The CODOH Revisionist Forum

Posted: **Sat Mar 14, 2026 3:08 pm**

Nessie wrote: ↑Sat Mar 14, 2026 2:42 pm
pilgrimofdark wrote: ↑Sat Mar 14, 2026 1:52 pm ...

Flaws's third nosewitness about the smell of Treblinka is Jakub Krzepicki, who is usually mistakenly referred to as Abraham Krzepicki.

...
Why is that a mistake?

https://muzeumtreblinka.eu/en/informacj ... ram-jakub/

"Abram Jakub Krzepicki was born in 1915 in Praszka..."

https://www.jhi.pl/en/articles/a-man-es ... epicki,391

"On 13 September 1942, Abraham (Jakub) Krzepicki escaped from the Treblinka II..."

https://1943.pl/en/artykul/the-victim-a ... er-part-1/

"On 13 September 1943, Abram Jakub Krzepicki managed to escape from the extermination camp in Treblinka."

This entire article is available online.

In all of these publications, the contents are attributed to Avraham Krzepicki. Documents and a photograph attached to the original manuscript, however, indicate that the witness’ correct name is Yaakov Krzepicki. This was subsequently confirmed by his brother, Menachem Krzepicki, who met with Auerbach and gave testimony to Yad Vashem in 1967.

- Prais, Lea. “‘Jews from the World to Come’: The First Testimonies of Escapees from Chełmno and Teblinka in the Warsaw Ghetto, 1942-1943.” Translated by Natali Greenwood. Yad Vashem Studies 42, no. 1 (2014): 47. https://www.yadvashem.org/research/yv-s ... /42-1.html.

And there's a Yad Vashem page of testimony from his sister, calling him Jakob Jozef Krzepicki, stating his profession was a tailor.

edit: Link to his brother's testimony. Seems to be partly Auerbach, partly Menachem. Google still struggles to translate Yiddish, but it's comprehensible.

Posted: **Sat Mar 14, 2026 3:34 pm**

I get that your point is to highlight repeated errors, such as those apparently made over names and occupations. You are correct that historians are guilty of assuming that information they repeat from secondary sources are correct. But what you have highlighted so far, is inconsequential. So what that Krzepicki may be commonly now referred to be a first name that he did not commonly use, or that Zabecki was not actually station master. It is more important that one was a prisoner inside TII and the other worked nearby. You really should do the same for the claims being made on X and I am sure other social media platforms.

Posted: **Sat Mar 14, 2026 3:41 pm**

Nessie wrote: ↑Sat Mar 14, 2026 3:34 pm I get that your point is to highlight repeated errors, such as those apparently made over names and occupations. You are correct that historians are guilty of assuming that information they repeat from secondary sources are correct. But what you have highlighted so far, is inconsequential. So what that Krzepicki may be commonly now referred to be a first name that he did not commonly use, or that Zabecki was not actually station master. It is more important that one was a prisoner inside TII and the other worked nearby. You really should do the same for the claims being made on X and I am sure other social media platforms.

X isn't charging $60 for a book.

Posted: **Sat Mar 14, 2026 4:02 pm**

pilgrimofdark wrote: ↑Sat Mar 14, 2026 3:41 pm
Nessie wrote: ↑Sat Mar 14, 2026 3:34 pm I get that your point is to highlight repeated errors, such as those apparently made over names and occupations. You are correct that historians are guilty of assuming that information they repeat from secondary sources are correct. But what you have highlighted so far, is inconsequential. So what that Krzepicki may be commonly now referred to be a first name that he did not commonly use, or that Zabecki was not actually station master. It is more important that one was a prisoner inside TII and the other worked nearby. You really should do the same for the claims being made on X and I am sure other social media platforms.
X isn't charging $60 for a book.

By X's reach is far greater. So, the examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock that I referenced, such as the wooden gas chamber door, is far more significant that repeated claims Zabecki, who worked at a station, was the actual station master.

What you are doing here, is evidencing that the repeated mistakes made by historians, are far less significant than the repeated mistakes made by Holocaust revisionist/deniers.

Posted: **Sat Mar 14, 2026 4:40 pm**

I don't hold random people on X in higher regard and to a higher standard of rigor and accuracy than academic historians writing academic books with an academic press and charging money for it.

That must be humiliating to the academics

That said...

RaNdOm X uSeR (fAr GrEaTeR rEaCh):

https://nitter.net/GrunwaldSpier/status ... 13606400#m

Franciszek Zabecki was stationmaster at Treblinka and recorded w the cruelty of the Ukrainians and Lithuanians to the Jews1/2

This RaNdOm X uSeR has worked out to their satisfaction that Franciszek Zabecki was the stationmaster at Treblinka.

