Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Holocaust denial and related subjects.
User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:29 am

This is interesting, an excerpt from Engle's article on Karski
In the extensive written materials that he presented to Sikorski on conditions in the homeland under German occupation, Jews were not mentioned at all.2

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 3:22 am

Here is an snippet from Jankowski and Wood's Biography of Karski

The village Jan reached was not Belzec, nor did Jan think it was while he was there. When he first spoke of this mission after reaching London three months later, he described the site as a "sorting point" located about fifty kilometers from the city of Belzec although in the same statement he referred to the camp's location as "the outskirts of Belzec."


This is clearly a reference to the report published in The Black Book. Karski was not the author of it, but he did contribute to it and it influenced his later accounts.

(The actual Belzec death camp was in the town of Belzec, within a few hundred feet of the train station.)


This is critical. At no point did Karski describe this camp as being in the town itself.

In an August 1943 report, Karski at first placed the camp ten miles, then twelve kilometers outside of Belzec. By the time he began retelling his story publicly in 1944, the town he had reached had become Belzec itself.


This goes to show that there was a third account, after the one derived from the conference with Schwartzbart et. all but before the 1944 one that our little guest harps on. This shows us a clear progression:

1942/43: sorting camp, 50 kilometers away

1943: sorting camp, 12-16 kilometers away.

1944: death camp, 2.5 kilometers away.

I must also add that his 1944 account described it as a place where Jews were executed by being dissolved with quicklime in trains. This is, how should I say, an immediate visual absurdity, and not consistent with how a transit camp would have been operated.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 3:24 am

We are no longer questioning whether or not Karski went to Belzec - I have proven that he did not - but rather whether or not his (changing) description was based on an actual visit to another camp that he willingly conflated with Belzec, or simply made up altogether.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4551
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 3:34 am

Jeff_36 wrote:We are no longer questioning whether or not Karski went to Belzec - I have proven that he did not - but rather whether or not his (changing) description was based on an actual visit to another camp that he willingly conflated with Belzec, or simply made up altogether.


Thanks. I agree with your assessment.

I think he visited a camp, I don't think he made it up. None of the information provided points to that. What I think he saw, based on the original description, was a collection point for Jews passed on to the death camp(s). The wide open space, surrounded by barbed wire, the condition of the prisoners, all of it, leads me to believe he saw an actual transport, just not a death camp.

I think he later became confused and his memory contaminated by descriptions he read or other camps he saw (particularly in 1939-1940).

Naturally this is all my opinion.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 3:46 am

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:We are no longer questioning whether or not Karski went to Belzec - I have proven that he did not - but rather whether or not his (changing) description was based on an actual visit to another camp that he willingly conflated with Belzec, or simply made up altogether.


Thanks. I agree with your assessment.

I think he visited a camp, I don't think he made it up. None of the information provided points to that. What I think he saw, based on the original description, was a collection point for Jews passed on to the death camp(s). The wide open space, surrounded by barbed wire, the condition of the prisoners, all of it, leads me to believe he saw an actual transport, just not a death camp.

I think he later became confused and his memory contaminated by descriptions he read or other camps he saw (particularly in 1939-1940).

Naturally this is all my opinion.


Additionally, he made no mention of "the tube", a consistent feature in the testimony of anyone who was at Belzec. He described a raised track from the railway to the camp, but the tube was located within the camp and was covered, not raised.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 13416
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Oct 10, 2016 4:07 am

So I don't know Karski's biography in any depth at all. Is he generally reliable? What do historians make of him overall?
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 4:12 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:So I don't know Karski's biography in any depth at all. Is he generally reliable? What do historians make of him overall?


Raul Hilberg stated that he was unreliable, basically saying that he would not have used him in a footnote. I think Friedlander was more ambivalent, but was sure that his account was not of Belzec.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 13416
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Oct 10, 2016 4:14 am

Ah, thanks.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 4:28 am



This excerpt form our little guest proves only that Shwartzbart and Zygielboim's March 1943 report was based partially on a conversation with Karski and was obviously a depiction of Karski's claims. In that report, the camp was described as being fifty kilometers from Belzec and was described as a sorting camp. So Schwartzbart's description of "Belzec" refers to the town in the loosest way possible. This if anything proves my point, namely that Karski's description was unreliable, and that the 1944 version was a later variation that underwent much change. As stated before, he made no mention of any of this in his report to Sikorski that was made immediately after his return to London.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4551
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 4:54 am

Jeff_36 wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:So I don't know Karski's biography in any depth at all. Is he generally reliable? What do historians make of him overall?


Raul Hilberg stated that he was unreliable, basically saying that he would not have used him in a footnote. I think Friedlander was more ambivalent, but was sure that his account was not of Belzec.


Hilberg was a bit harsh, undoubtedly Karski was a brave man and a patriot. He was just confused over what he saw.

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1577
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Denying-History » Mon Oct 10, 2016 6:30 am

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
Statistical Mechanic wrote:So I don't know Karski's biography in any depth at all. Is he generally reliable? What do historians make of him overall?


