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

[Hektor]

....
Ah, yes, so he "admits" to gassings, which had nothing to do with him. However, there is more to it: According to the "official" story made by the "experts" as you call them, the Birkenau crematorium were not being used to gas and cremate Jews at this time. Actually, it is alleged that so-called "Bunker 1" and "bunker 2" or "Red house" and "White house" were being used to gas Jews, until the crematoria were built.

Pruefer also stated:
"I saw a gas chamber from the outside; There was a wooden barrack; from here there was a connection with the gas chamber; from the gas chamber there was a connection with the crematorium" (In the original: "schol derevjannyj barak, ot nego bylo soobschchenie s gaskameroi, ot gaskamery bylo soobschschenie s krematoriem")

So, there was a "connecting structure" between the gas chamber and the crematorium and between the gas chamber and a wooden hut. Did the examiner speak of one of the two "bunkers"?
According to Prüfer, the gas chamber was outside the crematorium, just as the Smersch officer had suggested with his question ("next to the crematoriums"). Accordingly, it can not have been any of the gas chambers allegedly installed in the crematoria. The farmhouses are said to have been 550 or 900 meters away from the Crematoria II and III, which he clearly is not even describing at all since the gas chambers were underground.

Pruefer had to agree with the leitmotif of the indictment that the crematoria for the destruction of innocent people, that is to say, had been built for mass murder. These sorts of "Confessions" are quite meaningless given this context.
His descriptions of the alleged gas chambers are completely at odds with the standard story, they are not even close... He basically just says "yes, indeed, gas chamber" to get them off his ass. His claims are so at odds with the official story, which you claim is truth, that it is obvious that he is improvising here to placate his interrogator.
....

I think it's necessary to point out what SMERSH (СМЕРШ) is. It's short for Russian Смерть шпионам which means "Death to Spies".
It should be interesting to elaborate on the interrogation methods of SMERSH. How they extracted information. Or how they made people say what they wanted to hear. Funny enough, the Exterminationist literature that uses those 'confession' never deals with that issue. At least I haven't seen that yet. Point it out to me, if they do.

As for 'confessions' and 'testimony' Exterminationists like to use to suppor homicidal gassings in Auschwitz, they selectively use a tiny fraction of potential witnesses and ignore the overwhelming amount of potential witnesses that noticed nothing or only heard rumors in that regard. Apply Occam's Razor there.

Witness testimony isn't the friend of the Holocaust, it's his enemy.

[Lamprecht]

Hektor, check this post:
viewtopic.php?p=93521#p93521

From a major "Holocaust" journal:

Such self-abasing confessions cast grave doubt on Soviet methods of obtaining evidence, and support the thesis that the proceedings were merely show trials. The conduct of the trials, then, begs a crucial question: do the trials have any value as legal and historical evidence?

Trusting the Soviets to conduct a fair trial in these circumstances is much like trusting a fox to guard the henhouse.

As for why only maybe 1 or 2% of "eyewitness" claim gassings, the excuse is that it was just a big secret and they merely forgot to kill these people. And pay no attention to their claims that 5 people were shoved into one muffle, just a mistake

[Pon]

Dr.Johann Paul Kremer,Dozent of Anatomy at the University of Münster.Kremer had volunteered as a member of the General SS in 1935,and he had been detailed to Auschwitz in August 1942 to replace a physician who had fallen ill.There he served until November 20.

Kremer's diary was found when he was arrested,and was immediately recognized as an important piece of evidence of the atrocities committed in Auschwitz.We give here,in the common English translation,a few excerpts.

August 30,1942.Departure from Prague 8.15 a.m.through Böhmisch Trübau,Olmütz, Prerau,Oderberg.Arrival at Concentration Camp Auschwitz at 5.36 p.m.Quarantine in camp on account of numerous contagious diseases (typhus,malaria,dysentery).Received to secret order through garrison physician Hauptsturmführer [Kurt}Uhlenbrock and accommodation in a room (no.26)in the Waffen-SS club-house [Home ].

