Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Nov 28, 2025 12:20 pm
Nessie,
It is surprising to me that you don't want to talk about any part of this testimony that
is corroborated. Instead you want to make a blanket statement and talk about platitudes. What part is corroborated? That's not legitimately discussed.
Quotes from me, where I discuss what parts of Krzepicki's statements are corroborated;
"That his descriptions of how the camp functioned, the mass transports arriving, the sorting of the property stolen and its transportation back out of the camp and the gassings are corroborated, mean his claims are verified as truthful."
"Both he and Wiernik describe cremations as being prompted by the Nazi discovery of the Katyn mass graves, which was not until 1943. But, there were rumours already circulating since 1940, that the Soviets had massacred Polish soldiers at Katyn and a grave had been found by Poles in 1942."
"Corroboration is widely used by historians, journalists, criminal investigators, the courts and even scientists, as a reliable method of determining truthfulness and accuracy. If a witnesses claims, are matched by other evidence, then we know the witness is being truthful. For example, Krzepicki describes mass transports arriving at TII. Nazi documents are found that record mass arrivals and transports. Krzepicki is corroborated and he is truthful about the mass transports."
"I have already provided an example of how it was corroborated. Both Krzepicki and Wiernik mention Katyn as the reason why the Nazis started to exhume and cremate the corpses and that both noted female corpse burned better than male. To expand that further, the history of what happened at Katyn, chronologically fits with the timing of the first cremations and there is evidence of the widespread exhumation and cremation of corpses, under Sonderaction 1005. That circumstantial evidence further corroborates Krzepicki's claims about the exhumations and cremations. Then there is the physical evidence of cremated remains and mass graves at the camp. That means Krzepicki is corroborated by eyewitness, physical and circumstantial evidence. It also means that there is evidence the exhumations and cremations began earlier than many, including me, originally thought."
"His description of the main events in TII, are corroborated and consistent with all the others who worked inside the camp. The variations in detail, are to be expected, as his experience was different to others and standard issues with memory, recall and estimations, will all play their part."
Part of the reason you create a problem on the board is that you are an empty cart. There is literally nothing to your argument, or you would present it.
I have asked you, repeatedly, to show me corroboration with regard to this testimony, and you refuse. You have not cited any tract from it and you have made absolutely 0 effort here. You simply say the same crap over and over, empty and hollow as it is, smugly.
As I have just proven, I have discussed how Krzepicki is corroborated, throughout this thread. It is clearly your problem that you do not understand that.
That you accept 'found in a buried bucket' almost a decade after the fact as acceptable provenance is disturbing enough. To then point at it as strong evidence 'because it is corroborated' without citing anything in it is just ridiculous.
I DID CITE EXAMPLES!!!! SEE MY QUOTES ABOVE
This is why you stay in my ignore bucket.
I simply can not talk to you, because you are incapable of thinking or of rationally defending your position.
Accusing me of straw manning you for asking you if your statements conclusion was supported was simply repugnant as well. You are resolved to never admit an error. You made a gross error and just try to gloss over it and shift the conversation to platitudes while attempting not to engage with the testimony that you yourself claimed was 'the best'.
You think the best testimony regarding the alleged of events at Treblinka II is a notebook found in a buried milk bucket in the 1950's written by multiple hands, expanded to the point of being barely recognizable, and then spoon fed to you by people who said it was legit.
Look, if you gave an 8 page testimony, and 70 pages were entered into evidence, should the court be concerned?
You refuse to engage with that, just as you refuse to engage with the content of the testimony itself, simply saying the word 'corroborated' over and over. You gloss over the patently absurd in it that I pointed out, without engaging with it, and you just say the word 'corroborated'.
The witnesses that saw Martha riding her broomstick and engaging in sexual intercourse with the devil all corroborated each other Nessie, so, I suppose you believe them too, no matter how ridiculous and absurd that is. One thing about witch trials testimony that is stronger than this one is that the testimonies weren't buried in a bucket for a decade, after initially being written by multiple people, and then expanded to 10x their original content.
The secret work of Oyneg Shabes, and its collection of intelligence, is well documented. That is why I do not have an issue with the provenance of the statements from Krzepicki.
Otherwise, you need to be able to explain why you think I have not provided examples of how he was corroborated, when I clearly have.