Raul Hilberg stated that he was unreliable, basically saying that he would not have used him in a footnote. I think Friedlander was more ambivalent, but was sure that his account was not of Belzec.


Hilberg was a bit harsh, undoubtedly Karski was a brave man and a patriot. He was just confused over what he saw.


I agree with Hilberg whole heartedly... I also wouldn't say he was to harsh cause he probably understood the issues with Karzki's testimony. Being brave doesn't change the reliability of his testimony ether.
« Oral history is a complex field. After all, memory can be a distorting mirror, as anyone who has ever worked with memoir literature knows very well...They may be imperfect, and, at times, inaccurate as the narrator tries to cast himself in the most favorable light, but all sources are imperfect. Even an archival document reflects how the person who drafted it understood something and remains something less than the unvarnished truth. »
- James Mace

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby BRoI » Mon Oct 10, 2016 10:53 am

Jeff_36 wrote:The City of Belzec {!#%@}, not the Belzec Death Camp.

As if Karski would ever have called Belzec "a city"! He had nothing whatsoever to do with that propagandistic article [see below].

The earliest document mentioning where Karski claimed to have gone is the 05.12. 42 Schwarzbar telegram:
SPECIAL OFFICIAL ENVOY GENTILE ESCAPE AND ARRIVED HERE LEFT CAPITAL THIS OCTOBER SAW WARSAW GHETTO ON LAST AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER WITNESSES MASS MURDER OF ONE TRANSPORT SIX THOUSAND JEWS AT BELZEC SPOKE TO HIM YESTERDAY 3 HOURS [...]


As he mentions in his 1944 book, Karski also spoke with Arthur Koestler who subsequently wrote an article from Karski's point-of-view which was also published in 1943. It tells virtually the same story as Karski does in his book [and would do for the next 50+ years]:
Image


Jeff_36 wrote:You yourself stated that the report from March of 1943 was produced as a result of a conference that was attended by Karski and Szmul Zygielbojm among others. That report identified the camp as being a sorting camp, 50 kilomiters outside Belzec. You can't have this both ways.

Non sequitur of course. Just because the propagandistic article in TGS 01.03.43, written by persons unknown in New York, is allegedly based on "stenographic notes" made at the early December meeting in London, that does not mean it accurately reflects what Karski told Szmul Zygelbojm and Ignacy Schwarzbar. It claims Karski wore a Polish policeman's outfit, which he never would have said.

Koestler's 1943 article presents Karski's actual story fairly accurately because they actually met in London, and Karski's definitive account is of course his own book published in late 1944.

Claiming that details in The Ghetto Speaks article somehow trump details given in Karski's own book just because it was published first is the most egregious form of cherry-picking I've ever seen. Karksi had no involvement with that article, it was written by unknown people in NY who bastardised Karski's account given to SZ and/or IS for their own propaganda needs. As a source for Karski story, it's worthless.


Jeff_36 wrote:In Facing a Holocaust, David Engel states that Karski's first report upon returning to London was to Władysław Sikorski and made no mention of the Jewish situation at all. That was what I referred to earlier and that is something that you, unsurprisingly, are unaware of. Score one for Jeff. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

You should know that Engel never found the Schwarzbar telegram, so many of his claims about Karski have been superseded.

We know that because Karski mentioned the horrors of the "Jewish situation" in Warsaw during his interrogation by the British on 27.10.42 at the Royal Patriotic School in London. That was just 2 days after his arrival in Britain, and before he saw Sikorski.

Image

:lol: *Laughing at you celebrating *your goal* that's been ruled offside* :lol:
"... these witnesses would swear to anything if it gets the Germans killed."
- Solomon Surowitz, Assistant Prosecutor at the 1947 Buchenwald trial.

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby BRoI » Mon Oct 10, 2016 1:13 pm

Balsamo wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:The City of Belzec {!#%@}, not the Belzec Death Camp. You yourself stated that the report from March of 1943 was produced as a result of a conference that was attended by Karski and Szmul Zygielbojm among others. That report identified the camp as being a sorting camp, 50 kilomiters outside Belzec. You can't have this both ways.

In Facing a Holocaust, David Engel states that Karski's first report upon returning to London was to Władysław Sikorski and made no mention of the Jewish situation at all. That was what I referred to earlier and that is something that you, unsurprisingly, are unaware of. Score one for Jeff. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Agree, Jeff, but it does not explain how the city of Belzec became the Ghetto of Izbica, described by JK as a camps with mirradors and barbed wire while it was an open ghetto... i have Just read the link provided in the OP, and it makes no sense at all if the place is supposed to be Izbica...Why the Holocaust project website felt compelled to illustrate the article with pictures of Izbica is beyond me.


I surprised that you of all people should fall for Jeff's nonsense based on bits and bobs he's scrapped from the internet.

The "report" of March 1943 is nothing more than magazine article written by an unknown journalist in NYC and claims to be based on "stenographic notes" taken at a meeting with Karski in London. Whilst it's clearly based on Karski's account, it includes claims that Karski would never have made; the most prominent of which is the claim he wore a 'Polish policeman's uniform' to gain access to the place.