August 31,1942.Tropical climate with 28 " Centigrade in the shade,,dust and innumerable flies!Excellent food in the Home.This evening,for instance,we had sour duck livers for 0.40 RM,with stuffed tomatoes,tomato salad,etc.Water is infected,so we drink seltzer-water which is served free (mattoni).First inoculation against typhus.Had photo taken for the camp identity card.

September 1,1942.Have ordered SS officer's cap,sword-belt and brace from Berlin by letter.In the afternoon was present at the gassing of a block with Cyclon B against lice.

September 2,1942.Was present for the first time at a special action at 3 a.m.By comparison Dante's inferno seems almost a comedy.Auschwitz is justly called an extermination camp!2

After his arrest,Kremer was extradited to Poland,and he became one of the defendants in the Auschwitz Trial held before the Supreme National Tribunal in Cracow in November and December 1947.During his pre-trial interrogation Kremer was asked to elucidate the various entries of his diary.On August 18,1947,he stated that ";by September 2,1942,at 3 a.m.I had already been assigned to take part in the action of gassing people."

These mass murders took place in small cottages situated outside the Birkenau camp in a wood.The cottages were called ";bunkers " in the SS--men's slang.All SS physicians on duty in the camp took turns to participate in the gassings,which were called Sonderaktion [special action ].My part as a physician at the gassing consisted in remaining in readiness near the bunker.I was brought there by car.I sat in front with the driver and an SS hospital orderly sat in the back of the car with oxygen apparatus to revive SS-men,employed in the gassing, in case any of them should succumb to the poisonous fumes.When the transport with people who were destined to be gassed arrived at the railway ramp,the SS officers selected from among the new arrivals persons fit to work,while the rest -old people,all children, women with children in their arms and other persons not deemed fit to work -were loaded onto lorries and driven to the gas chambers.I used to follow behind the transport till we reached the bunker.There people were driven into the barrack huts where the victims undressed and then went naked to the gas chambers.Very often no incidents occurred,as the SS-men kept the people quiet,maintaining that they were to bathe and be deloused.After driving all of them into the gas chamber the door was closed and an SS-man in a gas mask threw the contents of a Cyclon tin through an opening in the side wall.The shouting and screaming of the victim could be heard through that opening and it was clear that they were fighting for their lives.These shouts were heard for a very short while.I should say for some minutes,but I am unable to give the exact length of time.3

Three days later Kremer witnessed another gassing,and dutifully recorded it in his diary.

September 5,1942.At noon was present at a special action in the women's camp (Moslems)-the most horrible of all horrors.Hschf Thilo,military surgeon,was right when he said to me today that we are located here in the anus mundi In the evening at about 8 p.m.another special action with a draft from Holland.men compete to take part in such actions as they get additional rations -1 /5 litre vodka,5 cigarettes,100 grammes of sausage and bread.Today and tomorrow (Sunday)on duty.4

In Poland,Kremer gave again a full explanation of this entry.On July 17,1947 he testified that ";the action of gassing emaciated women from the women's camp was particularly unpleasant."

Such individuals were generally called Muselmänner [Moslems ].I remember taking part in the gassing of such women in daylight.I am unable to state how numerous that group was. When I came to the bunker they sat clothed on the ground.As the clothes were in fact worn out camp clothes,they were not let into the undressing barracks but undressed in the open.I could deduce from the behaviour of these women that they realized what was awaiting them. They begged the SS-men to be allowed to live,they wept,but all of them were driven into the gas chamber and gassed.Being an anatomist I had seen many horrors,had dealt with corpses,but what I then saw was not to be compared with anything ever seen before.It was under the influence of these impressions that I noted in my diary,under the date of September 5,1942 ";The most horrible of all horrors.Haupsturmführer Thilo was right when he said to me today that we are located here in the anus mundi " I used this expression because I could not imagine anything more sickening and more horrible.

From: https://web.archive.org/web/20020529044838/http://www.holocaustdenialontrial.com/nsindex.html

I will continue posting witness statements, and answering the concerns you have on the witnesses, it's true that details are sometimes wrong in the statements, though I hope to show that some "incredible" details are, in fact, credible and that the details wrong is simply of human error. Some might be intentional, exaggerating the evils of the nazis, this is also human nature when having been through what some of the victims has been through, witness statements should always be taken suspiciously, but without, for that sake, ignoring important facts that only they could bring.