They rely on the argument from gullibility, which is a logical fallacy that states that believing in something is enough to make it true.

They easily dupe themselves into believing the exact opposite of what Zabecki said about himself and was consistent on from 1944-1977.

Disclaimer: the point of this thread is to highlight mistakes/misconceptions of mainstream works with the same lack of charity, hyperbolic insults, and non sequitor mischaracterizations as directed at revisionist writings. The citations are real, the tone is satirical. If it looks unhinged, insane, and paranoid -- that's because it is. Some people who take this thread way too seriously have denounced such argumentation style as being not a win.

Posted: **Sat Mar 14, 2026 5:14 pm**

pilgrimofdark wrote: ↑Sat Mar 14, 2026 4:40 pm I don't hold random people on X in higher regard and to a higher standard of rigor and accuracy than academic historians writing academic books with an academic press and charging money for it.

Nessie likes to focus on casuals on X since he has no chance against more informed revisionists.

Posted: **Mon Mar 16, 2026 8:22 pm**

Witold Chrostowski, in a mAsS cOnSpIrAcY with Vallentine Mitchell to write, edit, and publish a book and offer it for sale to the public. Should have gone on X if he wanted fAr GrEaTeR rEaCh!

As soon as the train stopped, the Ukrainians opened all the doors simultaneously and, yelling wildly and beating the exhausted Jews, they pushed them out onto the ramp.

[the next paragraph]

The majority of newcomers did not suspect anything. Nothing seemed to indicate the horror that was in store for them.

[the next paragarph]

...the kommandant or his deputy made a speech to the Jews assembled on the ramp. [...] The speech usually met with applause...

- Chrostowski, Witold. Extermination Camp Treblinka. Vallentine Mitchell, 2004. p. 59-60.

Chrostowski has worked out to his satisfaction that being yelled at and beaten is no cause for suspicion. He believes being beaten before being given a speech is a tested, verified, and generally reliable way to receive applause.

Maybe he has also been diagnosed with Self-Defeating Personality Disorder and thus spends time with people who yell at and beat him, for which he applauds.

Because he is easily duped, he is gullible to believing that being beaten upon arrival at a location would not arouse suspicions among the victims of the beatings. In fact, being yelled at and beaten is something Jews generally applaud.

This is known as the fallacy of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock, which is used by bullies and censors.

AI Definition: An argument from gullibility is a logical fallacy that occurs when someone accepts a proposition as true simply because they want to believe it and find it comforting, often relying on personal intuition or ethnic solidarity. The fallacy lies in the faulty reasoning that a claim's desirability serves as sufficient validation, essentially arguing that because one can imagine or feel something to be real, it must be so. This flawed logic is commonly seen in claims made by people using the Epstein historiographical methodology, which states "let the goyim deal in the real world."

Chrostowski is comforted by his belief that Jews applaud a speech after being yelled at and beaten. What is the evidential value of his desire that Jews be yelled at and beaten to be true?

Maybe Chrostowski could explain the evidential value of his belief that being beaten is not suspicious. I find it incredible how difficult historians find it to differentiate between "suspicious beating" and "non-suspicious beating" when the concepts and terms are so simple and obvious.

Chrostowski pretends there is nothing suspicious about being beaten. I never claimed that Chrostowski is pretending. That is a lie and bullying. You just made that up. I call Chrostowski a liar who misrepresents and is delusional, or at best ignorant. Nothing explains why Chrostowski is allowed to bully.

Chrostowski has worked out to his satisfaction that Jews are brought up in an environment with so much wild yelling and beatings that they cause no suspicion that anything might be wrong. Chrostowski easily conceives of Jews who, after a bout of wild yelling and beatings, applaud a speech. This is frankly idiotic and is one reason why his position is impossible to steelman.

Disclaimer: the point of this thread is to highlight mistakes/misconceptions of mainstream works with the same lack of charity, hyperbolic insults, and non sequitor mischaracterizations as directed at revisionist writings. The citations are real, the tone is satirical. If it looks unhinged, insane, and paranoid -- that's because it is. Some people who take this thread way too seriously have denounced such argumentation style as being not a win.

Posted: **Tue Mar 17, 2026 7:17 am**

Archie wrote: ↑Sat Mar 14, 2026 5:14 pm
pilgrimofdark wrote: ↑Sat Mar 14, 2026 4:40 pm I don't hold random people on X in higher regard and to a higher standard of rigor and accuracy than academic historians writing academic books with an academic press and charging money for it.
Nessie likes to focus on casuals on X since he has no chance against more informed revisionists.