Jeff's assertion that this magazine article features Karski's *original* story, it a bit like claiming a newspaper report on a politician's speech is a more reliable source than an uncut video recording of it! It's just absurd; this magazine article is worthless as a source compared to Karski's own words in his book.

As I mentioned in my previous post; Jeff's delight in appealing to Engel is misplaced because Engel never found Schwarzbar's telegram which proves he met Karski on 04.12.42; Engel claimed they did not first meet until March 1943. And I of course proved using an original document from the British NA that Karski even told his British interrogators about the "Jewish situation", so Engel's claim about Sikorski's meeting with Karski [if Jeff's accurate about it] is irrelevant.
"... these witnesses would swear to anything if it gets the Germans killed."
- Solomon Surowitz, Assistant Prosecutor at the 1947 Buchenwald trial.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 6:50 pm

BRoI wrote:As if Karski would ever have called Belzec "a city"! He had nothing whatsoever to do with that propagandistic article


You yourself state that the very article you mention was produced as a result of stenographic notes of a conference where Karski participated. You are now contradicting yourself.


SPECIAL OFFICIAL ENVOY GENTILE ESCAPE AND ARRIVED HERE LEFT CAPITAL THIS OCTOBER SAW WARSAW GHETTO ON LAST AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER WITNESSES MASS MURDER OF ONE TRANSPORT SIX THOUSAND JEWS AT BELZEC SPOKE TO HIM YESTERDAY 3 HOURS [...]



That's cute. The first iteration of his "experience" was a description of a place that clearly was not Belzec.

As he mentions in his 1944 book, Karski also spoke with Arthur Koestler who subsequently wrote an article from Karski's point-of-view which was also published in 1943. It tells virtually the same story as Karski does in his book [and would do for the next 50+ years]:


As I have proven, his account developed, and the 1944 version was far from the original. The Kostler article does you no service at all, it contrasts the 1944 account on two points, the nationality of JK's disguise, and the fact that he stated he was "one of the executioners", something that was not mentioned at all in his 1944 account. What we have here is a case of an ever changing, self-contradictory narrative that must be taken in its original incarnation - i.e not the version you spam like an autistic child to prove your ridiculous preconceived notions.

Non sequitur of course. Just because the propagandistic article in TGS 01.03.43, written by persons unknown in New York, is allegedly based on "stenographic notes" made at the early December meeting in London, that does not mean it accurately reflects what Karski told Szmul Zygelbojm and Ignacy Schwarzbart.


It was based on conference notes for a meeting attended by a number of persons who had spent most of the war in London, and one person who had just returned from Poland - the setting of the article. Thus, it can be locically concluded that Karski's account had a great influence, perhaps the only influence, on the article. Whether it was true or not is a different story altogether, but you cannot deny that it was the inspiration for Karski's later accounts. It's genisis (2/12/42) predates every other statement by Karski on this matter, including the one that you have spammed twice.

It claims Karski wore a Polish policeman's outfit, which he never would have said.


Look at the little telepath!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Koestler's 1943 article presents Karski's actual story fairly accurately because they actually met in London, and Karski's definitive account is of course his own book published in late 1944.


That is so wrong, Karski's 1944 account was a later version of a take that had it's origins in the article published in January of 1943. They are basically similar.

Karksi had no involvement with that article,


It was based on stenographic notes from a conference that he had participated in personally and it matches his later accounts almost to a T.

it was written by unknown people in NY who bastardised Karski's account given to SZ and/or IS for their own propaganda needs. As a source for Karski story, it's worthless.


I'm gonna have to ask you to use your head, I know its very difficult, but hear me out: Why on earth would the writers in NY add in the detail of it being a sorting camp 50 kilometers away from Belzec? Would telling the story as if it were Belzec itself he had visited not be much greater for propaganda purposes? To say that they edited to look like that makes no sense.

The simple and easy conclusion is that the article is the best indicator of the earliest version of Karski's tale. If he had mentioned the "melting Jews in Train" detail and described it as Belzec itself, you could be sure that the NY publishers would have made sure that the article reflected it. But alas, that was not the case. Your beliefs don't change facts. Facts change your beliefs.


Jeff_36 wrote:You should know that Engel never found the Schwarzbar telegram, so many of his claims about Karski have been superseded.We know that because Karski mentioned the horrors of the "Jewish situation" in Warsaw during his interrogation by the British on 27.10.42 at the Royal Patriotic School in London. That was just 2 days after his arrival in Britain, and before he saw Sikorski.


The information given by Karski regarding this situation is incredibly general, and refers only to happenings in the Warsaw Ghetto. It is doubtful by the way, that he evewr visited there at all, as his description of goings on there are a it loopy and highly anachronistic. Despite whatever he may have said, the fact that did not devote so much as a letter to the situation in his formal report to the head of the PGE says a lot, as does the fact that it took him until December to come up with the Belzec tale. Obviously he would have mentioned it in his report to Sikorski, at least in passing. But he did no such thing.