[Lamprecht]

Pon, first I would like to make clear that I made this thread with you in mind: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12783

You don't have to reply to the thread, I just suggest you check out that document I have posted. It's given to jurors in a criminal trial in order to help them assess validity of eyewitness testimony. It has some good tips. It is of course not the same for "confessions" which is a whole other situation than eyewitness testimony of victims.

Dr.Johann Paul Kremer,Dozent of Anatomy at the University of Münster.Kremer had volunteered as a member of the General SS in 1935,and he had been detailed to Auschwitz in August 1942 to replace a physician who had fallen ill.There he served until November 20.

Kremer's diary was found when he was arrested,and was immediately recognized as an important piece of evidence of the atrocities committed in Auschwitz.We give here,in the common English translation,a few excerpts.

August 30,1942.Departure from Prague 8.15 a.m.through Böhmisch Trübau,Olmütz, Prerau,Oderberg.Arrival at Concentration Camp Auschwitz at 5.36 p.m.Quarantine in camp on account of numerous contagious diseases (typhus,malaria,dysentery).Received to secret order through garrison physician Hauptsturmführer [Kurt}Uhlenbrock and accommodation in a room (no.26)in the Waffen-SS club-house [Home ].

August 31,1942.Tropical climate with 28 " Centigrade in the shade,,dust and innumerable flies!Excellent food in the Home.This evening,for instance,we had sour duck livers for 0.40 RM,with stuffed tomatoes,tomato salad,etc.Water is infected,so we drink seltzer-water which is served free (mattoni).First inoculation against typhus.Had photo taken for the camp identity card.

September 1,1942.Have ordered SS officer's cap,sword-belt and brace from Berlin by letter.In the afternoon was present at the gassing of a block with Cyclon B against lice.

September 2,1942.Was present for the first time at a special action at 3 a.m.By comparison Dante's inferno seems almost a comedy.Auschwitz is justly called an extermination camp!2

After his arrest,Kremer was extradited to Poland,and he became one of the defendants in the Auschwitz Trial held before the Supreme National Tribunal in Cracow in November and December 1947.During his pre-trial interrogation Kremer was asked to elucidate the various entries of his diary.On August 18,1947,he stated that ";by September 2,1942,at 3 a.m.I had already been assigned to take part in the action of gassing people."

These mass murders took place in small cottages situated outside the Birkenau camp in a wood.The cottages were called ";bunkers " in the SS--men's slang.All SS physicians on duty in the camp took turns to participate in the gassings,which were called Sonderaktion [special action ].My part as a physician at the gassing consisted in remaining in readiness near the bunker.I was brought there by car.I sat in front with the driver and an SS hospital orderly sat in the back of the car with oxygen apparatus to revive SS-men,employed in the gassing, in case any of them should succumb to the poisonous fumes.When the transport with people who were destined to be gassed arrived at the railway ramp,the SS officers selected from among the new arrivals persons fit to work,while the rest -old people,all children, women with children in their arms and other persons not deemed fit to work -were loaded onto lorries and driven to the gas chambers.I used to follow behind the transport till we reached the bunker.There people were driven into the barrack huts where the victims undressed and then went naked to the gas chambers.Very often no incidents occurred,as the SS-men kept the people quiet,maintaining that they were to bathe and be deloused.After driving all of them into the gas chamber the door was closed and an SS-man in a gas mask threw the contents of a Cyclon tin through an opening in the side wall.The shouting and screaming of the victim could be heard through that opening and it was clear that they were fighting for their lives.These shouts were heard for a very short while.I should say for some minutes,but I am unable to give the exact length of time.3

Three days later Kremer witnessed another gassing,and dutifully recorded it in his diary.

