More Treblinka nonsense - this time from Thomas Dalton

[Clem]

Thomas Dalton one-ups the discredited Thomas "there is no reason to doubt" Kues by claiming that about 90,000 Jews died en route to and while at Treblinka. (Kues claims about 40,000) Dalton quotes a figure of 912,000 throughout the article:

I would further add that, on the revisionist thesis, many thousands of people did indeed die in the camp, of various causes. A high-volume transit camp would have received thousands of incoming dead (recall the “one third” statistic above), and many more would have died of disease and, yes, execution (likely by bullet) at the camp. So it is fully expected that mass graves exist in the camp. But the anticipated number of victims is much smaller—perhaps 10% of those claimed.

http://www.inconvenienthistory.com/arch ... blinka.php

Simply incredible. What is it with these holohoax-light "revisionists" named Thomas?

[Clem]

Dalton:

I would further add that, on the revisionist thesis...

Where is this "revisionist thesis" that Dalton is talking about?

It appears that our two not so doubting Thomases are the only "revsisoinists" who have ever read it.

What makes these people think that they can speak for others on this issue?

90,000 claimed deaths at Treblinka and he calls himself a "revisioinist"?

Pathetic.

[Raymond]

90,000 is a far cry from the nearly 800,000 usually quoted, so I would say this is quite a revision in the literal sense of the word. In the light if the rapid spread of disease, air attacks on the train lines from allied planes and executions by shooting or hangings (speculation), it doesn't seem all too unrealistic that there would be a high number of deaths. The lack of gas chambers is the key element. Revisionism isn't all or nothing nor is it a black and white matter.

[White Wolf]

Didn't the Red Cross estimate about 18,000 total at Treblinka?

Figure that even if they were all jews it is a far cry from 90,000.

[Raymond]

Im unfamiliar with the IRC visiting any of the Reinhardt camps. Can we see the documents?

[borjastick]

Before denegrating Thomas Dalton and his fine work I would suggest people read his book 'Debating the Holocaust'. A brilliant piece and well observed. Never does he resort to anger or bigotry in his comment but only ever uses calm, evidence based logic and thought to arrive at his conclusions. He never denies that jews were relocated at great human cost. He accepts readily that jews died en route to and at some of the camps, to do otherwise is in my opinion avoiding the facts.

As for the death camps he uses time charts and death rates as well and physical capabilities of the camps, and just for good measure he quotes witnesses too.

His book is one of the best written yet and is firmly but intelligently revisionist. If contributors feel that not one person died in Treblinka they are kidding themselves.

[Haldan]

Before denegrating Thomas Dalton and his fine work I would suggest people read his book 'Debating the Holocaust'. A brilliant piece and well observed. Never does he resort to anger or bigotry in his comment but only ever uses calm, evidence based logic and thought to arrive at his conclusions. He never denies that jews were relocated at great human cost. He accepts readily that jews died en route to and at some of the camps, to do otherwise is in my opinion avoiding the facts.

How does his book Debating the Holocaust tie-in with the claim that 912000 jews died in Treblinka? Is there a connection I'm unaware of in that book?

-haldan

[borjastick]

Dalton has a whole section on the death camps and analyses the claims against the available evidence. He deconstructs the Treblinka and other camps death claims and arrives at a guess that it could be no more than 10% of the claimed figures. Later today I will read the section again and post some quotes from it.

[Haldan]

Dalton has a whole section on the death camps and analyses the claims against the available evidence. He deconstructs the Treblinka and other camps death claims and arrives at a guess that it could be no more than 10% of the claimed figures. Later today I will read the section again and post some quotes from it.

Thank you Mr. Borjastick. I have not read his book yet so this will be interesting additions to this discussion

-haldan

[Kingfisher]

A curious piece of Treblinka trivia: we often read that the Germans planted lupins on the site, which somehow seems unlikely.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=treblinka+lupins

I suspect this was in fact Rosebay Willowherb (US Fireweed) or a local relative, which is an early coloniser growing on freshly disturbed ground, especially if there has been a fire. Railway cuttings, demolition sites and -- during the war -- bomb sites are examples in Britain.



Trivial in itself, but an interesting example of how evidence can be misinterpreted, intention assumed where there was none, and a false story circulate as a result.

[borjastick]

Clem, with respect I suggest you read the book in its entirety before you shoot him down. It is a ridiculous notion to claim that no jews died in transports that were at the very least 'rough' and lasted a day or more in railway trucks.

I know that my grandad died in 1975 but I cannot prove it to you because all the papers were lost by my parents. He still died though.

I used the death camps description because that is how they are generally referred to. Call them what you like but they are called death camps by those with whom we have the biggest beef.

Dalton used some witness statements as proof or at least close to it as the ridiculous claims that are made about the death camps.

It's a good book and I would recommend it to anyone but then again if you have your mind made up no reasonable commentary will change it.

I don't for one moment accept the official version that Treblinka was a death camp and that about 800,000+ people were put to death there. But I do have an open mind to the suffering of jews and others in such transports. I cannot accept that no Jews died in such transports and to do so is the act of an Ostrich. It doesn't prove the Holocaust happened or anything like it.

