Why did Jankiel Wiernik plagiarize an earlier report?

[Stubble]

Pilgrimofdark, unless I am mistaken, you are on the frontier. I don't expect to see any older comparison of the English and Polish translations. I don't expect any explanation for omissions to be forthcoming.

My hypothesis, the omissions were done by a diet or committee, to streamline the story.

[Archie]

If Wiernik is a fraud, not only can he not be cited as evidence for the Holocaust, he becomes strong evidence against the Holocaust.

So often with witnesses, the pro-Holocaust side will just quietly deemphasize bad witnesses in favor of more obscure ones who haven't been debunked as thoroughly yet. That's not how it works. If the sources that originally formed the basis for the story are bogus, then the story is extremely unlikely to be true.
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=116

[bombsaway]

No comment from the true believers on the recent revelations that Wiernik was writing communist propaganda tracts before the war? No comments at all? Do you think this improves or harms his credibility?

https://codoh.com/library/document/jank ... pagandist/
viewtopic.php?t=259

Does this shake your faith in Wiernik? Or are you holding firm?

I find it rich that revisionists think this is a strong point but don't bat an eye at the documented German personnel at Chelmno/ Reinhardt Camps being almost uniformly from T4. Of the many death camp testimonies, how many are evidenced to be by Soviet sympathizers or documented agents (which Wiernik is most definitely not).

So ... you don't want talk about it. Interesting.

Re: your clumsy pivot, we've all heard about the euthanasia/AR personnel overlap. But to me that's a circumstantial point and it can't make up for the star witnesses crashing and burning and there being grossly inadequate physical evidence. Muh T4 is just not enough to carry the day. Sorry.

Wiernik writing pro soviet articles is also circumstantial evidence of him being a soviet agent, which is circumstantial evidence for him having fabricated his treblinka testimony.

The difference here is you have one witness with this utterly circumstantial connection, and arguably not even due to the possibility of multiple Wierniks, whereas almost every german staffing the reinhardt camps and chelmmo came out of t4.

[Nessie]

No comment from the true believers on the recent revelations that Wiernik was writing communist propaganda tracts before the war? No comments at all? Do you think this improves or harms his credibility?

https://codoh.com/library/document/jank ... pagandist/
viewtopic.php?t=259

Does this shake your faith in Wiernik? Or are you holding firm?

I am holding firm, since the majority of his claims, in particular about the main process within TII, are corroborated by multiple pieces of evidence.

Your faith in Wiernik is admirable.

"I have not seen such great faith, no, not in all Israel."

Corroboration, or the use of evidence independent of a claim, to verify if the claim is truthful and how accurate it is, is a methodology used by investigators all over the world. It removes the use of opinion and faith.

[bombsaway]

I find it rich that revisionists think this is a strong point but don't bat an eye at the documented German personnel at Chelmno/ Reinhardt Camps being almost uniformly from T4. Of the many death camp testimonies, how many are evidenced to be by Soviet sympathizers or documented agents (which Wiernik is most definitely not).

Medical / administrative facilities close and you're surprised that unemployed staff with medical / administrative experience are moved to another facility that also entails medical / administrative work?

For months, English and American newspapers have been reporting on a new weapon the Soviets supposedly possess to defeat the Germans this winter: typhus. They believe they have found a new "general" who could save them—General Typhus.
[...]
In Germany, all necessary countermeasures were taken in time to prevent this danger. The German border was secured by a network of delousing facilities that acted like a demarcation line. Dr. Conti adds that the threat of typhus has been averted.
[...]
In the incorporated eastern territories, there were 43 cases among Germans and 338 among Jews. In recent weeks, this number has been further reduced. In the metropolis of Berlin, there were only four cases in the entire month of February. It is a clear reality; there is practically no longer any risk of typhus. By eliminating this threat from the East, Germany is once again fulfilling a European responsibility.

