?
A. Yes.
Q. They ate the flesh of other prisoners?
A. Yes.
Presiding Judge: Did you mean that they ate the flesh of dead prisoners, victims of the bombing?
Witness Bakon: Yes.
http://www.nizkor.com/hweb/people/e/eic ... 68-06.html

[hermod]

I doubt the power-holders of the West ever required the debunking of all the existent testimonies to the blood libel before labelling it as "an anti-Semitic canard."

https://postimg.cc/cKwGKL9G

https://postimg.cc/D4FGV0Dv

[Hektor]

I doubt the power-holders of the West ever required the debunking of all the existent testimonies to the blood libel before labelling it as "an anti-Semitic canard."

...

Indeed. Why does this not apply to gas libel, equally.
And people that doubt ritual murders are not called 'Ritual Murder Deniers'.