Markiewicz Report in 1994

[ConfusedJew]

Go back and read this. There was no bet, there was a rough proposal which you refused, and it had nothing to do with the actual logistics of the gassing but everything to do with whether reasonable people would care about that technical inconsistency in the testimonies and history.

Now will you please shut the fuck up already? If you mention this one more time, you will be placed on mute and I'll continue with Archie who actually seems interested in the forensic details of the Markowiecz report.

https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=13201#p13201

[HansHill]

Go back and read this. There was no bet, there was a rough proposal which you refused, and it had nothing to do with the actual logistics of the gassing but everything to do with whether reasonable people would care about that technical inconsistency in the testimonies and history.

Now will you please shut the fuck up already? If you mention this one more time, you will be placed on mute and I'll continue with Archie who actually seems interested in the forensic details of the Markowiecz report.

https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=13201#p13201

Scroll up about 2 posts

Overall, the method that they described was very similar and you are finding what I consider to be a very tiny difference and exaggerating it. I'd bet a ton of money that most people would agree with me on this.

...maybe I'll create my own Keen-style prize...

I will gladly change my mind if you are able to explain to me why that's significant when we get to that point of the argument.

Deal

1) What kinda ton of money are we talking?
2) I will DM you my Monero details privately
3) I will only keep half and donate the other half to Revisionist causes. Archie and Callafangers will assist me in choosing.
4) The condition will be met when you argue from necessity that the pellets must remain inside the column during the entirety of a gassing, to be removed afterwards.

I would appreciate a mod reviewing the above to ensure it is a true reflection of the discussion so far

[TlsMS93]

Tisha B'Av I think.

I was tagged in a thread about Nessie but I'm not allowed to view it, what happened?

[ConfusedJew]

That was not an accurate reflection of the discussion up to that point.

Exactly how the gas was administered is obviously important forensically but not something that the vast majority of concentration camp survivors would be expected to care about or even know.

There's a tendency here to find inconsistencies, errors, exaggerations, and imperfections among the tens of thousands of witnesses. Under any similar true circumstance, much of that would be expected. No single testimony would be expected to be perfect, especially for technical details that most people would never think about. That is an entirely separate issues though.

Now can we go back to the Markiewicz report?

[HansHill]

That was not an accurate reflection of the discussion up to that point.

Exactly how the gas was administered is obviously important forensically but not something that the vast majority of concentration camp survivors would be expected to care about or even know.

There's a tendency here to find inconsistencies, errors, exaggerations, and imperfections among the tens of thousands of witnesses. Under any similar true circumstance, much of that would be expected. No single testimony would be expected to be perfect, especially for technical details that most people would never think about. That is an entirely separate issues though.

Now can we go back to the Markiewicz report?

>Sonderkommandos telling us how they physically and literally interacted with and disposed of the murder weapon
>Not something they would care / think about

Nice try.

[ConfusedJew]

There were hundreds or thousands of them. The vast majority of them would not have been responsible for picking up the pellets and may have just assumed that other Sonderkommandos did it. They also used different methods at different times in different camps. This isn't nearly as complicated as the chemistry which is far more interesting to me.

Please, you've derailed the fuck out of this conversation.

[HansHill]

picking up the pellets

Claiming the pellets required manual disposal (via hosing or sweeping) from between the dead bodies, from a first-hand eyewitness account, is not something that is incidental, trivial or in any other way irrelevant to the discussion of Markiewicz or how we evaluate the chemistry.

Why are you so insistent on avoiding this? It is in fact what has driven Van Pelt's need to construct a model of the Kula Column. You don't get to brush over this as if it's incidental

[ConfusedJew]

Logistically it is not incidental. In terms of invalidating testimony it is. If you scroll up, I already started addressing that.

[HansHill]

Logistically it is not incidental. In terms of invalidating testimony it is. If you scroll up, I already started addressing that.

So which model was the correct one? Were the pellets inside or outside the column after everyone died?

[Wahrheitssucher]

Exactly how the gas was administered is obviously important forensically but not something that the vast majority of concentration camp survivors would be expected to care about or even know.

1. No ‘camp survivor’ would know anything about how the alleged poison gas was “administered” unless:
1a.) they were involved in the procedure;
1b.) were themselves gassed in a homicidal gas chamber and somehow survived.

2. All the liars (lie-witnesses) who claimed to be sonderkommando involved in the procedure (i.e. 1a.) testified to physically impossible details. This can ONLY be explained as EVIDENCE that they were participants in a hoax and deliberate deception.

3. There are no credible testimonies of anyone who claimed they were gassed and survived (i.e. 1b.).

4. When numerous people all corroborate each other on false evidence this PROVES they are either deluded or collectively lying for some perceived mutual benefit/self-interest.