"There is no danger of typhus", translated from German. Oesterreichische Volks-Zeitung, März 1942, 1942-03-28, p. 3

Delousing on the border of Germany (and its territories) -- a critical priority necessitating qualified staff. Fortunately, with the end of T-4, staff were readily available.

T4 formally ended in august 1941 so your supposition is that the staff were just sitting around for almost a year not doing anything.

T4 also had nothing to do with treating typhus or providing medical treatment. It was a top secret killing operation, often w the use of poison gas.

[Nessie]

If Wiernik is a fraud, not only can he not be cited as evidence for the Holocaust, he becomes strong evidence against the Holocaust.

So often with witnesses, the pro-Holocaust side will just quietly deemphasize bad witnesses in favor of more obscure ones who haven't been debunked as thoroughly yet. That's not how it works. If the sources that originally formed the basis for the story are bogus, then the story is extremely unlikely to be true.
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=116

By "deemphasising bad witnesses" you mean -

- separating hearsay from eyewitness claims
- identifying likely mistakes & poor estimations about time, distance and size.
- identifying figures of speech, hyperbole and emotive descriptions.
- recognising the decades of study into witness memory and recall.

That is the correct way to assess witnesses. Your way is bogus and deeply flawed. When the sources that originally formed the basis of the story, which in this case are escaped prisoners, are then corroborated by camp staff, physical finds from the camp sites and the circumstantial evidence of the running of the camp, then their claims are verified.

[Stubble]

Bombsaway, you are neglecting a significant detail with regard to this staffing.

If the overlap with t4 was 'super important' because 'of the nature of the work, specifically with regard to execution', why weren't staff chosen for 'homicidal gassings' that had experience with 'homicidal gassing'?

You see, the wheel was reinvented in Poland. This didn't just happen one time either.

So far as what the former staff had been doing during the interim between the cessation of Aktion t4 and Aktion Reinhardt, you can look at service records. The reassignments were many and varied.

[pilgrimofdark]

...you are on the frontier. I don't expect to see any older comparison of the English and Polish translations. I don't expect any explanation for omissions to be forthcoming.

The frontier of Holocaust research is double-checking a translation for errors and omissions 80 years after it was sent to the printer for publication?

Woah.

The charitable view is that these are inadvertent omissions and it will be valuable to identify and add them back in for the sake of completeness.

The less charitable view is they might have been deliberate omissions?

But why would they deliberately omit the trainload of alive disheveled half-naked people observed from the Treblinka train station traveling north from the direction T-II?

Alternatively, why NOT just leave it in? What is the harm to leaving in the phrase?

NSFW Content warning: Graphic photo of dishevelled individual after bath:

Spoiler

(I'm finding zero evidence Wiernik approved of these unauthorized redactions by the English translators, so they are not "corrections" of errors in the Polish original.)

[Stubble]

To my knowledge, nobody in the last 80 odd years has contrasted the printed and circulated copies in various languages of 'A Year in Treblinka', correct.

To my knowledge, you are the first Sir.

The term 'frontier' in this context is meant to convey 'exploration of unsettled territory or terrain'.

[bombsaway]

Bombsaway, you are neglecting a significant detail with regard to this staffing.

If the overlap with t4 was 'super important' because 'of the nature of the work, specifically with regard to execution', why weren't staff chosen for 'homicidal gassings' that had experience with 'homicidal gassing'?

They literally were, eg Chelmno was headed by SK Lange whose 1940/41 duties were clearing out mental asylums through use of gas vans https://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot ... erman.html

Who had experience with homicidal gassing or euthanasia that didn't go on to work at Chelmno or the Reinhardt camps?

[Archie]

...you are on the frontier. I don't expect to see any older comparison of the English and Polish translations. I don't expect any explanation for omissions to be forthcoming.

The frontier of Holocaust research is double-checking a translation for errors and omissions 80 years after it was sent to the printer for publication?

Woah.
...

I don't believer we have any monographs on Wiernik specifically. He's been discussed but only in the context of much broader works about Treblinka or AR.