You like to censor me, since you have no chance of making a rational defence of the unique to Holocaust revisionism methodology.

Posted: **Tue Mar 17, 2026 7:49 am**

Nessie wrote: ↑Tue Mar 17, 2026 7:17 am
Archie wrote: ↑Sat Mar 14, 2026 5:14 pm
pilgrimofdark wrote: ↑Sat Mar 14, 2026 4:40 pm I don't hold random people on X in higher regard and to a higher standard of rigor and accuracy than academic historians writing academic books with an academic press and charging money for it.
Nessie likes to focus on casuals on X since he has no chance against more informed revisionists.
You like to censor me, since you have no chance of making a rational defence of the unique to Holocaust revisionism methodology.

The guy with 3,775 posts thinks he censored. Yeah, okay. I have placed you in quarantine to prevent you from swamping every single thread with your repetitive spam posts. I'm not going to let you ruin all the threads on the main Debate board.

If you don't like being in quarantine, you should try following the forum rules for a change. Some of those rules I wrote specifically with you in mind.

Posted: **Tue Mar 17, 2026 7:54 am**

Archie wrote: ↑Tue Mar 17, 2026 7:49 am
Nessie wrote: ↑Tue Mar 17, 2026 7:17 am
Archie wrote: ↑Sat Mar 14, 2026 5:14 pm

Nessie likes to focus on casuals on X since he has no chance against more informed revisionists.
You like to censor me, since you have no chance of making a rational defence of the unique to Holocaust revisionism methodology.
The guy with 3,775 posts thinks he censored. Yeah, okay. I have placed you in quarantine to prevent you from swamping every single thread with your repetitive spam posts. I'm not going to let you ruin all the threads on the main Debate board.

If you don't like being in quarantine, you should try following the forum rules for a change. Some of those rules I wrote specifically with you in mind.

I do not post in every single thread, why are you exaggerating?
The threads I posted in became the most active, that is not spamming.
You repeatedly make the same mistakes again and again, so of course my responses will be repetitive.
What rules have I failed to follow?

Posted: **Tue Mar 17, 2026 9:35 pm**

Roberto wrote: ↑Tue Mar 17, 2026 7:54 am What rules have I failed to follow?

Posted: **Thu Mar 19, 2026 7:58 pm**

Jacob Flaws, continuing to engage in a mass conspiracy with the University of Nebraska Press to write, edit, and publish a book that is offered for sale to the public:

This is frankly idiotic. Nearly 80 years after a Polish surveyor rotated North-South by 90 degrees on his map of Treblinka, Flaws has doubled the midwittery by rotating a map of Malkinia by 180 degrees.

To steelman his position, he has written a book called Spaces of Treblinka but has never seen a map of the Malkinia area and has simply plagiarized his map from somewhere else. I understand he thinks the science is virtually settled that Treblinka was north of Malkinia based on his methodology of printing upside-down maps in his authoritative book on "space." I say his judgment about compass directions is off. Flat earthers also think the science is settled on their side, counter to the unanimous perspective of the directionally-oriented community.

I am interested in methodology, and his methodology is appalling. This double fucked midwit has no idea how to look at an aerial photograph.

In fact, it would have been better if he, similar to Wiernik, had simply plagiarized someone else's map. At least then he'd have had a chance to get it right.

So far, attempts to get Holocaustophiliacs, in reality untrained Freudian psychoanalysts projecting their mental diagnoses onto others, to explain and justify their methods of analyzing cardinal directions, have failed. They can not do it.

Some people might say it's normal for experts on "space" to confuse North and South. I have a better theory, which is that Flaws is insane.

Flaws's map is logically flawed. Just because he can explain how a map not showing the railroad to Treblinka is the road to Treblinka, does not therefore mean it is possible.

This is known as the argument from gullibility, which is a logical fallacy.

AI Overview: The logical fallacy of believing something is true simply because you personally can work out any reason why you want it to be true.

What is the evidential value of Flaws's upside-down map not showing the road to Treblinka that he claims is a right-side-up map showing the road to Treblinka?

When I sent Flaws and the University of Nebraska Press 3,800 emails pointing out their logical fallacies and lies, they could only block me. That they resort to censorship evidences my claim that they are bullies. It is clear his intention is to keep on selling his book, to try to get easily-duped fellow academics to confuse North with South, again and again and again. Why is he allowed to bully and censor me?