September 5,1942.At noon was present at a special action in the women's camp (Moslems)-the most horrible of all horrors.Hschf Thilo,military surgeon,was right when he said to me today that we are located here in the anus mundi In the evening at about 8 p.m.another special action with a draft from Holland.men compete to take part in such actions as they get additional rations -1 /5 litre vodka,5 cigarettes,100 grammes of sausage and bread.Today and tomorrow (Sunday)on duty.4

In Poland,Kremer gave again a full explanation of this entry.On July 17,1947 he testified that ";the action of gassing emaciated women from the women's camp was particularly unpleasant."

Such individuals were generally called Muselmänner [Moslems ].I remember taking part in the gassing of such women in daylight.I am unable to state how numerous that group was. When I came to the bunker they sat clothed on the ground.As the clothes were in fact worn out camp clothes,they were not let into the undressing barracks but undressed in the open.I could deduce from the behaviour of these women that they realized what was awaiting them. They begged the SS-men to be allowed to live,they wept,but all of them were driven into the gas chamber and gassed.Being an anatomist I had seen many horrors,had dealt with corpses,but what I then saw was not to be compared with anything ever seen before.It was under the influence of these impressions that I noted in my diary,under the date of September 5,1942 ";The most horrible of all horrors.Haupsturmführer Thilo was right when he said to me today that we are located here in the anus mundi " I used this expression because I could not imagine anything more sickening and more horrible.

From: https://web.archive.org/web/20020529044838/http://www.holocaustdenialontrial.com/nsindex.html

I will continue posting witness statements, and answering the concerns you have on the witnesses, it's true that details are sometimes wrong in the statements, though I hope to show that some "incredible" details are, in fact, credible and that the details wrong is simply of human error. Some might be intentional, exaggerating the evils of the nazis, this is also human nature when having been through what some of the victims has been through, witness statements should always be taken suspiciously, but without, for that sake, ignoring important facts that only they could bring.

So basically he wrote nothing about gassing in his diaries, except gassing of lice. He wrote about "Special action" which, I am sure you will insist, meant murder. However that is not the case. See:

D. Hebden debunks the word 'sonderaktion' / Kremer diary
viewtopic.php?t=2291

Special Treatment in Auschwitz—Origin and Meaning of a Term
https://holocausthandbooks.com/dl/10-stia.pdf
(see section: 15. The “Special Operations” and Dr. Johann Paul Kremer [beginning page 82])

When Kremer arrived at Auschwitz, a deadly typhus epidemic took place, at some points hundreds died per day. This is why he was saying it was a camp of death or annihilation, and he speaks about this horrible situation a lot in other entries you don't mention. But never does he talk about gassing other people.

In August 1945 Kremer was arrested by the British, and detained in former camp Neuengamme. They confiscated his diary, and then extradited him to Poland in December 1947 where he was sentenced to death at the Krakow trial. This sentence was commuted to life imprisonment but he was released in 1958. However, at another trial he was sentenced in 1960 again for 10 years, but it was considered "served due" due to his prison time in Poland.

The following translation is ommitting something important:

September 2,1942. Was present for the first time at a special action at 3 a.m.By comparison Dante's inferno seems almost a comedy.Auschwitz is justly called an extermination camp!

the German text says "Zum 1. Male draußen um 3 Uhr früh bei einer Sonderaktion zugegen." or:
"For the 1st time present outside at 3 a.m. at a special action"

So the omitted "outside" indicates that the "special action" (which you claim is homicidal gassings) was not inside any sort of building, which is what you claim is true. Also, your "extermination camp" term is a mistranslation. He said "Lager der Vernichtung" which is "camp of annihilation" not "extermination camp". So that's just deceptive, Pon. Not that I think you did that on purpose, but your source of information either did, or was just careless.

As for this quote:

September 5,1942.At noon was present at a special action in the women's camp (Moslems)-the most horrible of all horrors.Hschf Thilo,military surgeon,was right when he said to me today that we are located here in the anus mundi In the evening at about 8 p.m.another special action with a draft from Holland.

The last sentence here is a mistranslation, "Abends wieder bei einer Sonderaktion aus Holland" or:
"In the evening again at a special action from Holland"
The translation you provided suggests that a special action was performed against the individuals in the transport, but actually the correct translation is that the transport itself was the special action!

