"Muehlenkamp accepts nafcash's challenge" - 3rd Update

Original article and 1st update

2nd update, 24.07.2008, 23:55 hours GMT

Update on 26.07.2008, 15:08 hours GMT

Did Gerdes invite "Hannover" Hargis to come over to VNN and discuss with me there directly?

Read more!


Of course not. Gerdes is too chicken-shit to extend my invitation, and "Hannover" Hargis would be much too chicken-shit to accept it.

Instead we continue being treated to the amusing and instructive spectacle of two miserable "Revisionist" cowards talking about an opponent on a forum to which, as both of them know, that opponent has no access.

And what is more, stinking coward Gerdes hasn’t even yet had the courage to give the CODOH clowns a link to the VNN discussion. Obviously there are things on that thread that Gerdes doesn’t want to show to his brothers-in-spirit.

That’s "Revisionism" in all it’s splendor, folks.

Now let’s look at the latest showpieces of "Revisionist" imbecility on the Cesspit’s thread Muehlenkamp accepts nafcash's challenge.

Gerdes, Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:25:

Let's look at the lies of the fraud Kola:

WARSAW (Reuters) - Polish archaeologists excavating the Nazi death camp in Sobibor said they have found mass graves at the site. The excavations could provide valuable new evidence on the number of victims. “We uncovered seven mass graves with an average depth of five meters. In them there were charred human remains and under them remains in a state of decay” archaeologist Andrzej Kola was quoted by the Polish PAP news agency telling a news conference. He said the largest grave measured 70 by 25 meters, the others 20 by 25 meters."

When you look at the following video of the "huge mass graves," please notice how narrow they are. 20 - 25 meters wide? Nonsense, they look to me like they are 4 meters wide. And there is NOTHING "uncovered" or "excavated." And notice the lie in the video title - the "pits." LOL!!! All we have is two depressions in the soil. NO EVIDENCE WHAT-SO-EVER of human remains. All we have is a cognitive illusion. Look at this crap and see for yourself what a joke this fraudulent claim by Kola is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvPO31XgL8w&feature=related"]YouTube - Sobibór - the pits

BTW, did you notice how young the trees were in those depressions?

Did Shermer inspect these "pits" during his "firsthand investigation" of the camp.

First of all, Gerdes is obviously assuming that the depressions shown in Alan Heath’s Sobibor video are the mass graves found by Prof. Kola in 2001. Actually the filmmaker makes no statement in this sense, and he’s not even sure that the depressions he shows are mass graves. On the contrary, he expressly acknowledges that there could be a "forestry reason" for these depressions.

Second, would the width of the depressions, assuming they are related to the mass graves found by Prof. Kola in 2001, necessarily contradict Prof. Kola’s findings? I don’t think so. The soil need not have sunk throughout the width of any given mass grave but may have remained higher in some parts than in others.

Third, the absence of anything "uncovered" or "excavated" in the depressions, assuming they are related to the mass graves found by Kola in 2001, does not mean anything at all, considering that Heath’s video was put on YouTube on 26 March 2007 and probably made not long before that. What excavations Prof. Kola conducted were probably covered up when he concluded his work in 2001, so expecting to see signs of these excavations today is just stupid.

Fourth, Gerdes' howling about no evidence of human remains being shown in Heath's video is even more stupid. If these depressions are related to the mass graves discovered by Prof. Kola in 2001 – and that need not be so, see above – the human remains would of course be underground and thus not visible on the video. Duh!

Fifth, what is the age of the trees in the depressions supposed to mean? I’d say it means nothing either way. It speaks neither in favor nor against the assumption that these depressions are related to the mass graves found by Prof. Kola in 2001.

To sum it up, Gerdes has just shown once more what a bleeding idiot he is.

Gerdes’ babbling at the end of this post about Michael Shermer – who I never referred to as a source – is meaningless except insofar as it again reveals Gerdes' pathological obsession with this gentleman, which has amused me throughout my discussions with Gerdes on Topix and on VNN.

Gerdes, Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:28 pm:

I kid you not folks, only a certifiable nut case or a paid professional liar could come up with this - This is Muehlenkamp's latest:

"Try explaining why charred human remains and remains in a state of decay should be visible on any given core-drilling sample from mass graves that can be expected to largely or mostly contain cremains Mr. Gerdes."

Mmmmm. She quotes Kola to say that his word alone is proof that the Sobibor holocaust has been proven by archeological means:

WARSAW (Reuters) - Polish archaeologists excavating the Nazi death camp in Sobibor said they have found mass graves at the site. The excavations could provide valuable new evidence on the number of victims. “We uncovered seven mass graves with an average depth of five meters. In them there were charred human remains and under them remains in a state of decay” archaeologist Andrzej Kola was quoted by the Polish PAP news agency telling a news conference.

Then asks how anyone could believe that what Kola says he found could be found!

This of course begs the question - If Muehlenkamp isn't a paid professional liar, then - Is he mentally ill or retarded?

Either way, she's priceless isn't she?

Like Hannover says - It's so easy.

What is actually easy is to once more demonstrate, on hand of his above babblings, what a sorry idiot Mr. Gerdes is.

The poor fellow seems to believe there is a contradiction between Prof. Kola’s description of the mass graves’ contents in a press conference and the presence of what seems to be mixed ashes of human bone and tissue on these two photos of drill samples:

http://www.sobibor.edu.pl/angielska/galerie/badania/F5.html


http://www.sobibor.edu.pl/angielska/galerie/badania/F6.html


and what seems to be either bone ash or lime on this photo of a core drill sample:

http://www.sobibor.edu.pl/angielska/galerie/badania/F7.html


Why should there be such a contradiction?

First of all, I don’t know – as I expressly pointed out on VNN – if these core drill samples are related to Prof. Kola’s 2001 investigation or to later archaeological work.

Second, how does Gerdes know what core samples of "charred human remains" would look like and that they would look different from the light-gray substance visible on the core samples in the first two photographs shown above?

Third and most important, assuming that core samples of "charred human remains" would have a different aspect, how would the presence of "charred human remains" in the Sobibor mass graves rule out the presence of ashes? Even if some of the bodies were not reduced to mere ashes and bone fragments, the incineration of the bodies on grids at Sobibor must have produced lots of such smaller remains, and it stands to reason that these were not left lying around and neither necessarily taken somewhere to be scattered, but returned to the mass graves together with the incompletely burned remains that are suggested by the term "charred human remains" – assuming this is a correct translation of what Prof. Kola told the Polish news agency in Polish language.

So there’s no banana again for Mr. Gerdes, sorry. The chimp just showed once more that he forgot to think before writing.

Now let’s have a look at one of the subterfuges that charlatans like Gerdes resort to when they have no arguments: hollow derision meant to create the impression that what is being derided is oh-so-ridiculous:

Gerdes, Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:46 pm

I'm serious here folks, a person just couldn't make this stuff up (unless of course you were a member of holocaust controversies).

These are photos that Muehlenkamp is trying to claim are, and again, these are his EXACT WORDS: "what is visible in these samples is quite interesting. The color of the soil, judging by the soil surface visible on these photographs, is a light brown. Yet these samples show layers underground that are light gray and black (f5, f6 &f7):"

http://www.sobibor.edu.pl/angielska/galerie/badania/index.html

"How about ashes of human bone and tissue for the light gray stuff, wood ashes for the black stuff and pure bone ashes or lime for the white stuff, Mr. Gerdes? ...there’s no reason indeed to doubt the accuracy of the corroborating descriptions and photographic depictions of physical evidence that we have seen so far from Sobibor. Any other idea what those light grey, black and white substances in the light-brown soil of Sobibor might be, Mr. Gerdes? Let’s hear."

Priceless.

What is actually priceless is Gerdes' tacit admission that he cannot explain what, other than ashes of human bone and tissue and bone ashes or lime, those light grey, black and white substances in the light-brown soil of Sobibor could possibly be. I asked him several times on VNN, last time in my post # 826:

The light gray substance on the first two photos looks like ashes of human bone and tissue to me. I’ve seen such ashes elsewhere, hence the association.

The black substance on the second photo looks like wood ash to me. There’s a gray streak in the middle of the black suggesting that some human ashes may be there as well.

The white substances on the third photo could be either bone ash or the lime that was poured upon the dead bodies in the mass graves.

Now let’s see what alternative possibilities you come up with, Gerdes. Instead of seeking refuge in infantile derision and silly laughter, tell us what other than human ashes, wood ashes or lime the substances on these photos of Sobibor core drill samples, clearly distinguishable from the light-brown soil, could possibly be.