*Laughing at you celebrating *your goal* that's been ruled offside* :lol:


The score is now 4-0 for Jeff and we are reaching the 89th minute. tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 7:01 pm

BRoI wrote:I surprised that you of all people should fall for Jeff's nonsense based on bits and bobs he's scrapped from the internet.


You mean books that I own, have read, and articles that I have paid a lot of good money for.

Jeff's assertion that this magazine article features Karski's *original* story, it a bit like claiming a newspaper report on a politician's speech is a more reliable source than an uncut video recording of it!


True, but as it stands we have no uncut video, and the "newspaper article" is the most immediate primary source for the "speech" that is available, Karski contributed to it, as did Schwartzbart, the official who Karski informed of his experiences.


It's just absurd; this magazine article is worthless as a source compared to Karski's own words in his book.


I'm afraid its the other way around. It goes like this: TGS article> Karski's August 1943 account > Karski's book.

As I mentioned in my previous post; Jeff's delight in appealing to Engel is misplaced because Engel never found Schwarzbar's telegram which proves he met Karski on 04.12.42;Engel claimed they did not first meet until March 1943.


If you bothered to read my posts instead of spewing BS you would notice that I made no use of Engel's assertion to that effect because I kenw it was incorrect. But the fact that Karski made no mention of it to Sikorski is written in stone at this point.

And I of course proved using an original document from the British NA that Karski even told his British interrogators about the "Jewish situation", so Engel's claim about Sikorski's meeting with Karski is irrelevant.


By "The Jewish situation" he was referring to was in regards only to the Ghetto at Warsaw, a place he likely never visited. He made no mention of his imaginary, out of body "experience" at "Belzec" (lol) to anyone until his meeting with Schwartzbart, Zygielbojm and others in December of 1942, the meeting that produced the telegram that you have spammed again and again like a monkey in a seizure, and the article from The Ghetto Speaks, an article that you are desperately, unsuccessfully trying to disassociate from your craven, dishonest thesis.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 8:29 pm

Take this with a grain of salt but Deathcamps.org states that the PGE's report of 11/24/42 reprinted in the New York Times on 11/25/42 was based on Karski's written info. Let's take a look at what that edition said.

Image
Image

No mention of a visit to Belzec at all. Had such a visit taken place it surely would have received top billing.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 9:25 pm

Basically this fails the two-source rule in journalism and history, and since there are more witnesses saying otherwise, he is wrong. And even then, it is doubtful he even went to Belzec at all.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4551
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 10:35 pm

Jeff_36 wrote:Take this with a grain of salt but Deathcamps.org states that the PGE's report of 11/24/42 reprinted in the New York Times on 11/25/42 was based on Karski's written info. Let's take a look at what that edition said.

Image
Image

No mention of a visit to Belzec at all. Had such a visit taken place it surely would have received top billing.


Well, they got the shooting part right.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4551
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 10:37 pm

Jeff_36 wrote:Basically this fails the two-source rule in journalism and history, and since there are more witnesses saying otherwise, he is wrong. And even then, it is doubtful he even went to Belzec at all.


There's a lot of good research there, thank you.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4551
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 10:38 pm

I did notice in the article they did say that survivors are taken to Treblinka, Sobibor and Belzec where they are mass murdered.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 17353
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby scrmbldggs » Tue Oct 11, 2016 12:32 am

It also mentions Janusz Korczak and his conduct. IIRC, his is the only name mentioned in stone at Treblinka II...

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby BRoI » Tue Oct 11, 2016 2:03 am

Jeff_36 wrote:Take this with a grain of salt but Deathcamps.org states that the PGE's report of 11/24/42 reprinted in the New York Times on 11/25/42 was based on Karski's written info. Let's take a look at what that edition said.


Ah, deathcamps.org, where Jeff_36 conducts his "research".

I was mulling over the same story two days back, considering whether it was Karski related. I originally found the article in a kiwi paper back in 2013:
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/e581a048b76a572dd25df290bcd17257.jpg

I decided to ignore it for now and concentrate on the archival docs and studies published in the 2010s.

As for your latest bucket-mix of internet grabs, miscomprehensions, and ad homs., that'll be be thoroughly refuted tomorrow.
"... these witnesses would swear to anything if it gets the Germans killed."
- Solomon Surowitz, Assistant Prosecutor at the 1947 Buchenwald trial.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Tue Oct 11, 2016 2:14 am

BRoI wrote:Ah, deathcamps.org, where Jeff_36 conducts his "research".


No, as I stated explicitly, I think it must be taken with a grain of salt.

I decided to ignore it for now and concentrate on the archival docs and studies published in the 2010s.


Ahh, you omit evidence that is harmful to your beliefs. I'm not surprised.

As for your latest bucket-mix of internet grabs, miscomprehensions, and ad homs., that'll be be thoroughly refuted tomorrow.