You may already know this, but cataloguing variations in texts and manuscripts is known as textual criticism. It comes up especially in biblical scholarship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_criticism

It is a considered a pretty arcane field and it can be quite laborious work. Revisionists do get into textual criticism when there's something really noteworthy, but, no, this has not necessarily been done for every single text. Faurisson had some interest in textual variations as his professional background was in this sort of literary analysis. He included some textual criticism in his analysis of the Anne Frank diary (noting that the German edition had lots of material not in the "original" Dutch version). Mattogno included some textual criticism in his book on Nyizsli (the original was serialized in a Hungarian periodical but the French translation was what became better known).

I'd say there's probably no need to catalog every variation just for sake of doing it, but if there are significant omissions or modifications it can be good to be aware of this and mention it the most significant ones in books and articles. As I recall, Mattogno does talk about the variations in Wiernik's statements in HH28 (e.g., the chlorine) but I don't think his intention was to provide an exhaustive list since again he was not writing a monograph dedicated entirely to Wiernik.

Keep in mind as well that a lot more stuff is online now, but a lot of these things were a lot harder to find in the past.

[Stubble]

Kaiser's Koffee Kafe again Bombsaway?

Let's take this back to an appropriate thread and not derail the current one.

[Archie]

I find it rich that revisionists think this is a strong point but don't bat an eye at the documented German personnel at Chelmno/ Reinhardt Camps being almost uniformly from T4. Of the many death camp testimonies, how many are evidenced to be by Soviet sympathizers or documented agents (which Wiernik is most definitely not).

So ... you don't want talk about it. Interesting.

Re: your clumsy pivot, we've all heard about the euthanasia/AR personnel overlap. But to me that's a circumstantial point and it can't make up for the star witnesses crashing and burning and there being grossly inadequate physical evidence. Muh T4 is just not enough to carry the day. Sorry.

Wiernik writing pro soviet articles is also circumstantial evidence of him being a soviet agent, which is circumstantial evidence for him having fabricated his treblinka testimony.

The difference here is you have one witness with this utterly circumstantial connection, and arguably not even due to the possibility of multiple Wierniks, whereas almost every german staffing the reinhardt camps and chelmmo came out of t4.

The cops caught him with the typewriter. That's not circumstantial.

It shows conclusively that he was a highly biased source. And he had a history of involvement in the production of propaganda pamphlets not unlike A Year in Treblinka. Despite this, you continue to take this material at face value, and you pretend it is a sincere and accurate account of real events from the camp.

[Stubble]

A caveat Archie,

He was caught with 'two typewriters' 'Soviet proclamations' and 'copy materials'.

[bombsaway]

So ... you don't want talk about it. Interesting.

Re: your clumsy pivot, we've all heard about the euthanasia/AR personnel overlap. But to me that's a circumstantial point and it can't make up for the star witnesses crashing and burning and there being grossly inadequate physical evidence. Muh T4 is just not enough to carry the day. Sorry.

Wiernik writing pro soviet articles is also circumstantial evidence of him being a soviet agent, which is circumstantial evidence for him having fabricated his treblinka testimony.

The difference here is you have one witness with this utterly circumstantial connection, and arguably not even due to the possibility of multiple Wierniks, whereas almost every german staffing the reinhardt camps and chelmmo came out of t4.

The cops caught him with the typewriter. That's not circumstantial.

It shows conclusively that he was a highly biased source. And he had a history of involvement in the production of propaganda pamphlets not unlike A Year in Treblinka. Despite this, you continue to take this material at face value, and you pretend it is a sincere and accurate account of real events from the camp.

Assuming it was the Treblinka Wiernik, I never denied that. What I denied is that it was direct evidence of him being a Soviet agent. That's circumstantial, and even assuming he was an agent that's still only circumstantial evidence of a fabricated testimony. Meanwhile we have SK Lange being documented as killing patients, with extensive testimony it was done through gas vans, and then they become SK Chelmno, and that connection doesn't lead you to bat an eye. Total hypocrisy.