Page 8 of 8
Re: Kula vs Tauber on "Kula columns"
Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2026 4:14 pm
by HansHill
bombsaway wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2026 10:25 pm
If an eyewitness
claims to have seen the device firsthand or worked on it,
like Kula, they are eyewitness.
How about Tauber?
Re: Kula vs Tauber on "Kula columns"
Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2026 4:20 pm
by bombsaway
HansHill wrote: ↑Sun Mar 29, 2026 4:14 pm
bombsaway wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2026 10:25 pm
If an eyewitness
claims to have seen the device firsthand or worked on it,
like Kula, they are eyewitness.
How about Tauber?
Yeah Tauber is an eyewitness.
Re: Kula vs Tauber on "Kula columns"
Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2026 4:21 pm
by HansHill
Perfect. And Chazan?
Re: Kula vs Tauber on "Kula columns"
Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2026 4:35 pm
by bombsaway
Yup.
Post all the testimonies in full if you think they contradict in a significant way.
Re: Kula vs Tauber on "Kula columns"
Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2026 4:42 pm
by HansHill
Great. Here Chazan is saying the murder weapon could be swept from the room after a gassing. Remember, he is an eyewitness so he said he saw and done this:
[Greif] Did the grid column through which the gas was dropped reach all the way down to the floor?
[Chazan] Nearly to the floor. One had left a space which made it possible to clean there. One poured water out and brushed up the remaining pebbles.”
G. Greif, Wir weinten tränenlos… Augenzeugenberichte der jüdischen “Sonderkommandos” in Auschwitz, Böhlau Verlag, Cologne/Weimar/Vienna 1985, p. 237.
I challenge Bombsaway's claim that there are no material contradictions between the eyewitnesses and the experts (or the eyewitnesses and other eyewitnesses). Removal of the murder weapon from a crime scene is material by definition.
In Nessie's bank robbery analogy, a bank teller claims to have swept the gunman's gun away after robbing the bank. Bombsaway should retract his statement about non-contradiction of testimony in ways that are material. Here is his claim:
have not seen any testimony from any of these people that contradict orthodoxy in a significant way.
Re: Kula vs Tauber on "Kula columns"
Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2026 5:24 pm
by bombsaway
I feel like you're misunderstanding something very basic
Picture a car accident at an intersection:
Witness 1: “I saw a car run a red light.”
Witness 2: “I saw a driver on their phone.”
Witness 3: “I heard a loud crash but didn’t see anything.”
These accounts are:
Partial (incomplete)
Focused on different details
They don’t contradict unless someone says:
“The light was green."
or “No crash happened".