Simple question: What happened to the people who were sent to the camps? / 'Where did they go?'

[Lamprecht]

Thank you. In my readings, nobody ever mentioned the railway-gauge changes. That is really helpful to know. I also appreciate the Mattogno and Graf citation. Very helpful in addressing my concerns.

I think we need a map, something like this, but with the railways imposed also on them:

The locations of Treblinka 2, Sobibor, and Belzec makes the most sense in terms of transit camps (as they were called in documents) rather than "pure extermination camps" as they are said to be by the exterminationists.

These 3 camps are located in areas where the railroad guages (width of the track) changed, so that different trains had to be used to continue a journey. Germany and Poland used standard gauge rail lines (1435mm) and the Soviets used wide-gauge lines (1528mm).

More on the importance of railways in WWII:

The Influence of Railways on Military Operations in the Russo-German War 1941–1945
https://archive.vn/b6vfP | https://www.hgwdavie.com/blog/2018/3/9/ ... r-19411945

DEUTSCHE REICHSBAHN – THE GERMAN STATE RAILWAY
https://archive.vn/pH1nb | https://www.feldgrau.com/WW2-German-Sta ... eichsbahn/

Here are some maps of Soviet railways with the locations of Treblinka, Sobibor, and Belzec added. The locations of these 3 camps is approximated, but should be very accurate given the size. The following 3 locations were already labeled on the map and are known to be very close to the camps:

Влодава (Wlodawa) near Sobibor, under 10km
Малкиня (Malkinia) near Treblinka, under 5km
Томашув (Tomaszow; "Томашев" on this map) near Belzec, under 10km

Treblinka, Sobibor, and Belzec:

(along the left side, towards the center)

Treblinka, Sobibor:

(towards the bottom left)

Belzec:

(top left)

Mirror for 3 pics: https://imgur.com/a/n4Bzri4

The original images are from:

Schemes of railways and waterways of the USSR 1943 (Схемы железных дорог и водных путей сообщения СССР 1943)
https://www.soldat.ru/files/4/10/137/

https://www.soldat.ru/files/4/10/137/ or https://web.archive.org/web/20201025021 ... /4/10/137/

https://web.archive.org/web/20111105072 ... ys1941.png
https://www.soldat.ru/files/f/00000580.jpg
https://www.soldat.ru/files/f/000005c8.jpg
https://www.soldat.ru/files/f/000005c3.jpg
Key:
https://www.soldat.ru/files/f/0000057b.jpg


Another map is featured in Mattogno, Graf & Kues' "The 'Extermination Camps' of 'Aktion Reinhardt'":

A look at a contemporary (1942) map of railway connections (Illustration 7.1) reveals that the shortest route traveling by train to RK Ukraine from the Białystok district would have been from the city of Białystok to Brest Litowsk via Bielsk and Wysokie Litowsk. If one first traveled east from Białystok, one would have to come to Wołkowysk or all the way to Baranowicze (in RK Ostland) before being able to turn south to Brest Litowsk (Wołkowysk–Kleszczele–Wysokie Litowsk–Brest Litowsk or Baranowicze–Bereza Kartuska–Brest Litowsk) or Luniniec (Baranowicze–Hancewicze–Luniniec). If the Białystok–Bielsk–Wysokie Litowsk–Brest Litowsk line was either out of order during the period of late 1942/early 1943 or reserved for higher prioritized traffic so that no Jewish convoys could make use of it, then it would have been logistically more sound to send transports destined for western Ukraine via Treblinka. On the other hand, we have no sources at our disposal indicating that such was the case.
...
A look at a contemporary map (Illustration 7.2)[1606] shows that a considerable part of the western half of the district was actually located to the west of Bełżec, longitudinally speaking, and that a vertical line drawn a mere 60 km east of Bełżec, which was located just south of Tomaszów Lúbelski, almost immediately on the border between the Lublin district and Eastern Galicia (i.e. the former German-Soviet demarcation line from 1939), would include to its west the counties (Kreise) of Rawa Ruska, Sambor, Drohobycz and virtually all of Lwów County (Lemberg-Land) including the city of Lwów, as well as most of the counties of Stryj and Kalusz.