If these entries meant extermination, why didn't he destroy them? The "Special actions" are clearly in reference to obtaining transports.

He says the SS men who volunteered for "special actions" got extra food, cigarettes, alcohol, etc. So probably it had something to do with cleaning the trains the people arrived in, or something else that is quite unenjoyable. There isn't any reason to think it was gassing Jews.

The "Bunker" he talks about was likely Block 11 which served as a brig (jail, prison) and executions took place outside of it. The women who "begged ... to be allowed to live" were possibly sentenced to death and were sent to be executed. Or maybe they just thought they were going to be gassed, because of rumors -- there are many examples of jews saying "we went to the gas chamber, people told us we were going to die, but instead, water came out!" Maybe someone told them they were going to be gassed, even though they weren't?

As for Kremer's "Confessions" as a prisoner in captivity, this was to save his own life. He had every reason to tell the lies his captors wanted to hear. It was a successful strategy. The proof is in the pudding so to speak: he was not executed, and his second sentence of 10 years imprisonment he did not even have to serve! Imagine if he said "Nobody was gassed! It's a lie!" he would have certainly been executed -- that was no defense at all. He was 77 years old at the time, who can blame him for not wanting to spend his last moments alive imprisoned?

Let's also be clear, Kremer was very critical of the NSDAP in his diary, despite being a member. I can post some quotes in his diary about it but it would maybe clutter the thread, so I will not post them unless asked. Perhaps you could make another thread focused on this individual.

Pon, do you really think "Confessions" prove very much when it was beneficial for the individual who was imprisoned to tell whatever lie his prosecutors wanted to hear?

Some Auschwitz workers that Pon loves to ignore:
- Another example I would like to bring up is Josef Kramer (yes, different last name). Initially, Kramer, who was a former commandant of Auschwitz (but later Bergen Belsen) said that the allegations of mass murder by gas chamber were false. Later, he said that they were real. Why did he change his mind? Because it was in his benefit to tell the lies the victors wanted told.

- Hans Aumeier, deputy commandant of Auschwitz, said in a statement on 29 June 1945 that nobody was gassed when he was at Auschwitz.

- Richard Baer said nobody was gassed at Auschwitz either, and reports said nothing would dissuade him from this belief. He was the only defendant to not show up at the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial in 1963. He died "in a highly mysterious way" in prison

- SS-Obersturmführer Robert Mulka, who was adjutant to Rudolf Hoess, denied he even knew about the alleged gassings

- Karl Höcker, Mulka's successor as adjutant of the camp commandant, believed "that inmates in Auschwitz were basically not killed."

- Fritz Gaar claimed: "Although I was working for longer then 4 years in Auschwitz I did not notice anything about prisoners being gassed there"

- Dr. Mengele, the infamous "Angel of Death" stated: "I gave life in Auschwitz, I did not take it."

- Fritz Frenzel, Hermann Hagerhoff, and Walter Otto (Auschwitz camp guards) and Ernst Romeikat and Theodor Grewe (Auschwitz administration of inmate property) all stated that they had no personal knowledge of the alleged mass killings.

- Thies Christophersen, stationed at Auschwitz, and author of the book "The Auschwitz Lie" also rejected the claims of homicidal gas chambers. "During the time I was in Auschwitz, I did not notice the slightest evidence of mass gassing"

In Pon's conspiracy theory, anyone claiming that they were at Auschwitz and there were no gassings was just a liar. Anyone who, under any circumstances, claims there were is not a liar, even if they say other things which are not true; we should just ignore that they say absurd things like "5 people were cremated in 1 oven muffle in 10 minutes" and trust anything they say about gassings. This is, of course, laughable.


Suggested reading on Kremer:

lies about the Kremer diary / his trials
viewtopic.php?t=390

Confessions of SS Men who were at Auschwitz (Kremer in particular is focused on)
https://codoh.com/library/document/1982/

[Moderator]

Pon, the OP said:

I challenge you to tell this forum about so called "eyewitnesses" that you find convincing.
It's a simple request.