Needless to see, there’s nothing resembling an answer to this question amidst the chimp’s hysterical howling in his recent VNN posts (nos. 835, 836 and 837, which I’ll have the pleasure of shredding later on). How could there be? The sorry charlatan can offer no alternative explanation for what those light grey, black and white substances in the light-brown soil of Sobibor might be. And to cover up this obvious fact, he resorts to his above-quoted derision, obviously in the hope that fellow retards will gain the impression that he is considers it below his dignity to respond to my pertinent questions because they are oh-so-fucking-stupid.

That’s "Revisionism", folks – charlatanry masked by the arrogant feigning of superior knowledge.

Now to my old friend Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis and his post of Fri Jul 25, 2008 11:39 am, see if he fares better than poor little Gerdes.

"Hannover"

How pathetically desperate Muehlenkamp and his gang are. This is so easily debunked that it's embarrassing.

So Hargis will now explain what Gerdes couldn’t explain, i.e. what, other than human ashes, wood ashes or lime, the substances on the shown photos of Sobibor core drill samples, clearly distinguishable from the light-brown soil, could possibly be?

I can’t quite believe it, but let’s read what he’s got ...

"Hannover"

Where's the excavation to examine?

Prof. Kola’s 2001 excavation (which the photographed core samples need not be related to) was probably covered up when his work was completed in 2001. Current excavations by the Sobibor Archaeological Project, insofar as not covered up for the winter at the end of 2007 and not yet reopened this year, can probably be viewed at the present time. Now, why must there be an "excavation to examine" for an archeologist’s description of his investigation results to be considered reliable? And what has this got to do with the question what, other than human ashes, wood ashes or lime, the substances on the shown photos of Sobibor core drill samples, clearly distinguishable from the light-brown soil, could possibly be?

"Hannover"

Where's the visible layers to review?

Why must there be "visible layers to review" for an archeologist’s description of his investigation results to be considered reliable? And what has this got to do with the question what, other than human ashes, wood ashes or lime, the substances on the shown photos of Sobibor core drill samples, clearly distinguishable from the light-brown soil, could possibly be?

I’m looking forward to what "Hannover" will come up with as answer to these questions, Mr. Gerdes. You will invite him to come to VNN, won’t you?

"Hannover"

We see laughable posed pictures of some guys supposedly taking core samples. Note the woman poring over a laptop for effect, nice touch. ?

Indulging in baseless insinuations of manipulation, "Hannover" continues to studiously avoid any statement about what, other than the human remains or lime that their appearance suggests, the light-gray or white substances on the photographed core samples might be.

"Hannover"

Where's the verifiable lab analysis of human remains?

While such a lab analysis was conducted regarding core samples from the Belzec mass graves (it is mentioned in Prof. Kola’s report about the 1997-1999 investigations at Belzec), I don’t know if it was made regarding the core samples shown on the photographs under assessment. Further information about this can probably be obtained from the Friends of Sobibor Remembrance association, on whose website these photographs are featured. And again, how is this supposed to answer the question what, other than the human ashes, wood ashes or lime that their appearance suggests, the substances on the photographed core samples might be?

"Hannover"

Where the proof the any verified human remains are in the numbers that are absurdly alleged?

In the documentary and eyewitness evidence proving the murder of at least about 150,000 human beings at Sobibor, Mr. Hargis. And in the size of the Sobibor mass graves, established by Prof. Kola, which is in line with and corroborates that evidence. Nobody has yet exhumed let alone counted the human remains contained in the mass graves of Sobibor, for sure. But I don’t think you can show us any rules or standards of evidence according to which this must be done, explain any logic whereby this would be necessary in order to establish the extent of mass murder at Sobibor, or many mass murders you accept as factual where the number of victims was established by counting the physical remains.

Ah, and the only absurdity here is your baseless allegation that the documentary, eyewitness and physical evidence pointing to mass murder at Sobibor was all manipulated by some sinister conspiracy.

"Hannover"

Where's the proof that any verfied human remains are a result of murder? Typhus and other disease were rampant during the war, especially eastern Europe.

That may be so, but it happens that human remains found at Sobibor were found at a place that all known evidence shows to have been an extermination camp where at least about 150,000 people were killed by gassing or shooting, so the probability that all these people died of "typhus and other disease" at this specific place is infinitesimal, to say the least. Think before writing.

"Hannover"

There's no reason to believe that they have done anything more than poke a hole in a trash incineration site.

Actually what all evidence and elementary human logic tell us is that there’s no reason to even remotely suspect that the core drills in question are from holes poked in a trash incineration site and not from holes drilled on the area of former Sobibor extermination camp. Hollow conspiracy theories as entertained by true believers like Hargis are certainly no such reason outside "Revisionist" cloud-cuckoo-land.

"Hannover"

Remember, in dealing with Belzec, shyster Kola presented hand drawn sketches of his alleged core samples, no verifiable photographs. Why?

Several reasons are possible, one being that the composition of core samples can be better explained on hand of hand-drawn sketches than on hand of photographs, the other that photographs of human remains taken out of a mass grave might offend the religious notions of certain people about respect for the dead. Simple explanations are usually far more probable than sinister conspiracy theories.

"Hannover"

Kola's alleged samples lack the most basic verification principles.

Which are, Mr. Hargis? I strongly doubt that you can show us any rules or standards about what "verification principles" an archaeological report must comply with. I strongly doubt that you even know what you are talking about.

"Hannover"

That is the hallmark of fraud.

By what standards and what reasoning other than those of a paranoid conspiracy theorist like yourself, Mr. Hargis?

"Hannover"

Anyone can sketch unverifiable 'core samples' to suit an agenda; just as they, among other tricks, have tried repeatedly to alter photos.

Who is "they" here? There was a case of probable photo manipulation by the Simon Wiesenthal Center (which I think is all "Hannover" can show in support of his "repeatedly tried to alter photos" claim), but how would this support the suspicion that a renowned archaeologist unrelated to that entity manipulated his investigation results, even though there’s no indication whatsoever of manipulation and those results are matched by all other known evidence (which the archaeologist, needless to say, could have no influence on)? Not at all, I would say – unless, of course, one baselessly postulates a monstrous conspiracy of evidence manipulation that corrupted every historian, criminal investigator and archaeologist over the last sixty years to help it pursue its sinister purposes. "Hannover" is one of the loonies who piously believe in such conspiracy, as he tells us in his next remark:

"Hannover"

All the judeo-supremacist claimed 'research' of the so called death camps reveal the same easily debunked fraudulent tactics.

What "fraudulent tactics", one is entitled to ask? The only indication of fraudulence that "Hannover" has shown is his baseless postulate that an archaeological report must comply with his baseless notions of verifiability lest it be fraudulent. Strictly for the birds.

The information published in Kola’s report about the archaeological investigations at Belzec is only a part of the information collected in the course of these investigations, by the way. On pages 10 and 11 of Kola’s book BEŁŻEC THE NAZI CAMP FOR JEWS IN THE LIGHT OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOURCES (which Hargis claims to have read), the following is stated (emphasis added):

Directed by that need The Council of Protection of Memory of Combat and Martyrdom turned in 1997 to the Archaeological and Ethnological Institute of Nicholas Copernicus University in Toruń with a request of conducting probing archaeological works at the territory of the camp in Bełżec. The excavation started in autumn 1997 and was carried on in spring and autumn 1998 and in autumn 1999. The result of the excavation works was a detailed archaeological documentation together with the basic report delivered to The Council of Protection of Memory of Struggle and Martyrdom as to the principal, together with the preliminary reports. The other, non archaeological documentation collected simultaneously were chemical analysis and microscope studies of samples taken during the probing works. They were made to verify the conclusions emerging from archaeological analysis.

How about trying to take a look at what’s in the archives of the "Council of Protection of Memory of Combat and Martyrdom" (Rada Ochrony Pamięci Walk i Męczeństwa - ROPWiM) in Warsaw, Poland, Mr. Hargis?

"Hannover"

see Kola and his 'samples' demolished here:
'News: Belzec book demolishes 'death camp' nonsense'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=1152

What I see "here" is the mendacious nonsense of "Revisionist" guru Carlo Mattogno that I shredded and showed for what it is in my blog article Carlo Mattogno on Belzec Archaeological Research. Thanks for the opportunity to again call my readers’ attention to this article, Mr. Hargis.

"Hannover"

This is what the lying filth of the 'holocaust' Industry tries to pass off as 'proof'.

Let’s make it:

This (i.e. mendacious crap like that of Mr. Mattogno) is what the lying filth from "Revisionist" cloud-cuckoo-land tries to pass off as 'proof' supporting its Jew-hating and Hitler-kissing articles of faith.

That, my dear Hargis, is an accurate statement – and one that, unlike your gibberish, requires no self-projection.

To conclude this update, I note that Hargis' "trash incineration site" - nonsense was the closest he got to providing an alternative explanation as to what, other than the human remains, wood ashes or lime that their appearance suggests, the light-gray, black or white substances on the photographed Sobibor core samples might be.