You previous attempts at "refutation" have faild miserably and have if anything only strengthened my case. Here I loom, before you.

I am curious - if you now accept extermination in the AR camps, why on earth are you desperately clinging onto this painfully obvious dead-end?

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby BRoI » Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:04 pm

Jeff_36 wrote:
BRoI wrote:Ah, deathcamps.org, where Jeff_36 conducts his "research".

No, as I stated explicitly, I think it must be taken with a grain of salt.

That wasn't my point; my point is about how and where you're conducting your "research". Incidentally, you *forgot* to cite the site from where you lifted those images:
http://www.rarenewspapers.com/view/589860


I decided to ignore it for now and concentrate on the archival docs and studies published in the 2010s.

Ahh, you omit evidence that is harmful to your beliefs. I'm not surprised.

Sure thing, dopey, that's why I admitted I was aware of it before you "discovered" the story on dc.org and swiped the images from rarenewspapers.com.

It's just that I have the novel of approach of checking things before jumping in feet first.

Karski didn't arrive in Britain until the 25.11.42 and was held by the British security services until the 28th; he wasn't even permitted to talk to a Polish officials until the 27th [FO 371/32231].

But M. Fleming writes [2014:149] that information Karski carried did reach London before he did. Poles in London sent a message to Warsaw 17.11.42 advising Karski was in Lisbon, and a further message from Stanislaw Mikolajczyk to Warsaw confirms receipt of Karski's material on 23.11.42. I provide further information on Mikolajczyk below, but for now it suffices to inform you that he was the man who compiled the reports arriving from Poland.

Therefore it seems highly likely that this press report is indeed partially based on Karski's claim to have visited Belzec and witnessed packed trains leaving the camp and its occupants died from the fumes and burns they received from the lime the nazis put in the carriages.

Obviously you will object to this well source information by shrilling about the report saying survivors of the lime trains are sent to B,S,T. Indeed it does, but Mikolajczyk's information wasn't entirely based on Karski; the Poles had what they evidently considered better information on Belzec dating back to March 1942. At this point the London Poles believed the Jews were electrocuted at Belzec, as is confirmed in Mikolajczyk's report that he forward to the British a few days later, which incidentally, Karski's is referred to once again [see below].


I am curious - if you now accept extermination in the AR camps, why on earth are you desperately clinging onto this painfully obvious dead-end?

I will happily accept Karski went to Izbica, I just want to see the alleged proof that he admitted it in his later years after sticking to his guns for the previous 50-odd.

Secondly, this whole thread has warped from one about Karski into one in which I'm obliged to endlessly correct your comically brazen claims based on the scantest research [recte: googling].


Jeff_36 wrote:
BRoI wrote:As if Karski would ever have called Belzec "a city"! He had nothing whatsoever to do with that propagandistic article


You yourself state that the very article you mention was produced as a result of stenographic notes of a conference where Karski participated. You are now contradicting yourself.

Er, no, he had nothing whatsoever to do with that propagandistic magazine article that bastardised his account, so there is no contradiction.


Jeff_36 wrote:
SPECIAL OFFICIAL ENVOY GENTILE ESCAPE AND ARRIVED HERE LEFT CAPITAL THIS OCTOBER SAW WARSAW GHETTO ON LAST AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER WITNESSES MASS MURDER OF ONE TRANSPORT SIX THOUSAND JEWS AT BELZEC SPOKE TO HIM YESTERDAY 3 HOURS [...]



That's cute. The first iteration of his "experience" was a description of a place that clearly was not Belzec.

Why is Schwarzbar's iteration, "the first iteration" [actually it wasn't, remember the Mikolajczyk reports?; discussed above and below] "a description of a place that clearly was not Belzec"?


Jeff_36 wrote:
As he mentions in his 1944 book, Karski also spoke with Arthur Koestler who subsequently wrote an article from Karski's point-of-view which was also published in 1943. It tells virtually the same story as Karski does in his book [and would do for the next 50+ years]:


As I have proven, his account developed, and the 1944 version was far from the original. The Kostler article does you no service at all, it contrasts the 1944 account on two points, the nationality of JK's disguise, and the fact that he stated he was "one of the executioners", something that was not mentioned at all in his 1944 account.

All you have proven is that you're constantly playing catch-up with information, in form of original documents and facsimiles of original publications, I keep posting; items you claim, unironically, to be "spam"! So, you've also kinda proven you're not receptive to information that's contra to your desired outcome.

We don't even know who was the NY based author who wrote TGS version, and there's not a scrap of evidence to show Karski was even aware of its existence. You should attempt to track down the alleged "stenographic notes" if you want to prove this magazine article is faithful to what Karski said in London. Good luck doing that with just google.

It's irrelevant that Kostler's version contrasts Karksi's book on minor points. Karski was only mindful not to tell the truth about wearing a "Ukrainian uniform", and Koestler's description of the Hiwis at Belzec as "executioners" in his condensed article seems a logical choice to me. Karski wrote that Koestler "... could describe it with greater force and talent than I" [1944:334].

