Ok, enough for now, but there is more, so, stay tuned. Here then is the map which accompanied this report, or so we are told. Mattogno/Graf in their above mentioned book give it the following caption:So, let's turn to Heink's source, M&G's Treblinka book, and examine their claims.
“Plan of Treblinka, enclosed with the Report of November 15, 1942. From: Krystyna Marczewska and Wladyslaw Wazniewski, “Treblinka w swietle akt Delegatury Rzadu na Kraj” (Treblinka in Light of the Documents of the Government Delegation for the Country), in: Biuletyn Glownej Komisji Badania Zbrodni Hitlerowskich w Polsce, Volume XIX, Warsaw 1968, p. 141.”
The similarity between this map and that of Wiernik is remarkable.
Mattogno and Graf write (links to images are included):
Document 4 in the Appendix shows the plan of Treblinka, which Wiernik has published in order to lend credibility to his claims. In reality, he quite simply copied the plan, which was enclosed with the report about the steam chambers dating from November 15, 1942 (see Document 2 in the Appendix).First of all, to accuse Wiernik of plagiarism, Mattogno and Graf have to show that Wiernik claimed to have produced the sketch published in his book. Did he ever claim this? Not to my knowledge. And Mattogno and Graf never cite any source which states that Wiernik claimed to be the author of the sketch.
Both plans bear the same designation: “Treblinka. Szkic orientacyjny” (Treblinka, orientation sketch); both depict the same map legends; and, on both, the facilities are numbered 1 through 26, which indeed is explained in the report of November 15, 1942, but not, however, in Wiernik‘s exposition. The first three “extermination chambers,” which in the report of November 15, 1942, are called “steam chambers,” but in that of Wiernik are called “gas chambers,” are designated by the number 14 in both plans. Correspondingly, a boiler room for the production of steam is represented by number 15a in the report of November 15, 1942, and in Wiernik‘s plan it is a gassing engine. In addition, the description of the two gassing installations – the first with three and the second with ten chambers – fully and completely corresponds to the report of November 15, 1942, and to the camp plan which was enclosed with it!
Precisely for the reason that it is the fruit of plagiarism, Wiernik‘s sketch has a paucity of features of this kind: not only are many buildings of the camp missing, but also the cremation grills, although he wrote his report in the year 1944. Wiernik ‘rectified’ his error only in 1945 by furnishing a new, ‘corrected’ plan of Treblinka. If one compares this with that of the year before, the plagiarism shows up even more glaringly. On the occasion of Session 66 of the Jerusalem Eichmann Trial, Wiernik produced the plan from 1945, which entered the records as Document T-1300, yet mendaciously claimed to have drawn it in the year 1943.
Thus it is clear that Wiernik quite simply plagiarized the plan of the report of November 15 and in doing so replaced the word “steam chambers” with “gas chambers”. Why did he do this? Presumably he was of the opinion – and to be sure with good reason – that the then current versions of mass murders in Treblinka were too simpleminded. On the other hand, the idea of the engine compellingly suggested itself.
The book was not "published" by Wiernik - he was the author, but the book was published by the Jewish Coordinating Commission in Poland. Most probably, they had an access to 1942 underground report and simply included the sketch from this report (in a "corrected" form) with the book.
Now, the sketch published by Friedman in 1945 is indeed authored by Wiernik, according to his own testimony. M&G claim that "if one compares this with that of the year before, the plagiarism shows up even more glaringly". Really? When I compare, I see two different sketches, which are similar, because they depict the same camp. No evidence of plagiarism in this instance has been provided.
M&G also accuse Wiernik of lying during the Eichmann trial. But all they show is that 1) they haven't read Wiernik's testimony during that trial in full; 2) they simply can't read English. Here's what Wiernik said:
Q. After the War, immediately following the War, you drew a sketch of Treblinka?According to M&G, T/1300 is the sketch published by Friedman in 1945. Let's take their word for this.
A. Yes. This is it, here. I drew it. I prepared it when I was still underground, after my liberation in 1943, I drew it. I was working in Warsaw, in the Tashitza Palace. I worked as a Pole.
Attorney General: I submit the sketch which the witness made at the time.
Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/1300.
Wiernik produced the plan from 1945, which entered the records as Document T-1300, yet mendaciously claimed to have drawn it in the year 1943Let's examine two questions:
1) Did Wiernik claim to have drawn the sketch in 1943?
2) Does the fact that the sketch was published in 1945 mean that it was drawn in 1945, and not earlier?
The answers are as follows:
1a) No. He claimed to have drawn it after his liberation (which happened in 1943), while still in underground. I.e., M&G can't comprehend English.
1b) Later in the testimony Wiernik was asked more questions about the sketch T/1300:
Judge Halevi: [to witness] When you were a member of the Armia Ludowa, was it then that you drew this sketch?So he explicitly said that he drew it in 1944. I.e., M&G didn't even read his rather short testimony in full.
Witness Wiernik: I prepared it when I was working in Warsaw in the Tashitza Palace. The SS was there on the one side, and I was a night watchman against air attacks - I also have a certificate about that. I used to sit there at night. Nobody disturbed me, and I gradually made that sketch.
Q. Do you remember in what month and what year you drew this sketch?
A. It was in 1944. It took a long time. I also wrote A Year in Treblinka. In 1944, it was already in America, via the underground.
2) The answer to this question is a simple "No". An obvious non sequitur.
So, what is left of M&G's charge of plagiarism against Wiernik? Only their own mendacity.