But that's still more than the other cowardly charlatan, Greg Gerdes, was capable of. :-)


4th update 29.07.2008, 15:00 hours GMT

"Muehlenkamp accepts nafcash's challenge" - 2nd Update

Original article and 1st update

Update on 24.07.2008, 23:55 hours GMT

Some more fun with the cowardly loons on the thread Muehlenkamp accepts nafcash's challenge of the CODOH Cesspit:

Read more!


Mr. Nobody (an appropriate handle), Mon Jul 21, 2008 7:11 pm:

Oh well I guess you can kiss your money goodbye, this will be too easy!

All Muehlenkamp has to do is obtain Shermer's alleged "Treblinka Investigation" MWUUUUUUUAHAHAHAHAH !

Stinking coward and liar Gerdes, who is aware of this article because it has been pointed out to him at least twice, is hereby requested to invite his fellow clown over to VNN so he can provide what Gerdes has not been able to provide throughout our discussions: the number of the page of Denying History on which Shermer (a source that I never referred to but Gerdes is for some reason obsessed with) claimed to have conducted a "Treblinka Investigation".

Stinking coward and liar Gerdes, Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:04 pm:

And speaking of proof, and I kid you not, this is an exact quote that just came in from Muehlenkamp on the VNN forum:

"It’s for who makes a claim to provide the proof supporting that claim, a**hole."

Exactly, and I showed Gerdes how proof is provided, in my VNN post # 777.

How about linking the CODOH clowns to this post, Gerdes?

(Note that Gerdes keeps bragging about our VNN discussion but has not yet provided a link to the VNN thread. He’s seems to be afraid – not unreasonably so – that the CODOH clowns might realize what a sorry figure he is cutting there against me).

Stinking coward and liar Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis (he and Gerdes are really birds of a feather), Mon Jul 21, 2008 8:04 pm :

Well, the links I provided above show without a doubt that Muehlenkamp cannot defend the impossible tales of the 'holocaust' religion. He/they make the claims, and when these claims are inspected their only recourse is to attempt dirty tricks. Such are the judeo-supremacists.

Yeah, Jonnie, just keep repeating your prayers. Meanwhile, readers of my VNN post # 739 are learning how the crap you and your fellow true believers produced on "the links I provided above" was taken apart piece by piece, and how it is that you keep opponents from "defending" what you self-projectingly call "the impossible tales of the 'holocaust' religion" (the only religion built on impossible tales in this context is the "Revisionist" fantasy about the "Hoax"): by deleting or retaining their posts and eventually banning them.

As to your victory dances, let me repeat again what one of your less cowardly and mendacious brothers-in-spirit, quoted in the same VNN post, had to say about them:

I agree, Herr Muehlankamp, those guys over there are not entirely honest. Banning you and others and then performing victory dances is beyond even chutzpah. Hopefully this new poster, if he is new, will soon realize that dissenting views, if you will, are verboten.

As far as pointing him to RODOH, the name can not be mentioned, it is deleted. One of my posts was totally distorted, I dared mention RODOH, should have copied it, which almost made me quit that forum. Anyway, who knows, perhaps this lost sheep will find its way.

Next in line is Hargis bird-of-a-feather Gerdes, who in his post of Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:38 am regurgitates the following:

Yes, and don't forget that Shermer also claims to have visited Sobibor. Remember what he said in Denying History:
Quote:

“The culmination of years of research… our purpose… to present the historical facts that refute Holocaust denial… To debunk the deniers can’t we just go there and see them for ourselves? The answer, of course, is “yes.”… We can no longer ignore the deniers, calling them names and hoping they will go away… We cannot remain silent anymore. It’s time to respond… Not only is it defensible to respond to the deniers, it is, we believe, our duty… Many of our arguments draw on specialized research into the claims of the deniers that took us… to the Nazi extermination camps themselves… we went to Europe to conduct research at the camps, in particular at… Treblinka, Sobibor… We wanted to see for ourselves just what evidence there is at the camps and to take the opportunity to examine firsthand the claims… Much of the research is the type of work professional historians normally do… analyzing ground and aerial photographs… in order to make proper interpretations, we must review the physical evidence… Like criminologists solving a crime, we piece together the myriad bits of evidence until a conclusion emerges from the morass of data… How is it that so much physical evidence can come to be doubted?”

Note that the above is a montage of statements from various different parts of Shermer’s book Denying History, which are pasted together as if they were related to each other in order to put words into the author’s mouth. Readers who have been following my VNN discussion with Gerdes may remember how often Gerdes made a fuss about investigations of the physical evidence Shermer supposedly claimed to have conducted at the sites of the former Aktion Reinhard(t) camps, and how often I asked him to point out the exact page or pages of Denying History on which Shermer supposedly claimed to have conducted such investigations. Gerdes’ response was always deafening silence – followed some time thereafter by a repetition of the mendacious montage quoted above.

Gerdes continues:

And now that THE FINAL SOLUTION FORENSIC CHALLENGE has been narrowed down to just Treblinka and Sobibor, and the applicant to the challenge reward must now use "SKPETIC" magazine only, Shermer should be able to assist Muehlenkamp on this matter immensely.

Yes, the Shermer / "SKEPTIC" magazine and Muehlenkamp / HC collaboration is a match made in heaven.

Actually – and as Gerdes well knows – neither I nor any of my fellow bloggers on HC have anything to do with Shermer, and throughout my discussions with Gerdes I never invoked Shermer as a source. Trying to saddle opponents with claims they never made and sources they never referred to is one of stinking liar Gerdes’ tricks.

Gerdes’ bird-of-a-feather Hargis, in his post of Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:48, dutifully echoes his fellow cowardly liar as follows:

Oh yeah, shysters Shermer and Muehlenkamp do Treblinka. Hilarious.

You gotta see these:

'Daily Gassings in Treblinka'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=118

'Andy Mathis / 'holocaust Hist. Project' Treblinka section'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=280'

'Treblinka 'mass grave' claim'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=4425

Search Treblinka at this site for more.

This is too easy.

- Hannover

I don’t see what the above threads have got to do with me – poor little Jonnie seems to be running out of threads in which he mouthed off about me after banning me. And what I really like in the above, coming as it does from a coward who never once left his Cesspit to debate on a forum where he could not control debate by cowardly censorship, is Hargis' "This is too easy" – bragging.

Hey Gerdes, what are you waiting for to invite Mr. "This is too easy" over to VNN, as I have several times asked you to do?

(Of course Hargis will never accept the invitation, he’s too much a coward for that. Any post of Gerdes’ containing such invitation is likely to immediately disappear into the memory hole. And the same will probably happen to any post of Gerdes containing a link to the VNN thread Archeological Investigations of Treblinka. Hargis doesn’t want his fellow true believers to look through the telescope.)

Next we have Gerdes, in his post Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:06 pm, proudly quoting his "latest (and last) major change to THE FINAL SOLUTION FORENSIC CHALLENGE". Note his amusing explanation for having excluded Belzec and Chelmno from the challenge:

I really hated to drop Belzec and Chelmno, but I felt the time was right to focus and force the issue about Sobibor. Of course, this means that someone else can pick up the Belzec and Chelmno balls that I dropped and do something with them. Especially Chelmno, which is not only a gift, but if the fraudulent "archeological investigation" there isn't used to our advantage, then the next generation of truthers are going to hold us in contempt. In fact, I believe the BS "archeological investigations" of Chelmno are the easiest of all to prove as fraudulent and can most easily be used to our advantage.

Of course it makes no sense whatsoever from Gerdes’ point of view to reduce the effect of his publicity stunt by excluding Belzec and Chelmno from the challenge, especially if the latter is "easiest of all to prove as fraudulent and can most easily be used to our advantage". Thus it seems reasonable to assume that Gerdes’ motivation was the exact opposite of what he claims, as I pointed out in my VNN post # 810:

So Belzec and Chelmno are not included in the challenge anymore, Mr. Gerdes?

Why is that? Did you get cold feet? Did someone tell you that Prof. Kola’s Belzec report alone, or Mrs. Golden’s article in ARCHAEOLOGY magazine, may be considered by a court of law as sufficient proof to meet the challenge requirements?

Does Gerdes really expect his readers to be so dumb as to fall for explanations that go against the grain of everything we have so far seen from this barking-mad loony?

Well, in "Revisionist" cloud-cuckoo-land he is sure to find that kind of suckers.

Last but not least we have Hargis again, post Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:44 pm:

See Kola and the laughable nonsense about Sobibor further demolished here:

'Mass graves found at Nazi camp [?]'
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=1194

Piece of cake.