Karski writes about the "endless grind of interviews and meetings" whilst he was in London between Nov 1942 - July 1943 [1944:337]. "Since my arrival in London I had been swamped with literally hundreds of conferences, conversations, contacts, and reports. I had been involved in them from 9:00 A.M. to midnight every day" [334]. Michael Fleming writes: "Karski spoke with many British officials - intelligence, military, propaganda personnel - but the contents of these conversations are not known." [2014:156] In July 1943 with Karski had meetings with "US military and intelligence officials" and the following month with "representatives of a number of different Jewish organizations" [154]. Below I provide details of another significant meeting, but Karski's schedule documented in this paragraph shown the utter lunacy of your claim to have "proven" how "his account developed" based on just his book and TGS article—which you've never even seen the original of [you hadn't even acknowledged the existence of the Koestler one when you first posted your braggadocio: "I have proven..."]!


Jeff_36 wrote:What we have here is a case of an ever changing, self-contradictory narrative that must be taken in its original incarnation - i.e not the version you spam like an autistic child to prove your ridiculous preconceived notions.

Like a spoilt brat you stamp your feet about this "original incarnation". TGS magazine article is not the "original incarnation", and, significantly, we have no idea who even wrote it.


Jeff_36 wrote:
Non sequitur of course. Just because the propagandistic article in TGS 01.03.43, written by persons unknown in New York, is based on "stenographic notes" made at an early December meeting in London, that does not mean it accurately reflects what Karski told Szmul Zygelbojm and later Ignacy Schwarzbart.


It was based on conference notes for a meeting attended by a number of persons who had spent most of the war in London, and one person who had just returned from Poland - the setting of the article. Thus, it can be locically concluded that Karski's account had a great influence, perhaps the only influence, on the article. Whether it was true or not is a different story altogether, but you cannot deny that it was the inspiration for Karski's later accounts. It's genisis (2/12/42) predates every other statement by Karski on this matter, including the one that you have spammed twice.

I don't need to "deny" anything, Mr Googler, I can prove you're wrong:

1. Karski meet Zygelbojm and Schwarzbart on separate occasions, respectively the 2nd [probably] & 4th of December. Karski [1944:334f] writes of his meeting with Zygelbojm at Stratton House, seat of the Polish Ministry of the Interior and mentions no one else being present and nothing of a stenographer. Therefore the preface of TGS article is wrong about them meeting him together after being "summoned" on the 2nd to the "Polish Ministry of the Interior".

2. There's is no evidence that Karski was even aware of this magazine article written and published in New York, some 4 months before his arrival in the U.S.

3. Claiming this article "genisis (2/12/42) predates every other statement by Karski on this matter" is completely wrong. Karski passed on information in Lisbon that arrived in London on the 23.11.42 and was used in the 25.11.42 NYT article. Furthermore information from Karski's account was included in Stanislaw Mikolajczyk's report which Frank Savery of the FO had translated by 03.12.42. In his covering letter he writes: "[Jan] Librach asked me not to give away the fact that some of the details had been obtained from a Polish policeman whose worked took him into the ghetto." Instead of Karski's, Mikolajczyk went with an older report on Belzec that claimed Jews were electrocuted there, which is a shame, as Savery stated that the "evidence does not seem to me quite convincing". [FO 371-31097, C12185] Michael Fleming [2014:153].



It claims Karski wore a Polish policeman's outfit, which he never would have said.

Look at the little telepath!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I'll just borrow DasPrussian's tent-peg twatting mallet for a moment to knock some facts into this crude braggart:
Following the US entry into the war in December 1941, the British were less concerned about gaining American Jewish favour. The situation for the Polish Government in Exile was somewhat different, for they continued to see both British and American Jewish opinion as important, and this divergence in perception fostered some tensions between the Poles and the British.
- Michael Fleming, Auschwitz, the Allies, and Censorship of the Holocaust, 2014:89

The London Poles were out to gain the favour of British and American Jewish for two main reasons. Firstly, they sought an ally to support the Polish cause over her territory east of the so-called Curzon Line; territory they feared the British and Americans would happily ceded to the Soviet Union. Secondly, they had themselves supported the mass emigration of Jews from Poland prior to the war, and nor was this policy completely abandoned whilst the war raged. The Polish government were strong supporters of the Zionist claim for a homeland in Palestine, even if this meant the annoying the British who were currently their hosts. Furthermore, the policy of the London Poles to appease Jewish groups in the US and UK is well covered in the literature [e.g. The Holocaust Encyclopedia, p.484].

A document I first saw cited by Fleming reads:
General Sikorski in particular has in the past given us reason to suspect that he was not averse from embarrassing His Majesty’s Government if he could at the same time appease influential Zionists.

[Frank Roberts to Godfrey Lias, 21 August 1942; in FO 371/30917]

So it's not likely that Sikorski's men would be telling influential Zionists about Polish policemen being regulars in nazi death camps.