- Give us their names.
- Tell us what they claim in their own words.
- Tell us where they were when they supposedly 'witnessed' events which allegedly support the "holocaust" narrative.
- Tell us when they supposedly did this alleged witnessing.
- Tell us what trials they testified in.

Please answer those questions. when posting names.

Thanks, M1

[Otium]

Normally, a person would be afraid to lie in court because he could be charged with perjury. But what if there's no option for that? What if, in fact, lying was encouraged? Then why should we trust their lies?

There's an important point to be made here. The fact is there would be no consequences about lying in a Holocaust Show Trial because the trials didn't ever exist to investigate the validity of the claims, they existed simply to "prove" them further because they were believed to be fact BEFORE any of the trials even began. There was no even playing field, there was no unbiased council. There was only prosecution. No Germans were tried for justice, whether they were innocent or not. They were tried to be convicted. The outcome was decided. Hence, no eyewitness need have felt it necessary to worry about lying. And when has any of these witnesses been convicted of such a thing?

How on earth can exterminationists justify these trials when we have no reason to believe the trials themselves were valid?

[Pon]

Lol, a simple request (with 5 complicated things you need to go through though).

The one that posted the first post, one of the "deniers" didn't follow those rules, shame..




I don't think it's doable to always stay true to those conditions, at least not by a amateur like me. I will try as far as I can, but to be a rule to be satisfied all the way..I doubt it. Sometimes everything is not documented in the web, if there's a statement by a historian the documentation might be available but not by any easy means (or for free). I don't have the economy to pay a lot of money to get documents where experts which have reviewed or at least not falsified the statements have already given their opinion or their sentiment.

Trusting the Soviets to conduct a fair trial in these circumstances is much like trusting a fox to guard the henhouse.

Why?

Witness testimony isn't the friend of the Holocaust, it's his enemy.

No, it's our confirmation of it's truth, and why we fight so hard for it. I, for some time, believed that moon landings were a hoax, I saw the arguments against the earth being round, though I didn't believe them, I still thought them convincing (just like holohoax arguments), I'm not the gullible, always have to follow society type (what do you think brought me here?). Witness testimony isn't your enemy. Iam. Your statements strenghten my conviction.

There's an important point to be made here. The fact is there would be no consequences about lying in a Holocaust Show Trial because the trials didn't ever exist to investigate the validity of the claims, they existed simply to "prove" them further because they were believed to be fact BEFORE any of the trials even began. There was no even playing field, there was no unbiased council. There was only prosecution. No Germans were tried for justice, whether they were innocent or not. They were tried to be convicted. The outcome was decided. Hence, no eyewitness need have felt it necessary to worry about lying. And when has any of these witnesses been convicted of such a thing?

How on earth can exterminationists justify these trials when we have no reason to believe the trials themselves were valid?

What did those sentenced to death have to loose? Why didn't they tell everything was a lie? Oh, please tell me, and the 6 million victims, they surely want to know. Sorry.

[Hannover]

Pon said about so called "eyewitnesses":

No, it's our confirmation of it's truth, and why we fight so hard for it.

You mean the ones that were already demolished or do you some better ones?

Again, I challenge you start threads on just THREE, or more if you like, of your favorite "eyewitnesses" and tell us:

- Their names.

- What they said in their own words.

- Where they supposedly "witnessed" the 'holocaust'.

- When?

- What trials did they testify in?

- Show us the verbatim text of their testimony, and show us the cross examination text.

- And why you believe them.

It's time for you to back up what you claim

- Hannover

No alleged human remains of millions upon millions to be seen in allegedly known locations, no 'holocaust'.

[Lamprecht]

Trusting the Soviets to conduct a fair trial in these circumstances is much like trusting a fox to guard the henhouse.

Why?

I would look into "Active Measures" Pon.

Even Wikipedia comments on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Show_trial#Soviet_Union

As early as 1922, Lenin advocated staging several "model trials" ("показательный процесс", literally "demonstrative trial", "a process showing an example") in Soviet Russia and the Soviet Ukraine.[19]

Show trials were common during Joseph Stalin's political repressions, such as the Moscow Trials of the Great Purge period (1937–38).