I’d say the only thing "demolished" on that thread was any reasonable reader's expectation that "Revisionist" howlers might have any substantial arguments against a renowned archaeologist’s statements about archaeological findings that exactly match what all documentary and eyewitness evidence tell us about the mass murder at Sobibor. Hargis’ own part in this "demolishing" (see his post of Sat Jul 03, 2004 8:21 pm) was an especially hilarious showpiece of imbecility, which I would love to discuss with him here on VNN.

When are you going to forward my invitation for Mr. "Piece of cake" Hargis to come over here, Mr. Gerdes? I feel like having some more fun.


3rd update, 26.07.2008, 15:08 hours GMT

"Muehlenkamp accepts nafcash's challenge"

Thanks to my new friend Greg Gerdes, another cowardly "Revisionist" charlatan, Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis has been given the opportunity to indulge in another of his mendacious victory dances. See the Cesspit thread Muehlenkamp accepts nafcash's challenge.

I actually did accept that challenge, and it’s not a big deal, as I wrote in my post # 596 of the VNN thread Archeological Investigations of Treblinka:

Nothing to make a fuss about, actually. I’ve become so interested in the subsoil of these camps, especially Sobibor, that I intend to find out as much as I can about it for this reason already. If I can get my findings published in Archeology or Skeptic magazine, or at least co-author an article in one of those publications, that would be great. And if doing so furthermore forces an intellectual midget and lowly piece of scum to pay me 100,000 dollars, that would be the icing on the cake.

My comments to both Gerdes’ and Hannover’s rambling on the above-mentioned CODOH thread can be read in posts nos. 734, 739 and 740 of the VNN thread also mentioned above.

Greg Gerdes and Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis are some of the most mendacious, hysterical and cowardly true believers in "Revisionist" cloud-cuckoo-land (though of course they have stiff competition). It is therefore quite amusing to see these two showpieces of "Revisionist" imbecility and intellectual dishonesty chatting with each other – moreover about someone who, as both of them know, has no access to the forum where their conversation is taking place.

That’s "Revisionism" in all it’s splendor, folks!

Update, 20.07.2008, 11:08 hours GMT

Regarding the latest of Gerdes on CODOH, see my post # 750 on the VNN thread Archeological Investigations of Treblinka.

For a better idea of what Gerdes is all about, see also posts nos. 743 to 747 on the same thread.

2nd update, 24.07.2008, 23:55 hours GMT

3rd update, 26.07.2008, 15:08 hours GMT

4th update 29.07.2008, 15:00 hours GMT

5th update, 30.07.2008, 23:59 GMT

6th update, 03.08.2008, 0:48 GMT

7th update, 27.08.2008, 23:34 GMT

8th update, 09.09.2008, 12:19 GMT

9th update, 20.09.2008, 22:53 GMT

10th update, 21.09.2008, 15:01 GMT

11th update, 22.09.2008 14:38 GMT

Update on Gerdes & NAFCASH

Greg Gerdes has responded to my invitation and reported for debate on RODOH, in a manner that confirms my interpretation of NAFCASH as meaning "National Association of Fish-wives, Cretins and Screaming Hysterics".

The current RODOH thread involving Mr. Gerdes is this one:

What is a forensic criminologist?

Gerdes is now also howling around here.

Update, 17.06.2008

Gerdes is furthermore rambling away (in the company of his "White" buddies) on the thread Archeological Investigations of Treblinka of the "Vanguard News Network" forum (an "open arena" into which all opposition is welcome, according to one of the posters – and so far I have not been censored there indeed).

How Low Can Deniers Go?

How about: justifying the execution of children, which Hargis attempts to do here by lying about international law, the real status of which was spelled out here?

In this regard, Hargis joins his guru Rudolf, who lied here about the principle of proportionality, the reality of which was clearly spelled out here and here. Just how deeply can these Hitler-kissers descend into the moral mire?

CODOH Lies and Ignorance: Sanning (Part 2)

A quick follow-up to Part 1. Anyone still curious about the number of East European Jews who were being admitted to the USA can check out the 1929 quotas here, the revised 1938 quotas here, and the numbers of Jews who actually gained admittance to the US in 1939-40 here and here. It should also be noted that Jews could not leave the General Government after November 1940, due to this ban.

CODOH's Greatest Hits: A Guide for New Readers

The idiocies of the CODOH forum have been documented in detail both here on the HC site and in the Memory Hole section of the RODOH forum. Highlights include CODOH mentor Bradley Smith censoring his own blog to delete complaints made about biased moderation by Jonnie Hargis; the banning of Sergey Romanov for exposing CODOH's hypocrisy concerning standards of evidence; and my own treatment after I exposed Hargis's double standards concerning Neander and Krege.

Readers can also wonder at the fact that this thread was allowed by the 'Moderator' to make unsubstantiated allegations that "Jewish Death Squads killed Germans"; Hargis himself was allowed to allege, without evidence, "mass murders by Allied field troops, heinous mass mutilations by the largely judeo-supremacist Bolsheviks/communists, the dismemberment of Germany, the seizure of her assets and patents, the mass rapes, [and] slave labor made of Germans"; and why Claudia Rothenbach was allowed to wax lyrical, without being warned, about how the "USA killed 20 M natives and robbed their land; had 15 M slaves while some tens of million were murdered before they reached the ramp in Neuf Orleans" and "USSR, killed about 66 M own people, 10 M Ukrainians 1930/31". All such allegations would have been deleted immediately if made about the Nazis.

Greg Gerdes

In his post of Tue May 13, 2008 2:45 pm on the "CODOH Revisionist Forum", a bigmouth who calls himself Greg Gerdes blustered away as follows:

Now let's look at what that incredible dullard - Roberto Muehlenkamp, has to say about the "huge mass graves" of Sobibor: (from: http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/09/more-of-same-trash_18.html )

Quote:
"As before in regard to Treblinka and Belzec, Mr. Ugly Voice tries to take his readers for a ride by "estimating" the burial space available at Sobibor... it seems there are viewers blind and/or stupid enough to let themselves be taken in by such a kindergarten-level hoax. Which is not surprising, by the way, to who has spent some time looking at the world of "Revisionist" lunacy, which is full of fanatics eager to switch off their tiny brains in order to believe what they would like to believe.

...If, on the other hand, you use the plausible densities mentioned in the same article, you get the following:

• At 8 bodies per cubic meter (Mattogno’s "maximum capacity"): 99,592 bodies

• At 10.7 bodies per cubic meter (Alex Bay’s calculation): 133,204 bodies

• At 14.8 bodies per cubic meter (pursuant to Charles Provan’s experiment: 184.245 bodies.

So we can see that, even by the lowest calculation that can be considered reasonable, the American Football spectator crowd of about 80,000 people that Mr. Ugly Voice tries to impress his gullible viewers with could very well fit into the burial space available at Sobibor, as established according to Prof. Kola’s above-mentioned findings. Unsurprisingly, Mr. Ugly Voice has it all wrong once again."

So the dullest of all the holocaust controversies dullards claims that the estimate of 80,000 buried in the "huge mass graves" of Sobibor is a hoax and also sneers at the figure of 100,000. He goes on to estimate 133,000 to 184,000 bodies are buried in the "huge mass graves" of Sobibor.

Of course, this begs the question - Even if the maximum figure of 184,000 are buried in the "huge mass graves" of Sobibor, then why do so many hoaxers claim that the figure is 250,000?

But of course, the real question is, a question that even a kindergartener would ask: IF the official Sobibor holocasut story is true - Then where EXACTLY are these alleged "huge mass graves?"

And a question:

When is Kola going to publish the results of this investigation?

Read more!


Never having met this Gerdes fellow before, I wondered why he was mad at me, as his mouthing suggests he his.

Was it only because I had referred to "Revisionist" nonsense in general and denierbud’s video clips in particular in rather unflattering and equally appropriate terms? Or was there more behind Gerdes' anger?

The latter is suggested by the fact that, as I found out by running "Greg Gerdes" on the Google search engine, our friend is the "president" of the so-called "National Association of Forensic Criminologists, Archeologists, Skeptics and Historians" (NAFCASH), whose mendacious "challenge" was appropriately commented by Sergey Romanov in this article. My own article Polish investigations of the Treblinka killing site were a complete failure … incidentally punched further holes in what these NAFCASH people (whose multi-colored and multi-sized collection of long-debunked "Revisionist" manure, such as the irrelevant "diesel gas chambers" baloney, is so shrill as to make it look like their initials actually stand for "National Association of Fish-Wives, Cretins and Screaming Hysterics") tell their readers about there being "no trace of mass graves" at Treblinka, by showing – on hand of a site investigation report quoted by "Revisionist" gurus Mattogno & Graf, who however failed to understand its significance – that the size of the presumable mass graves area of Treblinka extermination camp (an area of ca. 20,000 square meters covered by human ashes, bones and skulls, according to said report), as well as the likely depth of the mass graves established during the investigation (7.5 meters, go figure!), are compatible with the order of magnitude of mass murder at Treblinka that becomes apparent from documentary evidence. Another nail in NAFCASH's coffin was my recent article Gold Rush in Treblinka, with its mention of documentary evidence about the postwar digging-up of the Treblinka killing site by treasure hunters and the opinion of an expert in ground-penetrating radar (GPR) technology, both of which are further confirmation that NAFCASH’s poster-boy Richard Krege is, if not an inveterate liar, then at least an incompetent bungler who doesn't know much about GPR soil examination.

