The CODOH Revisionist Forum

fireofice wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 7:20 pm

bombsaway wrote: ↑Mon Oct 20, 2025 6:24 pm Is it necessary for all, even small transports to be documented? We don't know who he was sent to Minsk with, he says 50 people?

I think what you have here is a 'maybe' went through Treblinka

He wasn't a candidate for resettlement as he was clearly a strong and hardy worker

Himmler's note about resettlement of the GG makes clear this was for non-working Jews.

Oh now all deportations to the East don't have to be documented. Interesting.

Even if it was mostly Jews unable to work that were deported, it doesn't follow all of them were. Plenty of Jews able to work were exterminated according to orthodoxy. They may also have needed labor in Minsk for whatever reason.

Appealing to possibility won't get you far here. Sure, it's possible, but do you have any evidence to make it probable?

But you're no better, since you have no evidence he was on the September transport, or the mysterious transport he was on went to minsk with t2 stopover

bombsaway wrote:
But you're no better, since you have no evidence he was on the September transport, or the mysterious transport he was on went to minsk with t2 stopover

The evidence is that that's the last known transport, so that's probably what he was on.

However, even though I am convinced that this counts as a transit through Treblinka, the fact that we have a maybe (your words) takes the wind out of your argument. The original claim is that we can't name anyone. If we have a plausible case for one, even if we can't demonstrate it as more probable than not to your satisfaction, still destroys your argument.

fireofice wrote: ↑Fri Oct 24, 2025 8:57 pm

bombsaway wrote:
But you're no better, since you have no evidence he was on the September transport, or the mysterious transport he was on went to minsk with t2 stopover

The evidence is that that's the last known transport, so that's probably what he was on.

However, even though I am convinced that this counts as a transit through Treblinka, the fact that we have a maybe (your words) takes the wind out of your argument. The original claim is that we can't name anyone. If we have a plausible case for one, even if we can't demonstrate it as more probable than not to your satisfaction, still destroys your argument.

The evidence is not that it is the last, it's just the last known major transport. Distinction there. There's no evidence he was on a major transport. He also mentioned stopovers in other camps but there's nothing about Treblinka.

bombsaway wrote: ↑Sat Oct 25, 2025 5:29 am The evidence is not that it is the last, it's just the last known major transport. Distinction there. There's no evidence he was on a major transport. He also mentioned stopovers in other camps but there's nothing about Treblinka.

It's the last known transport period. So yes, the evidence is that he says he was deported from the Warsaw Ghetto around September because that's the last known transport, big or small. Memories which are subject to mistakes, things like that after 50 years is not very good evidence. Unless you find record of another transport, that's where we're at. And he doesn't have to mention Treblinka. We can make inferences.

It's funny how any absurdity in testimony can be brushed over as a minor mistake (even when it's anything but minor) but an actual minor mistake that actually can be easily explained like this is not something you can contemplate.

fireofice wrote: ↑Sat Oct 25, 2025 9:14 am It's funny how any absurdity in testimony can be brushed over as a minor mistake (even when it's anything but minor) but an actual minor mistake that actually can be easily explained like this is not something you can contemplate.

It is not funny, that so-called revisionists make no effort to learn about witnesses and witness evidence. That error on their part, leads them to make multiple mistakes, when understanding and interpreting what witnesses stated. You do not even get the basics, as to what is likely a mistake in recall, description, or estimation, or how to differentiate between hearsay and eyewitnesses.