The Soviet authorities staged the actual trials meticulously. If defendants refused to "cooperate"—i.e., to admit guilt for their alleged and mostly fabricated crimes—they did not go on public trial, but suffered execution nonetheless.

You have also ignored this post with a quote from a major "Holocaust" journal: viewtopic.php?p=94155#p94155
"Such self-abasing confessions cast grave doubt on Soviet methods of obtaining evidence, and support the thesis that the proceedings were merely show trials. The conduct of the trials, then, begs a crucial question: do the trials have any value as legal and historical evidence?"

No, it's our confirmation of it's truth, and why we fight so hard for it. I, for some time, believed that moon landings were a hoax, I saw the arguments against the earth being round, though I didn't believe them, I still thought them convincing (just like holohoax arguments), I'm not the gullible, always have to follow society type (what do you think brought me here?). Witness testimony isn't your enemy. Iam. Your statements strenghten my conviction.

Yet according to Jewish historian and Yad Vashem archives director Shmuel Krakowski (an Aushwitz survivor) most Jewish testimony is "Unreliable": download/file.php?id=2167

A person can say anything they want to say. If there's no punishment for lying in order to incriminate their enemy, why wouldn't they do it? A lot of people would consider it immoral, but even if 5% are willing to lie against their enemies as revenge [when there is no consequence] that still allows us to have plenty of worthless, fake testimony.

What did those sentenced to death have to loose?

Did they not have families who could be targeted? Were they sentenced to death BEFORE their alleged statements, or after?
If you had the choice between a quick and painless execution or month after month of horrible torture, what would you choose?

Why didn't they tell everything was a lie?

Some did, as mentioned previously. For example:
"Why Didn't Any Nazi Deny" and the scope of the "conspiracy"
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12287

Also check the bottom of this post: viewtopic.php?p=94190#p94190

Not to mention, few if any would have been able to say it was ALL a lie. Why would an Auschwitz worker say that nobody was gassed at Treblinka, a place he had never been? Use your brain, Pon

[david2923]

As per Filip Muller inmate # 29236, Arrived Auschwitz April 13, 1942.
In place of the round chimney that had been destroyed during the fire at the
crematorium, the bricklayer unit erected an enormous new quadrangular
chimney.” “The continuous operation, especially the strain on the furnaces that went with it and that originally had not been taken into account, apparently caused the refractory bricks of the inner lining to disintegrate, threatening the collapse of the chimney. For that reason, in the summer of 1942 a new quadrangular chimney with a double lining of refractory was attached to the furnaces. During this period, however, the operation of the furnaces was not discontinued. The unit working on the chimney was about 30 heads strong. These were mainly Jewish detainees.”..........P. 49 Auschwitz Cremation ........Mattogno

Imagine working on a chimney with the 3 furnaces(6 muffles) stoking at least 800 degrees centigrade!!!

[Otium]

There's an important point to be made here. The fact is there would be no consequences about lying in a Holocaust Show Trial because the trials didn't ever exist to investigate the validity of the claims, they existed simply to "prove" them further because they were believed to be fact BEFORE any of the trials even began. There was no even playing field, there was no unbiased council. There was only prosecution. No Germans were tried for justice, whether they were innocent or not. They were tried to be convicted. The outcome was decided. Hence, no eyewitness need have felt it necessary to worry about lying. And when has any of these witnesses been convicted of such a thing?

How on earth can exterminationists justify these trials when we have no reason to believe the trials themselves were valid?

What did those sentenced to death have to loose? Why didn't they tell everything was a lie? Oh, please tell me, and the 6 million victims, they surely want to know. Sorry.

They had everything to lose. 6 million? Holocaust Orthodox historians have no clue themselves how many were killed.

Reitlinger gives a significantly smaller number than any i've seen from the Orthodox side.