If Mr. Gerdes has read the above-mentioned articles – which I hope he has – that would explain his diatribes against Holocaust Controversies in general and "that incredible dullard" in particular even better than his anger at my having called a spade a spade in my article More of the same trash ….

Now, let’s look at Mr. Gerdes’ comments about the excerpt from that article quoted in his above-mentioned post, item by item.

Gerdes:

So the dullest of all the holocaust controversies dullards claims that the estimate of 80,000 buried in the "huge mass graves" of Sobibor is a hoax and also sneers at the figure of 100,000. He goes on to estimate 133,000 to 184,000 bodies are buried in the "huge mass graves" of Sobibor.

I refrain from calling Gerdes the dullest of "Revisionist" dullards because he has some stiff competition among his coreligionists, to say the least, but the fact is that the fellow is obviously too dumb to even read my article correctly.

I’m not arguing that the estimate of ca. 80,000 dead bodies buried in the Sobibor mass graves is wrong let alone a "hoax", and I am also not estimating that "133,000 to 184,000" dead bodies were buried in those mass graves. My argument is that, according to the measurements of the mass graves found in 2001 by Polish archaeologists, the Sobibor mass graves were large enough to hold more or much more than the number of dead bodies reportedly buried in them before the camp staff switched to incinerating the bodies instead of burying them. This in turn means that there is nothing implausible about these mass graves having contained about 80,000 dead bodies.

Maybe such elementary reasoning – if the mass graves could have held more corpses than they are reported to have held, then there’s nothing implausible about the reported figure – is too complex for a "Revisionist" simpleton like Gerdes to grasp.

Gerdes:

Of course, this begs the question - Even if the maximum figure of 184,000 are buried in the "huge mass graves" of Sobibor, then why do so many hoaxers claim that the figure is 250,000?

Besides misreading my article, Gerdes apparently didn’t understand the video clip that this article refers to, which starts with the following quote from page 177 of Yitzhak Arad’s book Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka. The Operation Reinhard Death Camps:

Only one-third of the 250,000 victims in this camp had been killed and buried before the cremating began. Those who were gassed there afterward, in the period between October 1942 and October 1943, were taken directly from the gas chambers to the cremating sites.

Even denierbud, though not the sharpest tool in the shed, realized that this meant ca. 83,000 bodies buried before cremation became the body disposal method at Sobibor, whereas the remaining 167,000 were incinerated right after they had been killed, without ever being dumped into a mass grave. For Gerdes, on the other hand, even this simple reasoning seems to have been too much. Or then he didn’t even bother to watch denierbud’s video clip (not that he would have missed anything of value).

The number given by Arad is the highest estimate of the number of victims of Sobibor that I know of. A more cautious estimate was made at the trial against former members of the Sobibor staff before the District Court in Hagen, Germany, which concluded that at least 150,000 Jewish civilians had been killed at Sobibor. As I mentioned in this article, an expert report provided during this trial managed to reconstruct (with remarkable accuracy, as a comparison with documentary evidence discovered decades after this trial shows) the dates and places of origin of the transports included in the minimum number of victims assumed by the court. So despite the Nazis’ documented attempts to get rid of as much evidence as possible, enough documents and other evidence survived to allow for a court expert’s detailed reconstruction of transports to Sobibor, adding up to about 150,000 people, at a trial held more than 20 years after the end of the war.

This leads us to a question far more pertinent that Gerdes’ high-handed (and already answered) question:

But of course, the real question is, a question that even a kindergartener would ask: IF the official Sobibor holocasut story is true - Then where EXACTLY are these alleged "huge mass graves?

The more pertinent question is this: if, as claimed by "Revisionist" fantasists like Gerdes, Sobibor was not an extermination camp but a transit camp from which Jews were distributed to ghettos or labor camps further east, then which were these alleged ghettos or labor camps, what evidence is there that shows large numbers of Jews from Sobibor being transported to these places and accommodated there, and what evidence is there regarding what eventually became of all those Jews?

Common sense alone (which is something alien to "Revisionist" thinking) already tells us that, if Sobibor had been a transit camp and large numbers of Jews had been transported somewhere further east from there, Mattogno & Graf (the only "Revisionists" who, to my knowledge, have tried to come up with something like an answer to this question) would be able to reconstruct these transports at least as precisely as German court expert Wolfgang Scheffler managed to reconstruct transports to Sobibor at the above-mentioned trial, all the more so as the Germans would have had no reason to keep resettlement transports from a Sobibor transit camp a secret or to destroy the related documentary evidence, as they are known to have done with most of the documents pertaining to the Aktion Reinhard(t) camps Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka. Had a massive resettlement operation via these three "transit camps" actually taken place, Mattogno & Graf wouldn’t be reduced to citing a handful of eyewitnesses about a few small transports from Sobibor to other places, as they do in the excerpt proudly quoted by Gerdes in his opening post of Tue May 13, 2008 1:38 pm (regarding the mendacity of Mattogno & Graf’s claims based on these selectively quoted testimonies, see Jonathan Harrison’s article Mattogno and Graf: Reverse Logic). Nor would these "Revisionist" gurus have to vaguely babble about Polish Jews deported to Ukraine or White Russia, only to be screwed by their own source (apart from shamelessly misrepresenting the writings of German historian Christian Gerlach, as I may demonstrate in a future article). If Mattogno & Graf’s lame endeavors quoted in Gerdes’ OP are the best that "Revisionists" have got by way of an answer to the essential question what, if not mass murder, is supposed to have happened to the Jews deported to Sobibor and the other Aktion Reinhard(t)camps, then one can only feel sorry for these faithful folks and the lunatic creed they embrace.

Gerdes ends his rambling with the following question:

When is Kola going to publish the results of this investigation?

Well, I suggest that Gerdes contact Prof. Kola and ask him this question, which I don’t think anyone else can answer.

Is the absence of a publication similar to Kola’s report about Belzec supposed to mean anything, like there being something wrong with Kola’s announcement of the discovery of mass graves at Sobibor and the measurements thereof? Only in the conspiraloon cloud-cuckoo-land of "Revisionism" could this be seriously claimed, also considering that Prof. Kola is a renowned archaeologist and that his findings are matched by all other evidence to what happened at Sobibor. Gerdes would also be shooting himself in the foot by arguing thusly, insofar as Richard Krege has not yet published the results of the touted "detailed forensic examination" he is supposed to have conducted in 1999. One might say that what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, except that there's a significant difference between the findings of a renowned professor of archaeology at Sobibor and those of a "Revisionist" nobody at Treblinka: the former are in line with all known evidence about Sobibor that has been investigated and researched by criminal justice authorities and historians over the past six decades, whereas the latter are at odds with all known eyewitness, documentary and physical evidence about the mass murder at Treblinka.

Gerdes seems to be fond of challenging others, namely Michael Schermer, to debate him.

So here’s a challenge to you, Mr. Gerdes:

Come out and debate the "incredible dullard" about any subject of your choosing related to your "specialty", the Aktion Reinhard(t) camps.

I would reply to you on CODOH if I could post there, but webmaster Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis banned me from that lovely place some years ago, obviously because neither he nor any of his acolytes could handle my arguments. But there’s a forum, owned by a "Revisionist", that offers open and uncensored debate. This forum, which Hargis is so afraid of that he made his software automatically change its name into "shills", is called RODOH, which stands for "Real Open Debate on the Holocaust" (the pun on the falsely so-called "Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust" is intended).

I’m waiting for you on RODOH, Mr. Gerdes.

Eduard Strauch

The documented words and deeds of SS-Obersturmbannführer Eduard Strauch, the commander of the Security Police and SD (KdS) in White Ruthenia, pose three unsurmountable problems for deniers. Firstly, Strauch "admitted that, to his own knowledge, a Jew had to be killed just because he was a Jew". This admission was made, not only at his 1948 trial, but also in documents that he wrote for his superiors, which are discussed below. Secondly, Strauch used euphemisms such as "special treatment" and "resettled" in contexts that were so blatant that they could not camouflage their true meaning. Thirdly, Strauch's actions can be traced through testimony showing that they were systematic and ordered from the centre. Deniers cannot therefore claim that Strauch's forces were killing Jews because they were partisans, nor that their actions were ad-hoc and reactive.

Read more!