[Butterfangers]

Thanks, Lamprecht. I have heard the argument of the rail gauge changes but this is my first time seeing the map which really drives it home. That's a very strong piece of evidence for transit. It's gotta be hard for any exterminationist to look at that and explain it away.

I have been fascinated by this map since first seeing it yesterday. I started translating some of the city names / points on the same map from Russian (one letter at a time, agonizingly, in Google translate). I got about this far:

Also started the second one:

I at least wanted to have enough to be able to compare some of the sites on the map of eastern Zwangarbeiterslagers to the train lines running by / through them.

On the first map, I actually didn't find anything which translated to either "Treblinka" or "Malkinia". What I did find in the place where I expected Malkinia / Treblinka to be was the label "Заремба". It's translation via Google is "Zaremba". It turns out this is the name "Zaręby" (the Polish version/translation). There is a town by this name which is 70 km east of TII. There is also a closer town with a train station called "Zaręby Kościelne" which is only about 20 km from TII (this one shows up on your second map as "Зарембы Косчельне") and only a few km from Malkinia. Zaręby Kościelne is a small village which has a train station as the next stop from Malkinia ("Kościelne" means "church" and there appears to be an historic church within the village).

Based on the location of either "Zaręby" on both Soviet maps, it seems clear that both refer to Zaręby Kościelne.

On the first map, this "Zaręby [Kościelne]" shows up as the last west-bound junction before exiting Soviet territory. "Malkinia" is not labeled at all on this map:

And on the second map, we see again that Zaręby Kościelne is the last stop west-bound from Soviet territory. We also see that Malkinia is the last stop east-bound before entering Soviet territory, and that the two are just a few kilometers apart:

ZOOM IN MALKINIA.png (74.2 KiB) Viewed 700 times

Note that it is clear from the maps that the small "empty circles" along the line are obviously junctions or junction stations. The circles with a small dot indicate they also have "settlements", those which are more filled-in are "district centers" (I covered them with yellow above to highlight but Malkinia shows as a "settlement" and Zaręby Kościelne as junction-only). Those which are just "notches" along the line are simply stops, no junction:

Notice also that on the map(s) there is always a junction station right at or near the rail-gauge change for each location where the rail-line continues across the border, which makes sense (I imagine junctions are needed to pull trains aside, etc., whenever passengers/cargo are being loaded onto trains of another gauge). There are also a few other instances on the maps where, as with Malkinia-Zaręby Kościelne, a set of two junction stations are located immediately on either side of the border.

I'm still a novice but I have gathered that it is not entirely clear at which precise location (or junction/station) that passengers/deportees heading east switched trains onto the wide-gauge. Is this correct? If so, the question seems to be: what can we safely assume necessarily took place between these two border-junction stations (Malkinia and Zaręby Kościelne)?

[Lamprecht]

Of interest:


And yes, those USSR maps are helpful but they do not perfectly align with the exact geographical area that they should. They are transit maps after all and are designed to show how the railroads interact with one another. The image below explains what I mean here, as a sort of extreme example:


Left is the standard subway map that travelers will look at; right is the geographically accurate version.

As I was saying here: viewtopic.php?p=107158#p107158

It is not necessary that they actually were transited to the east, especially those unfit to work. You would think that, given the resource constraints, if there were to be trains going east then it would be primarily laborers or something military-related. These "unfit to work" Jews not sent to any labor camp would quite possibly just be housed in one of the many Jew ghettos in the area around these camps.

And to be fair, "unable to work" is not a very large category. Only a small percentage of people would be truly "unable to work" - either very young or very old, neither category is going to end up being a very large source of testimony in the future. It was in mid-1944 that the Soviets "liberated" this area, about a year before Germany's surrender. So the Soviets did have enough time to fabricate whatever story they wanted. The Jews - either to be resettled in the east or already resettled - were now subjects of Stalin.