5. The obvious self-interest in the case of the ‘holocaust’ mass-gassing allegation is principally a ‘jewish’ one. I.e. jews benefited from it the most and continue to do so (reparations and land-theft in Palestine). They also stand to lose the most when/if the narrative is widely acknowledged to be a grand deception.
The other beneficiaries are the ‘Allied’ nations who deflected from their own war-crimes plus got to pose as ‘good guys’ waging a ‘just war’ against evil ‘bad guys’.

Summary:
Anyway who can’t admit the above facts AND who is themselves ‘jewish’ is likely to be perpetuating the narrative because of ‘jewish’ self-interests. That is what the racist, anti-German mass-gassing allegation (in the numbers claimed, at the sites claimed) appears to be: a hoax that serves perceived ‘jewish’ self-interests.

There's a tendency here to find inconsistencies, errors, exaggerations, and imperfections among the tens of thousands of witnesses. Under any similar true circumstance, much of that would be expected. No single testimony would be expected to be perfect, especially for technical details that most people would never think about.
That is an entirely separate issues though.

6. This is a ‘strawman’ deception. As no-one is expecting a witness “to be perfect” on all technical details. It is expected though that they wouldn’t corroborate each other on FALSE details.
When numerous ‘witnesses’ do that it can ONLY be explained in two ways:
i.) they are simple-minded folk suffering from a collective self-delusion;
ii.) they are knowing participants in a deliberate deception.

7. At least one “single testimony would be expected to be” not repeating FALSE details in any particular. That there is not a single ‘eye-witness’ to the alleged gassings who doesn’t repeat ‘corroborated’ falsities is proof of mass delusion or collective lying.

[HansHill]

WS is right - additionally, there are relatively few who give precision details on this exact aspect, so for us to be laser focused on what exactly they said is critical. This is the murder weapon after all.

[Stubble]

You guys walking back from the ventilation and the disposal bottleneck to look at the zyklon crystals Muller said the columns distributed in the room like a seed spreader?

You know, he said it in 1979, after Butz wrote 'Hoax', but, he did add it to his story. He said it.

He's got everything in there, he's got the orchestra, the speech, the ambulance and the zyklon pellets. And he should know, right? Because he was there after all. He saw it with his own eyes.

[ConfusedJew]

Logistically it is not incidental. In terms of invalidating testimony it is. If you scroll up, I already started addressing that.

So which model was the correct one? Were the pellets inside or outside the column after everyone died?

I'm not positive but it seems like they installed the mesh columns so that they could pull up the pellets safely and expedite the process. That's my working hypothesis.

[HansHill]

I'm not positive but it seems like they installed the mesh columns so that they could pull up the pellets safely and expedite the process. That's my working hypothesis.

How are you "not positive"? You came here to defend something you don't know?

You've seen what the sonderkommandos said. You've seen what the experts said. Now shit or get off the pot.

[Archie]

I don't join niche, information-dense communities and bet against their combined knowledge. So don't worry, you won't be getting any of my money.

My bet was not on your knowledge but whether people outside your forum would care and would believe that discrepancy materially altered the credibility of the witnesses. They most certainly would not. Please just drop this, it is a total derailment of this thread. You are welcome to make a new thread about what would be expected or not expected of witnesses who endured an atrocity like the Holocaust but this is not the thread for that discussion.

Well, I suppose you are giving yourself an out then since we have no means of rigorously surveying normie opinion on this point.

Obviously the question of whether certain "inconsistencies" are major or minor will be a matter of judgment. Your side always dismisses everything as minor. Because you have to. You can see this very clearly with Nessie who will shamelessly pick and choose bits that match the current story and declare these to be "corroboration" while dismissing all the contradictions and absurdities as "minor" or normal" no matter how extreme. See for example this thread about star witness Vrba fabricating a three page description of a fictitious Himmler visit which Nessie excuses as "getting the dates wrong."

https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=69

You cannot categorially assume that all the errors are minor. You are free to think revisionists are too harsh at times, but I try to reasonable about this, i.e., I do not look for one small error in order to conclude the entire account is false. What I do is for sake of argument I initially take the statements to be honest and accurate accounts of something that actually happened in physical reality. Then I follow the implications through to see where that leads us. It leads to the conclusion that most of the stories are not based in fact.

Imo, the question of whether the pellets were left to remain in the chamber or were removed during the gassing is a pretty basic one. I would expect people who supposedly worked in the "gas chamber" to know this, especially if it was their regular job, and especially given that it would be a major consideration in the ventilation and clean-up operation.