On July 25th, 1943, Strauch sent a long report to his superior, von dem Bach (Nuremberg file NO-2662), in which he complained bitterly about the behaviour of the Generalkommissar of White Ruthenia, Wilhelm Kube. The report is reproduced in full at the Axis History Forum here. The report includes the following revealing paragraphs:

On numerous occasions Kube has said to me personally that Jews evacuated from the Reich could be spared without any problem since they do not understand the local language and would therefore not pose a danger in so far as their becoming involved in guerrilla activities was concerned.

I am convinced from the evidence that deep down Kube is opposed to our actions against the Jews. If he does not admit to this outwardly the only reason is his fear of the consequences. He is in agreement with actions against Russian Jews because he is able to appease his conscience by the fact that the majority of Russian Jews collaborate with the guerrillas.

Every false denier claim, from Butz downwards, that the Einsatzkommandos were 'just' killing partisans can be safely trashed using this one extract. It confirms what was already obvious to anyone who has read the Operational Situation Reports, such as those in this link, namely that Jews were killed purely on the basis of their assumed 'racial origin'.

Strauch's use of euphemisms has already been the subject of an excellent blog by Nick Terry, revealing how the term 'resettlement' was used euphemistically when Strauch gave the order to kill the Jews of Sluzk. Nick's translation:

On 8 and 9 February 1943 there will be a resettlement in the town Sluzk by the local command the resettlement of the Jews there.
The evacuation of the Jews to the resettlement place happens by means of 6 trucks, each to be accompanied by 4 Latvians.
At the resettlement area are 2 pits. At each pit a group of 10 leaders and men will work, to be relieved every 2 hours. Times 8-10 o'clock, 10-12 o'clock, 12-14 o'clock, 14-16 o'clock.

Strauch's report to von dem Bach, cited above, provides further proof that deniers are pissing in the wind when they try to read 'resettlement' literally in any document produced during the occupation period:

On 1 March 1942 an action was to take place against the Russian ghetto in Minsk. The Generalkommissar received prior notification. In order to disguise the action the Council of Elders was to be informed that 5,000 Jews from the Minsk ghetto were to be resettled. These Jews were to be notified by the Council of Elders and told to get ready. Each Jew would be permitted to take along 5 kg of luggage.

As can be proved, the actual intentions of the Security Police were betrayed by the Generalkommissariat. Those Jews employed in the Generalkommissariat were not allowed into the ghetto for several days but were made to stay in the Generalkommissariat, as a result of which it became clear to the ghetto Jews that the version put out by the Security Police was not correct. In addition, further indiscretions were committed, as emerges from liaison reports. At the time it was not possible to prove these incidents. It is clear, however, that the Gauleiter used his knowledge to save his Jews.

Furthermore, the documents of Strauch, Kube and Lohse give several examples of how Sonderbehandlung was used as a euphemism for genocidal killing. Lohse, when forwarding a report from Kube to Rosenberg on 18 June 1943, wrote that:

The fact that Jews receive special treatment requires no further discussion. However, it appears hardly believable that this is done in the way described in the report of the General Commissioner of 1 June 1943. What is Katyn against that? Imagine only that these occurrences would become known to the other side and exploited by them! Most likely such propaganda would have no effect only because people who hear and read about it simply would not be ready to believe it.

To lock men, women, and children into barns and to set fire to them does not appear to be a suitable method of combating bands, even if it is desired to exterminate the population. This method is not worthy of the German cause and hurts our reputation severely.

Strauch's report to von dem Bach gives an example of such 'special treatment':

During a major ghetto action it was made known by informants that the German Jewish Ordnungsdienst made up predominantly of former World War I servicemen, was intending to put up armed resistance. In order to avoid bloodshed on the German side the Ordnungsdienst was made to assemble and was told that a fire had broken out in the town and they should be at the ready for fire duty. The Jews were then loaded on to trucks and sonderbehandelt.

The Nuremberg judgement against Strauch, cited above also noted that:

On 20 July 1943 Strauch wrote a letter narrating how he had subjected 70 Jews to special treatment and expressing his resentment because complaint had arisen from the fact that he had had the gold fillings removed from the mouths of these Jews before they were killed.

Finally, deniers will be distressed to read that Strauch was acting from higher orders. Heydrich met Strauch in Minsk in April 1942, and his presence enabled this sequence of events, described by Strauch at his trial:

In response to a question regarding the Jewish problem in White Ruthenia, Strauch replied that the Fuehrer Order was valid in White Ruthenia, as everywhere else. He testified that he had a conference with Kube and that Kube told him Jews were needed and he could not do without these Jews, since they should be used in bringing in the harvest, working in an armament factory, and doing other jobs. The defendant thereupon talked to Heydrich and was directed to postpone the execution of the Fuehrer Order until the harvest was brought in.

The harvest of evidence relating to Strauch will thus leave an unpleasant taste in mouths of Hitler-kissing deniers.

Conspiraloons on Child Survivors of Auschwitz

Deniers are often so eager to create a Straw Man that they inadvertently expose their idiocy in the process. Here's a classic example. Deniers would like us to believe that, at Auschwitz, "According to the storyline, children, the sick, and the elderly were immediately 'gassed'". However, in the same article, they then reprint Soviet propaganda photographs showing Jewish children who were liberated at Auschwitz.

These Conspiraloon deniers therefore fabricate hoaxers who were both so impossibly clever that they could conceal their forgeries and machinations for over 60 years, and so improbably stupid that they would publish photographs of child survivors when they were in the process of creating a narrative in which the Nazis killed every child on arrival. In their desperation to create Straw Man history in which a genocide can only occur when there are no survivors, deniers thus prove that no such narrative was being constructed by the allies in 1945. The true narratives of the period were created by history itself, which is always complex and which rarely allows the schemes of tyrants to succeed without exceptions and ambiguities, necessitating that some survivors will indeed be left behind. In the case of Auschwitz, testimony shows that these exceptions came from the arbitrary power exercised by Mengele and other selectors, combined with the camp personnel's need for errand boys, sexual playthings, experimental subjects, and Kapo companions. Once again, in its ignorance of this history, we witness the unbearable stupidity of the Cesspit.

Note: Thanks again to KentFord9 of RODOH for help with source material.

"Hannover" Hargis’ Hysteria ...

... came to the fore once more after Joachim Neander mentioned a recent Polish newspaper article about the Gold Rush in Treblinka.

Read more!


In a recent thread on the "CODOH Revisionist Forum" (a.k.a. the Cesspit), headed Anybody know what tin sheets were used for?, Joachim Neander wrote the following (Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:27 pm):

Sorry, Mr. Dahl, I did not study Sobibor. I only researched a little bit the "Treblinka gold rush" from 1944 to 1950. Two Polish (non-Jewish) journalists wrote an article about it that appeared in the Polish newspaper "Gazeta Wyborcza" in the beginning of this year. I translated it into German and Roberto Muehlenkamp into English. It can be found at the shills Web site under "Documents." The article deals with illegal excavations made by local people and members of the nearby Soviet garrison in search of gold and precious stones. BTW, similar "excavations" took place at Auschwitz, but they were quickly suppressed by the local Polish authorities. At Treblinka, the authorities turned a blind eye on the "excavations," most probably after having received their share of the "findings." In every respect, a disgusting story.

Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis, Keeper of the "Revisionist" Faith, thereupon started jumping up and down trying to discredit this unexpected and inconvenient information (Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:57 pm):

How convenient, but absurd, this story is.

What are these 'journalists' sources?

They claim that there were 'illegal' excavations, yet all too conveniently these alleged 'excavations' were not documented by official Polish sources, since they supposedly "turned a blind eye". On the contrary, making the alleged finds known and visible at the time would have been a bonanza to the propaganda ... IF the 900,000 Jews tale was true.

This is hardly credible evidence for a desperate cover story whose intent is to claim that the alleged mass grave for an alleged 900,000 Jews at Treblinka (10 X The Rose Bowl) cannot be found because there were 'illegal' excavations. Only with the 'holocaust' can people get away with this junk.

I should also note that any mass grave, especially one of the size alleged at Treblinka, would still, today, leave a massive, easily detected footprint. 'illegal excavations' or not.

The liars have not and cannot show us the alleged mass grave for the alleged 900,000 Jews at Treblinka.

- Hannover

What follows are my comments to Hargis' utterances.

Hargis:

How convenient, but absurd, this story is.

Actually the most "absurd" things have happened in human history, so "absurdity" is never an argument when there's evidence. And the pilfering of the Treblinka victims' belongings was not so much an "absurdity" as a showpiece of the greed and selfishness that, unfortunately, are among the features of human nature. The "story" is also everything other than convenient, on the contrary: as becomes apparent from the Gazeta Wyborcza article (see my English translation of Dr. Neander's translation from Polish into German), the Treblinka "gold rush" is an uncomfortable, shameful subject that contemporaries and their descendants in Poland are still reluctant to talk about.

