tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post4773918138954264189..comments2024-03-29T02:19:32.860+00:00Comments on Holocaust Controversies: Knowledge of Mass Extermination Among Hungarian Jews Returning from AuschwitzNicholas Terryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14852758011968360596noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-79431158189981665172015-08-18T18:45:45.723+01:002015-08-18T18:45:45.723+01:00A lot of Dragon, Mandelbaum and Tauber has already...A lot of Dragon, Mandelbaum and Tauber has already been published by Carlo Mattogno (TBOA, AOAI, ATCFS) and Sergey Romanov (http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.de/2010/01/carlo-mattogno-failed-dragon-slayer.html ). <br /><br />I might publish them in full in the future, but it's not a pressing thing as these Soviet depositions are not exactly new or little known sources in the debate with Revisionists, which have not been extensively quoted in English before (the more surprising is your Sompolinski "verifiably earliest Sonderkommando report" fail).Hans Metznerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07746792258730274681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-65875775474511826592015-08-18T00:58:10.350+01:002015-08-18T00:58:10.350+01:00Have you published Dragon/Mandelbaum/Tauber's ...Have you published Dragon/Mandelbaum/Tauber's Soviet testimony yet? If not, why not? Is it much more detailed than what D&T were quoted as saying in USSR-008? Did Tauber's testimony to Sehn show a truly stratospheric increase in knowledge compared to his one to the Soviets?The Black Rabbit of Inléhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12083144769375557650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-4981069792878344522015-08-15T07:56:35.725+01:002015-08-15T07:56:35.725+01:00The Black Rabbit of Inlé said...:
"It's ...The Black Rabbit of Inlé said...:<br /><br /><i>"It's immensely dishonest of you to claim the Olère is an "early Sonderkommando witnesses"."</i><br /><br />The earliest relevant drawings of David Olere are dated 1945-46 which makes him an early Sonderkommando witness. The fact that the drawings were made known to the public many years later does not refute this point. It is quite common that historical sources are studied long after they have been produced. There is no reason to doubt the dating on the drawings (Pressac otherwise claim on one drawing is unfounded), it's plausible. On the other hand, there is not even a motive apparent for why Olere should have back-dated the drawings and it is furthermore implausible that he would scatter the supposed fake datings of the drawings over several years instead of simply 1945. <br /><br />The Black Rabbit of Inlé said...:<br /><br /><i>"And you're still afraid to tackle the verifiably earliest Sonderkommando report, that of Roman Sompolinsky.<br />https://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?p=23948#p23948"</i><br /><br />First of all, I'm not "afraid" to tackle any sources. If I don't tackle a source I know, then it is because time is limited and it is not at the top of my priority list.<br /><br />Secondly, I did actually cite Roman Sompolinski in the selection of false hearsay sources above, from which the reader may readily deduce that I regard him as a false eyewitness. <br /><br />Thirdly, I have already prepared a few words on Roman Sompolinski for the forthcoming rebuttal of "Friedrich Jansson". <br /><br />Forthly, your claim that Sompolinski provided the "verifiably earliest Sonderkommando report" is incorrect (you would say it is "immensely dishonest", but I don't want to share your and Jansson's bad habit to accuse others of dishonesty when there is a disagreement of opinions or a mistake that may be very well an honest one):<br /><br />- The first "verifiably earliest Sonderkommando report" (excluding the 1944 Sonderkommando handwritings for no good reason) is from Shlomo Dragon, who was interrogated on 26 February 1945 by the Soviets (GARF [State Archive of the Russian Federation] 7021-108-12, p. 180 ff.; courtsey of Sergey Romanov)<br /><br />- The second is from Henryk Mandelbaum, who was interrogated on 27 February 1945 by the Soviets (GARF 7021-108-13, p. 93 ff.)<br /><br />- The third is from Henryk Tauber, who was interrogated on 27 and 28 February 1945 by the Soviets (GARF 7021-108-13, p. 1 ff.)<br /><br />- The forth is from Stanislaw Jankowski, who was interrogated on 13 April 1945 by the Poles (Inmitten des grauenvollen Verbrechens, p. 25 ff.)Hans Metznerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07746792258730274681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-56561414100037106042015-08-15T03:59:21.981+01:002015-08-15T03:59:21.981+01:00So what, you claim that the "EWIW JOOS" ...So what, you claim that the "EWIW JOOS" running the West German Criminal Justice System paid Olère to make the drawings? Can I cue the cuckoo clock noises? <br /><br />Re Sompolinsky: There are two possibilities here. One obviously being that he lied about being a SK for whatever reason and was merely a nutbar trying to get attention. You find these types in a lot of criminal cases. This does not take away from the accounts of Dragon, Tauber, Nyiszli, or Bendel, namely because those accounts match up strikingly considering the independent circumstances in which they were given. Sompolinsky is a pure outlier here. <br /><br />The second possibility is that Sompolinsky was mashing up his experiences in a number of Kremas together and adding in some wild, boneheaded speculation on things he had not seen, likely based on rumors. That makes him an unreliable witness, but he is outnumbered by those who gave accurate testimony that matched up well despite separate circumstances. Did he physically stand in the Gas Chamber while the procedure was under way? Was he party to the insertion of the Gas? No on both counts IIRC. <br /><br />Regina Plucer, due to her involvement in the step by step deconstruction of the facilities, can be expected to have a much more detailed knowledge of the technical aspects than Sompolinsky, whose experience (assuming he was a Sonderkommando) were likely limited to rushing in, removing the corpses, dragging them out, heaving, freaked out of his mind, not thinking. This is not nit-picking, but rather common sense. <br /><br />You will find the most outrageous, nonsensical testimony in relation to the Dresden bombing, the Titanic sinking, or the Blitz. This is to be expected in traumatic collective experiences. You will also find those jumping into the breach, claiming to have been a part of it all. If the number of old American men who claimed to have served in Vietnam actually had done so the Americans would have won the war lol. Same goes for the Shoah. <br /><br />Like I said this takes nothing away from the majority of witness with more credible claims backed up independently. Common sense.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03218089864137630577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-12219423790930602802015-08-13T02:16:46.232+01:002015-08-13T02:16:46.232+01:00Interesting articles Herr Sortie, well done on goi...Interesting articles Herr Sortie, well done on going through all those statements. <br /><br /><i>Unfortunately for Holocaust deniers, this result is boosting the credibility of the early Sonderkommando witnesses - the authors of the Sonderkommando handwritings, Henryk Tauber (or Shlomo Dragon or Stanislaw Jankowski), Miklos Nyiszli, Charles Bendel and David Olere</i><br /><br />It's immensely dishonest of you to claim the Olère is an "early Sonderkommando witnesses".<br /><br />"1964—when the great Frankfurt-Auschwitz trial was making headlines around the world—is the earliest date that the existence of David Olère's sketches can be confirmed. Which is nigh on two decades after they are claimed to have been drawn."<br />https://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?p=62912#p62912<br /><br />And you're still afraid to tackle the verifiably earliest Sonderkommando report, that of Roman Sompolinsky.<br />https://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?p=23948#p23948<br />The Black Rabbit of Inléhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12083144769375557650noreply@blogger.com