As I detailed earlier in the thread, recent editions of Karski's book have corrected the information in the original edition which was camouflaged for political reasons whilst the war still rage; his claimed to have an Estonian guide and uniform now reads Ukrainian guard and uniform.

Considering all of the above, the assertion in TGS article that Karski said he was wearing a Polish policeman's uniform is clearly absurd. Karski would never have given the impression to Zygelbojm and Schwarzbart that the Polish police force were involved in the nazis' death camps.


Koestler's 1943 article presents Karski's actual story fairly accurately because they actually met in London, and Karski's definitive account is of course his own book published in late 1944.

That is so wrong, Karski's 1944 account was a later version of a take that had it's origins in the article published in January of 1943. They are basically similar.

Once again; there's no evidence Karski or Koestler were even aware of the TGS article published in NY let alone that it "influenced" them. So, my point stands despite your bleating; Koestler's version presents Karksi's story fairly accurately in comparison to what Karski himself published in late 1944.


Karksi had no involvement with that article,


It was based on stenographic notes from a conference that he had participated in personally and it matches his later accounts almost to a T.

As I documented above, claims in the preface of TGS article are clearly wrong. Zygelbojm and Schwarzbart meet Karski separately; Zygelbojm and Karski met in the Ministry of the Polish Interior and Karski mentions nothing about anyone else being present, meaning there was no stenographer there. As is documented in the 05.12.42 Schwarzbart telegram, he met Karski on the 04.12.42. The wording of the telegram isn't entirely clear, but the paragraph on his meeting with Karski ends "SENDING REPORT", which would mean that he was going to compile a report on the meeting and send it to the WJC in NY.


it was written by unknown people in NY who bastardised Karski's account given to SZ and/or IS for their own propaganda needs. As a source for Karski story, it's worthless.


I'm gonna have to ask you to use your head, I know its very difficult, but hear me out: Why on earth would the writers in NY add in the detail of it being a sorting camp 50 kilometers away from Belzec? Would telling the story as if it were Belzec itself he had visited not be much greater for propaganda purposes? To say that they edited to look like that makes no sense.

Simple, because his story contradicted what was already known about Belzec, i.e. that Jews were sent there to be killed, not shipped off elsewhere. Stanislaw Mikolajczyk obviously saw similar issues with Karski's story, hence why he did something similar in the press release that appears in the NYT 25.11.42 and stuck with the account from March 1942 about Jews being electrocuted at Belzec in his lengthy report that Frank Savery had translated by 03.12.42, and only incorporated Karski's details on what was happening in the Warsaw ghetto.


The simple and easy conclusion is that the article is the best indicator of the earliest version of Karski's tale. If he had mentioned the "melting Jews in Train" detail and described it as Belzec itself, you could be sure that the NY publishers would have made sure that the article reflected it. But alas, that was not the case. Your beliefs don't change facts. Facts change your beliefs.

Quite wrong of course. As you now know the "melting Jews in Train" from Karski was relayed to the London Poles from Lisbon on 23.11.42 and published in the NYT 25.11.42.

I hope these new facts I'm spoon-feeding you change your beliefs, otherwise you've problems.


Jeff_36 wrote:
You should know that Engel never found the Schwarzbar telegram, so many of his claims about Karski have been superseded.We know that because Karski mentioned the horrors of the "Jewish situation" in Warsaw during his interrogation by the British on 27.10.42 at the Royal Patriotic School in London. That was just 2 days after his arrival in Britain, and before he saw Sikorski.


The information given by Karski regarding this situation is incredibly general, and refers only to happenings in the Warsaw Ghetto. It is doubtful by the way, that he evewr visited there at all, as his description of goings on there are a it loopy and highly anachronistic. Despite whatever he may have said, the fact that did not devote so much as a letter to the situation in his formal report to the head of the PGE says a lot, as does the fact that it took him until December to come up with the Belzec tale. Obviously he would have mentioned it in his report to Sikorski, at least in passing. But he did no such thing.

This is all nonsense of course, fallacious assertion after fallacious assertion, all of which is exposed as the ramblings of a man who simply has done any research into this issue but has the temerity to draw supposed conclusions! But what more should be expected from an ideologue who's researching prowess consists of googling.
"... these witnesses would swear to anything if it gets the Germans killed."
- Solomon Surowitz, Assistant Prosecutor at the 1947 Buchenwald trial.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:40 pm

BRoI wrote:That wasn't my point; my point is about how and where you're conducting your "research". Incidentally, you *forgot* to cite the site from where you lifted those images:
http://www.rarenewspapers.com/view/589860


Irrelevant.

Sure thing, dopey, that's why I admitted I was aware of it before you "discovered" the story on dc.org and swiped the images from rarenewspapers.com.
It's just that I have the novel of approach of checking things before jumping in feet first.


Except I did just that. I looked for the info, checked it, and then posted it.

Karski didn't arrive in Britain until the 25.11.42 and was held by the British security services until the 28th; he wasn't even permitted to talk to a Polish officials until the 27th [FO 371/32231].


I was well aware of that, which is why I stated that it needed to be taken with a grain of salt.