Hargis:

What are these 'journalists' sources?

Interviews with elder villagers who took part in the "gold rush", contemporary Polish reports about the scavenging, photographs that the journalists found or that were shown to them by a Polish historian – Piotr Głuchowski and Marcin Kowalski are very specific about their sources. All it takes to answer Hargis’ unnecessary question is reading their article.

Hargis:

They claim that there were 'illegal' excavations, yet all too conveniently these alleged 'excavations' were not documented by official Polish sources, since they supposedly "turned a blind eye".

Actually, and as the Gazeta Wyborcza article shows, the excavations in search of treasures were mentioned in several contemporary Polish documents, including

• Two reports from the Siedlce Section of the NSZ Task Force for Special Actions" [NSZ = Narodowe Siły Zbrojne - National Armed Forces, right-wing nationalist, anti-communist Polish partisan organization] about the raising of contributions from local inhabitants who ravished the graves in Treblinka;

• A vivid description of the site and the pilfering by a member of an investigative delegation from Warsaw, Karol Ogrodowczyk;

• An activity report by militia commandant of Kosów Lacki about (futile) measures taken by his unit against the pilferers;

• A photograph from an action against the pilferers undertaken by a militia unit from Ostrowa Mazowieckie, shown in the Gazeta Wyborcza article and in my review thereof.

Why didn't Hargis read the article, instead of jumping to convenient conclusions based on a statement of Dr. Neander’s? (This statement is not contradicted by the existence of the above-mentioned documents, by the way – a few half-hearted actions against the Treblinka scavengers don’t change the fact that these people's disgraceful activity, which went on for 15 years after the roundup resulting in the above-mentioned photograph, was allowed to proceed unhindered most of the time.)

Well, maybe he did and is lying – though he's obviously as afraid of this article as he is of anything that comes from the RODOH forum, the name of which is automatically changed into "shills" by the forum software on the Cesspit, lest one of Hargis’ fellow "truth-seekers" take a look through the telescope.

Hargis:

On the contrary, making the alleged finds known and visible at the time would have been a bonanza to the propaganda ...

What, making it known and visible that noble Polish citizens were digging up the ashes and bones of murdered Jews in search of whatever valuables the victims may have taken with them to their graves? As often before, Hargis shows that his reasoning, apart from being based on nothing other than hollow preconceived notions, leaves much to be desired in terms of logic.

The aspect of the Treblinka grave site was made known and visible at the time, by the way – not for the purpose of propaganda, but within the scope of a criminal site investigation carried out by Examining Judge Lukaszkiewicz, the results of which were summarized in a protocol presented by the Soviets at the Nuremberg Trial as Document USSR-344 (see my article Polish investigations of the Treblinka killing site were a complete failure …) and included in the report about The Treblinka Extermination Camp by the Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland, published in 1946. But then, who would have expected Hargis to read even his own "Revisionist" sources (the Polish site investigation report is quoted in my above-mentioned article after Mattogno & Graf’s Treblinka screed) before shooting the bull?

Hargis:

IF the 900,000 Jews tale was true.

900,000 happens to be the figure given by Głuchowski and Kowalski, which I criticized in my review. Is Hargis' mention of the same figure a coincidence, or did Hargis read my translation of the Gazeta Wyborcza article? In the latter case, he’s lying rather stupidly about the article’s contents.

Hargis:

This is hardly credible evidence for a desperate cover story whose intent is to claim that the alleged mass grave for an alleged 900,000 Jews at Treblinka (10 X The Rose Bowl) cannot be found because there were 'illegal' excavations.

First of all, what would Hargis consider "credible evidence", and what rules or standards of criminal investigation and/or historical research - if any - are his requirements based on? This is a question I would love to directly ask the fellow one day, though I expect him to run away from it like other "Revisionists" to whom this question has been asked.

Second, whence did Hargis derive the supposed "intent" of the Gazeta Wyborcza article? The source seems to be none other than his own paranoia, for nowhere in the article is it stated that the "the alleged mass grave for an alleged 900,000 Jews at Treblinka" cannot be found because of the robbery-digging. There is just one mention of the robbery-digging "blurring the traces of the German mass crime" (which it certainly did, independently of the extent to which the original mass graves remained identifiable), and that is contained in one of those official Polish reports that Hargis claims do not exist. From my translation:

In the archives of the IPN there is the activity report of the militia commandant of Kosów Lacki: "The area was guarded by unidentified armed persons, who barred access to non-adepts and stood guard for those who dug out the remaining watches, jewelry or gold (...) This situation led to blurring the traces of the German mass crime, and there was the risk of an epidemic of diseases dangerous for people. (...) We carried out a roundup and expelled the human hyenas, but they doggedly returned to take up again their interrupted search."

Third, who is supposed to have "alleged" that all victims of Treblinka extermination camp were dumped into one single mass grave? The eyewitness testimonies addressing this issue that I know of mention several mass graves in the "death camp" area of Treblinka extermination camp.

The "Rose Bowl" herring seems to have been borrowed from our old friend "denierbud", by the way. It is one of the arguments that the Ugly Voice fellow (who is probably identical with Hargis' acolyte "Carto’s Cutlass Supreme") uses to impress suckers, like in his clip # 13.

Hargis:

Only with the 'holocaust' can people get away with this junk.

It would be far more appropriate to say that only on a forum like the "CODOH Revisionist Forum", which Hargis controls by deleting inconvenient posts and banning inconvenient posters like this writer, one can get away with writing junk such as has once more been produced by Hargis. On an uncensored open discussion forum like RODOH, such junk would be taken apart by evidence-backed arguments and slapped around the poster's ears – which Hargis probably knows very well, as he has never been known to debate on a forum where he cannot control the debate.

Hargis:

I should also note that any mass grave, especially one of the size alleged at Treblinka, would still, today, leave a massive, easily detected footprint. 'illegal excavations' or not.

… says "Hannover" Hargis, the self-appointed expert in detecting mass graves, without informing the readers why mass graves emptied of their contents, then refilled with human ashes, bone fragments and soil, then leveled off and planted with lupines and then excavated over a period of 15 years by robbery-diggers even using explosives to blast holes in the ground, should leave "a massive, easily detected footprint". Though I’m no expert either, my common sense tells me that if anything left "a massive, easily detected footprint" under these conditions it would have been the robbery-digging, and this seems to have been so indeed. From my translation of the Gazeta Wyborcza article:

"When we went around the memorial we found slots in the area," we say when bidding farewell to the director. "Judging by the trees growing inside them they must be several dozen years old. Are these pits from the diggings?" - "No ... those are from artillery shells. In 1944 the front line was here for some weeks."[…] Martyna Rusiniak thinks that a part of the pits are the hyena's heritage. Especially from the time when bombs were used for "extraction". The young historian shows us photos of the largest postwar excavation sites. The pits have a length of ten meters, one of them looks like the construction pit of a several-story building.

Hargis

The liars have not and cannot show us the alleged mass grave for the alleged 900,000 Jews at Treblinka.

Actually the "liars" (Hargis probably means criminal investigators and historians who have documented the mass killings at Treblinka) have shown eyewitness, documentary and physical evidence that allows for only one reasonable conclusion, the conclusion that about 750,000 people were murdered at Treblinka extermination camp. This article explains how documentary evidence to the magnitude of the killing is corroborated by the findings of Examining Judge Lukaszkiewicz on site.

With all available evidence pointing to mass murder and none suggesting anything else, "Revisionists" are not in a position to play the expectant princess and yell "show me". They are the ones who have to show something, namely an evidence-backed alternative scenario about the fate of the hundreds of thousands who were deported to Treblinka. This they are not able to do, hard though they (especially their gurus Mattogno & Graf) have tried and despite the fact that any scenario other than mass murder should be far better documented (for the Nazis would have had no reason to try getting rid of the documentation) than the scenario that becomes apparent from all known evidence.

Without any evidence supporting "Revisionist" claims or insinuations as to what "actually happened" to all these people, folks like Hargis can whine and squeal all they like. They will never have anything like a case.

When No Doubt Is Left

When I first made the discovery that "Hannover" of CODOH Forum fame is actually Jonnie Allen Hargis of Pacific Palisades, Calif., I phoned Bradley Smith and challenged him on this point. He neither confirmed nor denied what I had discovered. However, when I said that a few weeks (maybe months) later that Smith had confirmed my suspicions, he vociferously defended himself, stating that he had said nothing to reveal Hargis's identity.

Read more!
I left it alone, but the issue came up again over the past weekend, when a prominent Holocaust denier (more on him in a few weeks) outed Hargis in a mass e-mailing. I felt it incumbent upon myself to e-mail Bradley Smith, which I did:

Bradley,

Are you still going to exist that "Hannover" isn't Jonnie Hargis with this latest from [name deleted]?

a.m.