The fact that all you willfully ignorant exterminationists think that omission determines guilt with your ridiculous claim that the Holocaust must be real because "nobody denied it" is so OBVIOUSLY stupid it beggars belief. If nobody committed a crime they're not going to say either or because they had nothing to do with it. The same goes for those accused at the Nuremberg Kangaroo court. The logical conclusion is that NONE of them had any clue about anything. And indeed that's the truth, not only because it didn't happen, but because even if it did none of them would've known anyway. I debunked this stupid assertion you people love to make months ago.

https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11053&p=92874#p92874

[Moderator]

Pon:
This thread is not about Nuremberg, hence I removed your last long post, I suggest you read the thread on Nuremberg below and respond there.
Nuremberg - Fair Trial or Show Trial ?
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11053

You have also been challenged to present "eyewitnesses" which you feel are credible. please do so.
See Hannover's challenge.

Please review our simple guidelines which you agreed to.

M1

[Lamprecht]

I didn't get to see your post Pon, but I warned you about this in your first thread on Prussian blue. I said I was surprised that the mod let you post so many off-topic things. Sometimes it is just best to make a brand new thread.

[Pon]

I get easily persuaded to post on things mentioned briefly in the threads (I'm not used to this kind of strict moderation, although I do see why it is needed), I'll try not to do that later on.

I intend to argue for Hoess as a important and reliable witness, I have to collect a lot of information for this though (as I already know what your arguments would be, ie tortured, missed a year, camp doesn't exist, etc.), I think I remembered you or someone else said that the truth shouldn't be that hard to find? I disagree on that, I believe the opposite, it is when giving up too soon when faced with hardship that we miss the truth.

I also intend to argue that you can burn more than one body (which was a argument against one of the witnesses in this thread), I'm looking for sources of an argument I read some time ago that the chinese also burned more than five bodies in one muffle, and also that the germans used the technique of not completely burning a body before inserting another (which reduced cremation time significantly).

I have a lot to do do presently so it might take some time to gather all the info I need in order to present a good argument, I do regularly visit this topic though and will respond when I find that I have a "good case", so to speak. I will respond to the appropriate thread concerning the Nuremberg trials as well when I find the time. I've given a bit of preview of what's to come so if you think you already know the arguments I'm going to present then you are of course welcome to respond to them, I think it would be best if we continue the discussion when I've collected the material though so we don't speak around eachother.

[Hannover]

I get easily persuaded to post on things mentioned briefly in the threads (I'm not used to this kind of strict moderation, although I do see why it is needed), I'll try not to do that later on.

I intend to argue for Hoess as a important and reliable witness, I have to collect a lot of information for this though (as I already know what your arguments would be, ie tortured, missed a year, camp doesn't exist, etc.), I think I remembered you or someone else said that the truth shouldn't be that hard to find? I disagree on that, I believe the opposite, it is when giving up too soon when faced with hardship that we miss the truth.

I also intend to argue that you can burn more than one body (which was a argument against one of the witnesses in this thread), I'm looking for sources of an argument I read some time ago that the chinese also burned more than five bodies in one muffle, and also that the germans used the technique of not completely burning a body before inserting another (which reduced cremation time significantly).

I have a lot to do do presently so it might take some time to gather all the info I need in order to present a good argument, I do regularly visit this topic though and will respond when I find that I have a "good case", so to speak. I will respond to the appropriate thread concerning the Nuremberg trials as well when I find the time. I've given a bit of preview of what's to come so if you think you already know the arguments I'm going to present then you are of course welcome to respond to them, I think it would be best if we continue the discussion when I've collected the material though so we don't speak around each other.

You said you understood the moderation here, yet above you try to introduce points before starting threads on them.

So then, get to it, Pon.
'Exterminationist' arguments shouldn't be difficult to find. After all, we've seen them all, we've shot them all down.

And while you're looking around, or procrastinating, for information about Hoess, please look around and show us the claimed millions of Auschwitz human remains that supposedly exist there.
You certainly cannot claim that Hoess is credible without showing us what is claimed by '"holocaust historians" themselves concerning the massive deaths & enormous mass remains that are alleged to be a result of his actions.

We await your thread on Hoess and other topics that you say you will support the 'holocaust' narrative.

- Hannover

Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd impossibility of the 'holocaust' storyline is the message.