Can any Holocaustophiliac, really unlicensed psychotherapist suffering from Self-Defeating Personality Disorder, explain to me, why they dump the cardinal directions used by cartographers all over the world, to investigate the Holocaust and switch to their method?

Disclaimer: the point of this thread is to highlight mistakes/misconceptions of mainstream works with the same lack of charity, hyperbolic insults, and non sequitor mischaracterizations as directed at revisionist writings. The citations are real, the tone is satirical. If it looks unhinged, insane, and paranoid -- that's because it is. Some people who take this thread way too seriously have denounced such argumentation style as being something only losers would use.

Posted: **Fri Mar 20, 2026 2:57 am**

pilgrimofdark wrote: ↑Thu Mar 19, 2026 7:58 pm Jacob Flaws, continuing to engage in a mass conspiracy with the University of Nebraska Press to write, edit, and publish a book that is offered for sale to the public:

This is frankly idiotic. Nearly 80 years after a Polish surveyor rotated North-South by 90 degrees on his map of Treblinka, Flaws has doubled the midwittery by rotating a map of Malkinia by 180 degrees.

To steelman his position, he has written a book called Spaces of Treblinka but has never seen a map of the Malkinia area and has simply plagiarized his map from somewhere else. I understand he thinks the science is virtually settled that Treblinka was north of Malkinia based on his methodology of printing upside-down maps in his authoritative book on "space." I say his judgment about compass directions is off. Flat earthers also think the science is settled on their side, counter to the unanimous perspective of the directionally-oriented community.

I am interested in methodology, and his methodology is appalling. This double fucked midwit has no idea how to look at an aerial photograph.

In fact, it would have been better if he, similar to Wiernik, had simply plagiarized someone else's map. At least then he'd have had a chance to get it right.

So far, attempts to get Holocaustophiliacs, in reality untrained Freudian psychoanalysts projecting their mental diagnoses onto others, to explain and justify their methods of analyzing cardinal directions, have failed. They can not do it.

Some people might say it's normal for experts on "space" to confuse North and South. I have a better theory, which is that Flaws is insane.

Flaws's map is logically flawed. Just because he can explain how a map not showing the railroad to Treblinka is the road to Treblinka, does not therefore mean it is possible.

This is known as the argument from gullibility, which is a logical fallacy.

AI Overview: The logical fallacy of believing something is true simply because you personally can work out any reason why you want it to be true.

What is the evidential value of Flaws's upside-down map not showing the road to Treblinka that he claims is a right-side-up map showing the road to Treblinka?

When I sent Flaws and the University of Nebraska Press 3,800 emails pointing out their logical fallacies and lies, they could only block me. That they resort to censorship evidences my claim that they are bullies. It is clear his intention is to keep on selling his book, to try to get easily-duped fellow academics to confuse North with South, again and again and again. Why is he allowed to bully and censor me?

Can any Holocaustophiliac, really unlicensed psychotherapist suffering from Self-Defeating Personality Disorder, explain to me, why they dump the cardinal directions used by cartographers all over the world, to investigate the Holocaust and switch to their method?

Disclaimer: the point of this thread is to highlight mistakes/misconceptions of mainstream works with the same lack of charity, hyperbolic insults, and non sequitor mischaracterizations as directed at revisionist writings. The citations are real, the tone is satirical. If it looks unhinged, insane, and paranoid -- that's because it is. Some people who take this thread way too seriously have denounced such argumentation style as being something only losers would use.

I cannot stop laughing! Can we agree that the book has some flaws the author should be aware of?

It is so very tempting to link the author to this thread, knowing it would make is blood boil he was so very wrong and is being so thoroughly mocked.

Posted: **Fri Mar 20, 2026 4:05 pm**

Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Mar 20, 2026 2:57 am I cannot stop laughing! Can we agree that the book has some flaws the author should be aware of?

It is so very tempting to link the author to this thread, knowing it would make is blood boil he was so very wrong and is being so thoroughly mocked.

He also does the stationmaster Zabecki took a photograph of Treblinka during the revolt with citation to Zabecki's Polish memoirs directly.

But those dead horses are still recovering from their most recent beatings.

I paid money for Flaws's book, read it, and got some good info and sources from it, so it's not a total loss. This thread is clearly labeled hyperbolic insults.

Posted: **Fri Mar 20, 2026 4:29 pm**

All those historians making mistakes and still, no evidence has appeared that would cause the mass murder narrative to be revised. The chances of a successful hoax of the murder of c6 million people being sustained, is virtually nil.

The CODOH Revisionist Forum

Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock

Re: Examples of the argument from gullibility to plagiarized schlock