Revisionism isn't black and white. Good and bad. Did happen didn't happen. It isn't that simple.

[Hannover]

I generally agree with Clem that there are times when Revisionists try to appear 'reasonable' in their assessments by throwing Jewish supremacists a bone. My analysis in those cases has shown that 'concessions' are not warranted by the evidence at hand. Dalton seems to accept some of Colls statements, with qualifications. I don't buy thoses concessions. Colls has not even proved that what she found were actual 'mass graves', the limited GPR work only indicated that some holes had been dug. Garbage burning pits? Footprints of former buildings? ... etc.

Too assume they are 'mass graves' while completely lacking detailed and verifiable information is the classic definition of shoddy work with an agenda.

I have no problem with accepting that some Jews died at Treblinka. Disease was rampant through much of eastern Europe during that time. Every populated area has deaths every day, applying that to the large numbers of people that moved through and stopped at Treblinka, it is therefore statistically logical that people died and were cremated. No big deal, happens everywhere everyday, a 'holocaust' that is not. To claim it is indicates nothing but desperation from those who profit & benefit from the ultimate 'big lie' technique.

But do note what Dalton concluded with:

Lacking the details, it’s hard to draw firm conclusions. But all signs point in one direction. They imply that, as at Belzec, ground surveys provide far more support for the revisionist thesis than the traditional one. Things are looking up; the truth is at hand.

- Hannover

[Raymond]

Not only have I made it clear that I do not believe the Treblinka II extermination story, but I also think I made it clear that I think the number of 90,000 given by Dalton seem pretty inflated for such a short period of time that T2 was in operation but I still do believe that there were a good number of deaths, a fate for ANYONE traveling by German rail lines of the time (Jews, Wehrmacht/SS soldiers, civilians, refugees and so on. . .).

I will not be dragged into your childish games when I have made it very clear that I do not for one second believe in the Treblinka story. Your little true false questionnaires serve no purpose other than making you seem bullheaded and amateurish.

As I have stated, in more or less words, I do not have the arrogance to claim that I KNOW the answers many particulars of the Holocaust story as I do not have the means or resources to conduct primary investigations which is why I come here to discuss and learn from the works of those that do.

At that, I am done with this pointless back and forth. I refuse to be dragged any further down to your level than I already have.

[Moderator]

Clem & Steve F.
I've given both of you a rest for a couple of weeks. You become to emotional, disruptive, and foul mouthed for this forum. That's it.
M1

[Kingfisher]

I generally agree with Clem that there are times when Revisionists try to appear 'reasonable' in their assessments by throwing Jewish supremacists a bone.

What you call "throwing a bone" others might see as being objective and open-minded. How can we expect opponents to consider our views if we are going to stick our fingers in our ears and intone loudly "I can't hear you" at the suggestion that even one tenth of what has been alleged could have some foundation? Historiography should be the search for facts, not the imposition of every aspect of a preconception.

My analysis in those cases has shown that 'concessions' are not warranted by the evidence at hand. Dalton seems to accept some of Colls statements, with qualifications. I don't buy thoses concessions. Colls has not even proved that what she found were actual 'mass graves', the limited GPR work only indicated that some holes had been dug. Garbage burning pits? Footprints of former buildings? ... etc.

I think Dalton and Kues would be among the first to agree with you that these alternative reasons for the presence of at least some pits are valid, but it is "throwing a bone" to the opposition to suggest that these are necessarily the only reasons. Dalton's writing is a first reaction to the newspaper article, so he takes at face value the claim that "graves" have been found. It is reasonable to expect some disposal of dead persons to have taken place. Talking numbers is entering the field of speculation: it is impossible to have any sort of reasonably accurate figure, so Dalton and Kues have chosen to show that even apparently very high figures need not raise suspicions of genocide. Dalton nowhere says that 90K died. What he does say that if only 1 in 10 died, that would give us this sort of figure.

Too assume they are 'mass graves' while completely lacking detailed and verifiable information is the classic definition of shoddy work with an agenda.

Absolutely. But that is a criticism of Caroline Sturdy Coles, not of Thomas Dalton

I have no problem with accepting that some Jews died at Treblinka. Disease was rampant through much of eastern Europe during that time. Every populated area has deaths every day, applying that to the large numbers of people that moved through and stopped at Treblinka, it is therefore statistically logical that people died and were cremated. No big deal, happens everywhere everyday, a 'holocaust' that is not. To claim it is indicates nothing but desperation from those who profit & benefit from the ultimate 'big lie' technique.

So, in the end, you and Dalton are not so far apart.

But do note what Dalton concluded with:

Lacking the details, it’s hard to draw firm conclusions. But all signs point in one direction. They imply that, as at Belzec, ground surveys provide far more support for the revisionist thesis than the traditional one. Things are looking up; the truth is at hand.

- Hannover

Something we can all agree with. I was going to say and take comfort from, but then I thought of that Daily Mail headline and realised what an uphill task we have. Every time, the evidence is misrepresented in the media as confirming what, in reality, it casts enormous doubt upon.

As you never tire of saying, Revisionists have won the battle (evidence). What you should add is they are one hell of a way from winning the war (convincing the public).