Bradley stonewalled me in return:

Dear Mathis: I do not expect to "exist," unfortunately, long enough to see you let go of this one. --B

Well, he's right. And indeed, why should I? After nine years of my going round and round with Hargis, he continues the very same behavior that inspired me to track him down in "real life" to begin with. I rejoindered:

Bradley,

All I've ever asked for from Hargis is an apology. That's all I've ever asked for to "let go of this one." But the bastard is just too hard-headed.

As for your refusal to admit what is now so painfully obvious, I don't even know what to say.

a.m.

To which the old man responded:

Andrew: that's a start. You don't know what to say. When that happens, it's ususally a good idea to remain silent. --B

So Bradley will go to his grave protecting Hargis. That much seems obvious.

The question that remains for me is, frankly, why. I can't think of any person who has done more damage to the "revisionist" cause than Hargis, essentially eviscerating the idea of "open debate" that Smith has ostensibly been championing for three decades now. All of which makes one wonder whether Bradley Smith was ever really interested in an open debate at all.

Maybe all of this simply confirms what I've always suspected: That Smith, a failed writer, got into Holocaust denial because he knew he'd become famous for it, and he wouldn't suffer the consequences from saying what he says and doing what he does that so many of his colleagues (Zündel, Frölich, Rudolf, et al.) have. That makes Bradley Smith an opportunist, and a coward to boot.

An opportunist and coward: It strikes me these are two good words to describe Jonnie Hargis.

Well, birds of a feather

Another Note to "Bankdraft"

There is a discussion forum which, unlike the Cesspit run by Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis, offers open, uncensored debate.

It is called RODOH, which stands for "Real Open Debate on the Holocaust" (the pun on the misnamed "Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust" is intended).

"Bankdraft" is herewith invited to leave the cozy safety of the Führerbunker and join the discussion on RODOH.

Note to Bankdraft

The opening blog on this site (dated March 23rd, 2006) states:

Let it be stated from the outset that we do not endorse censorship of any kind; nor are we in favour of anti-Holocaust Denial laws being passed in Britain or the United States. We would prefer that continental countries such as Germany, Austria and France did not make martyrs out of Deniers.

So perhaps you need to do some reading before mouthing off on the Cesspit, which is (lest we forget) a censored forum, despite the fact that its moderator, Jonnie Hargis (who lies about his identity), claims that it is a forum for open debate? There's a good chap.

Bradley Smith's Guide to Literature

Bradley introduces us to his literary hero, but can't spell his name correctly.

CODOH Demographics

In January 1953, Paul Rassinier wrote an article for Der Weg in which he claimed that "the majority (80%) of the Jews in the Ukraine, White Russia, Lithuania and Latvia" were rescued from the Nazis by Soviet evacuation procedures. As Pierre Vidal-Naquet noted here, Rassinier based this claim on a single source - a Soviet newspaper article by David Bergelson - that had no primary corroboration. This single-source claim was repeated by deniers Richard Verrall in 1974 and Walter Sanning in 1983. In April 2003, fifty years after Rassinier's article, CODOH repeated the single-source propaganda claim on this thread. What does the thread tell us about the state of revisionism, and CODOH's intellectual bankruptcy?

Read more!

Unlike Sanning, CODOH moderator Jonnie 'Hannover' Hargis makes no attempt to fabricate a pseudo-scientific method based on fraud, deception and manipulation. For Hargis, it is sufficient to state a faith position:

Jews went where Jews are.

Look at Israel.. how many Jews were there before WWII? How many are there now? Jews were literally flooding out of Europe immigrating to Israel, US, Canada, S. America, S. Africa..you name it.

It never occurs to Hargis that the onus is on him to prove this claim with demographic evidence from the countries concerned. He also embarasses his fellow revisionists, Mattogno and Graf, by showing that they - like Rassinier, Verrall and Sanning - are forced to rely on hearsay from journalists rather than proper historical and demographic sources:

Mattogno/Jürgen quoted in their Treblinka book a Jewish journalist Louis Rapoport from his book La guerra di Stalin contro gli Ebrei, Rizzoli, Mailand 1991

This is the best that CODOH can do. Like all its fellow fraudsters in the 'revisionist' school, therefore, CODOH does not have a clue how to study a demographic or historical subject seriously.

CODOH Lies and Ignorance: Himmler's Visit to Minsk

On October 22nd, 2007, the appropriately named 'Mr Nobody' started this CODOH thread, which gave a false account of how Holocaust websites have described Himmler's visit to Minsk. The thread was particularly significant because it exposed the shortcomings of three CODOH regulars: 'Mr Nobody', 'nathan' and 'Laurentz Dahl'. It also exposed the dishonest moderation of Jonnie 'Hannover' Hargis, because Hargis never checked the idiocies being posted, nor did he ask the posters concerned to verify their sources. Here's how the lunacy unfolded.

Read more!

Firstly, Mr Nobody claimed, falsely, that Holocaust websites derive all their information about Himmler's visit to Minsk from Bach-Zelewski's testimony to the Eichmann trial. Mr Nobody offered no evidence for this assertion, and did not quote from the websites concerned. His assertion can be refuted through a simple exercise. Mr Nobody claimed to have conducted a search on the words "Himmler Minsk", but when I did a search on those words, the third hit that came up was Richard Evans' submission to the Irving-Lipstadt trial, which contains two facts that immediately falsify Mr Nobody's claim. The first is that Bach-Zelewski gave evidence to the Wolff trial in 1964, in which he revealed that:

Himmler declared after the shootings that the hard struggle that the German people [Volk] had to undertake made harsh measures such as this imperative. The Jews were the bearers of world Bolshevism and they must therefore be destroyed. He and Hitler had assumed responsibility for this before the court of history. The task was difficult, but it had to be carried out.

Evans' second fact is that "Bach-Zelewski's account of Himmler's words was corroborated by no fewer than seven other witnesses at the [Wolff] trial," including the leader of EK 8, Otto Bradfisch.

Evans thus shows that there is plenty of testimony, from later than the Eichmann trial, which shows that the Minsk shootings were genocidal in intent. I would submit that Mr Nobody's search brought up this link but he dishonestly chose not to mention it.

Secondly, Mr Nobody made a great meal out of the fact that the content of Holocaust websites differs from the claims in Bach-Zelewski's diary. Mr Nobody concluded that the websites have therefore embellished the factual record. However, a review of these supposed "embellishments" shows that the websites have simply used other sources that are more authoritative than the diary. For example, Mr Nobody said:

1. the date is often given as the 15th August (2 days before Zelewski's Diary Entry).

A simple Google search would have told Mr Nobody that the 15th August is the date in Himmler's diary. There is simply no excuse for this willful stupidity and dishonest failure to check sources.

Thirdly, Hargis then intervened and made the moronic comment that:

it needs to be said the the 'partisans' (called 'terrorists' today), were subject to legal execution under international law.

Hargis ignored the fact that Himmler's diary entry referred to him witnessing an "execution of partisans and Jews" (Der Dienstkalendar Heinrich Himmlers 1941/42, p.193), therefore the Jews killed were not partisans.

Fourthly, Laurentz Dahl then joined the idiots' chorus with an extract from a press report on the Wolff trial which stated that Wolff had denied any knowledge of the mass shootings of Jews and also that Wolff had claimed that:

he believed only partisans and saboteurs were shot.

Dahl would have seen that Wolff's defense was false had he read Evans' commentary on the trial (which was my third hit on Google as noted above), showing that eight witnesses, including Bach-Zelewski and Bradfisch, had all heard Himmler declare at Minsk that:

The Jews were the bearers of world Bolshevism and they must therefore be destroyed.

Fifthly, this moronic babble was then joined by 'nathan', who deliberately misquoted the evidence given by Christopher Browning to the Irving-Lipstadt trial:

[Bach-Zelewski's diary] was mentioned during the Irving trial by Professor Browning, who deemed it “doctored and sanitized” because it contains no evidence of genocide.

This was simply a lie. Browning never said "it contains no evidence of genocide". Browning simply claimed that Bach-Zelewski doctored the diary to remove evidence of his own guilt:

He did send apparently his doctored and sanitized diary to the Bundesarchiv all nicely typed up and all references to things that you have referred to, that he probably has many hundreds of thousands on his conscious [sic] nicely deleted.

In conclusion, therefore, we can see from this one thread alone how CODOH posters, as a group, have colluded in the distortion of evidence to make false claims about Holocaust websites and distinguished Holocaust historians. Jonnie Hargis has been the orchestrator-in-chief of this symphony of lies, but he has employed a full ensemble of monkeys and useful idiots to post distorted and mendacious claims on his behalf.