[Butterfangers]

How many Jews could have escaped to the West from the Soviet territories of Eastern Europe without being identified as Jewish? There was apparently a great deal of movement out of these territories post-war. From Wikipedia:

Before 1950, over 15 million immigrants emigrated from Soviet-occupied eastern European countries to the west in the five years immediately following World War II.[49] Until the early 1950s, the lines between German occupation zones could be easily crossed.[50] Taking advantage of this route, the number of Eastern Europeans applying for political asylum in West Germany was 197,000 in 1950, 165,000 in 1951, 182,000 in 1952 and 331,000 in 1953.[50] One reason for the sharp 1953 increase was fear of potential further Sovietization with the increasingly paranoid actions of Joseph Stalin in late 1952 and early 1953.[51]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emigratio ... stern_Bloc

[Butterfangers]

Sharing this post (from another thread) here as it seems particularly relevant to this thread: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=14859&start=15#p107865

[Waldgänger]

Just to be a little cheeky, my own addition here comes from Dr. André Lettich's wildly propagandistic and bigoted, anti-German account of his time in Auschwitz:

"Without exaggeration, one can set at four or five million the number of victims who perished in this way in this death camp. A ‘colossal’ execution worthy of the German Kultur."

cited in pp. 101-102 of Mattogno's "Debunking the Bunkers", holocaust handbook #11

The mainstream narrative says only 1.1 million were gassed at Auschwitz, doctor. Where did the other 3-4 million go, then? Where have you hidden them, vous bon médecin? You must explain their absence now, or else you're a Nazi.

Of course they don't have to have gone anywhere, because they were made up.

[hannef]

It's a valid and important question.

Ask yourself which has more evidence:
A) that the published numbers existed in that place and at that time prior to and during the extermination
B) that the published numbers were exterminated

On the face of it, Holocaust historiography is built on faulty and lacking assumptions; at its depths, it's theory to theory to theory to theory; and some of those theories cannot be countered; and that is where we claim a small victory, every so often.

Roll with their numbers or don't; it matters not because, in my experience:

If they're correct, you will more easily find their lies.
If they're wrong, you will more easily find the truth.

In the end, open debate being prohibited and stigmatised is a death sentence for any proposition, for example that the Germans exterminated six million Jews and, non-Jews, slightly less thereof.

Keep your mind open to it all!

[Hektor]

The trick is to have people assume that "6 million Jews vanished" during world war two. That is however never proven. What they will start doing, when challenged is pointing to deportation lists and they can even relate to several countries in this. Take the Netherlands. They claim 100.000 Jews from the Netherlands were 'gassed'. Their proof. Something in that range was deported to Auschwitz and other camps, while 'nobody came back'. That does not prove they 'were gassed' of course, but it puzzles the gullible. And it also skips the question how they know they 'never returned'. The answer is that they didn't report back from camps. But that doesn't mean they didn't return. They may have simply come back and moved to friends for a while. Rebuilding their lives. Possibly even under changed names. And well, I won't be surprised, if they had reasons to change names stretching even to the 1930s. But given that St. Anne Frank is the national icon of the New Netherlands, you can bet that the questions around the issue have no chance being debated openly, even if anything would be legal in the Netherlands, Germany or any country related to the issue. That's the power of Myth.

I even told a dutchman ones that the official Anne Frank contradicts the Holocaust narrative. Especially the fact that she was deported from the Netherlands to Auschwitz - NOT gassed - taken back to Belsen - NOT gassed again, but dying from communicable disease rife at this moment of time in that area. The Brits didn't dispute that there was a typhus epidemic.
I also pointed out that Otto Frank was involved in common law crimes as well and that this was actually playing a role in his arrest.

The dutchmen's response was that it still was wrong to arrest her and deport her. That's not what we are debating, though. We debate if the Holocaust Narrative is empirically valid or not. Is it sound Historiography? It simply isn't and the evidence for this is actually hiding in plain daylight.

The: "You don't know where they are, so they must be gassed" type of argument, sounds clever, but is unbelievably silly on further investigation. It is a logical fallacy.