Therefore it seems highly likely that this press report is indeed partially based on Karski's claim to have visited Belzec and witnessed packed trains leaving the camp and its occupants died from the fumes and burns they received from the lime the nazis put in the carriages.


Then why the literal {!#%@} was there no mention of his visit? No mention of his witnessing the deportation, no mention of a disguise, nothing at all. It is because he had not devised that narrative yet, clearly.


I will happily accept Karski went to Izbica, I just want to see the alleged proof that he admitted it in his later years after sticking to his guns for the previous 50-odd.


In 1993, Karski visited Izbica and Belzec. It was likely his first trip to Poland in decades and he identifies Izbica as the place he had visited. This is recounted in a book on Karski, in French, titled Jan Karski, le roman et l’histoire. Furthermore, in 1995, in an appearance on a Los Angeles talk show he informed the host that he had visited Izbica, and corrected his earlier claims. The footage is viewable in the Jan Karski Papers, Hoover Institution Archives, Stanford University, box 31, file 11. You are free to check.

Secondly, this whole thread has warped from one about Karski into one in which I'm obliged to endlessly correct your comically brazen claims based on the scantest research [recte: googling].


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

My claims still stand, and you attempts at refutation have if anything strengthened my thesis.


Er, no, he had nothing whatsoever to do with that propagandistic magazine article that bastardised his account, so there is no contradiction.


For the last time, he participated in the conference that produced the article. This was the first version of his tale, period, and it was this version that Schwartzbart was likley referring to in the telegram.

Why is Schwarzbar's iteration, "the first iteration" [actually it wasn't, remember the Mikolajczyk reports?; discussed above and below] "a description of a place that clearly was not Belzec"?


It was described as being fifty kilometers outside Belzec.



We don't even know who was the NY based author who wrote TGS version, and there's not a scrap of evidence to show Karski was even aware of its existence. You should attempt to track down the alleged "stenographic notes" if you want to prove this magazine article is faithful to what Karski said in London. Good luck doing that with just google.


Well since you are the arch researcher, why don't you take it upon yourself to do that guppy? It is strikingly similar to Karski's accont in many ways, it describes a pole who entered into a camp as a disguise, describes some Jews being left in shelter and others exposed to the elements, and it copies the miskate that these were Jews from the Warsaw ghetto. It was informed by Karski's telling, you know it, and I know it.

It's irrelevant that Kostler's version contrasts Karksi's book on minor points. Karski was only mindful not to tell the truth about wearing a "Ukrainian uniform", and Koestler's description of the Hiwis at Belzec as "executioners" in his condensed article seems a logical choice to me. Karski wrote that Koestler "... could describe it with greater force and talent than I"


And yet Karski only visited Koestler in the first half of 1943, long after the TGS article was devised.


Like a spoilt brat you stamp your feet about this "original incarnation". TGS magazine article is not the "original incarnation", and, significantly, we have no idea who even wrote it.


You have yet to provide so much as a single iota of proof that it was composed by anyone else. It matches his 1944 account to a literal T and explicitly was produced as a result of a conference that he participated in. That is damming, telling, overwhelming evidence and you have yet to prove otherwise. You are bloody, you are brised, half your face is hanging off and yet you think your're winning! :lol: :lol: :lol:

1. Karski meet Zygelbojm and Schwarzbart on separate occasions, respectively the 2nd [probably] & 4th of December. Karski [1944:334f] writes of his meeting with Zygelbojm at Stratton House, seat of the Polish Ministry of the Interior and mentions no one else being present and nothing of a stenographer. Therefore the preface of TGS article is wrong about them meeting him together after being "summoned" on the 2nd to the "Polish Ministry of the Interior".


The similarities are far too convincing for it not to have been gestated by these meetings. Also, Karski was far from the most reliable witness, and Hilberg has attested to that. As you mentioned, it was a propaganda article, likely scraped together usting multiple sources, inclusing the meetings between Karski, Schwartzbart and Zygelbojm. The correlation between that account, the association of it with these three individuals, and Karski's strikingly similar account is far too strong to be a coincidence.


Claiming this article "genisis (2/12/42) predates every other statement by Karski on this matter" is completely wrong.


I never once claimed that. I stated that this was the first likely statement by him of anything in regards to a visit to a any camp.

Karski passed on information in Lisbon that arrived in London on the 23.11.42 and was used in the 25.11.42 NYT article. Furthermore information from Karski's account was included in Stanislaw Mikolajczyk's report which Frank Savery of the FO had translated by 03.12.42. In his covering letter he writes: "[Jan] Librach asked me not to give away the fact that some of the details had been obtained from a Polish policeman whose worked took him into the ghetto." Instead of Karski's, Mikolajczyk went with an older report on Belzec that claimed Jews were electrocuted there, which is a shame, as Savery stated that the "evidence does not seem to me quite convincing". [FO 371-31097, C12185] Michael Fleming [2014:153].


Note the peculiar absence of any account of a visit to Belzec?

Considering all of the above, the assertion in TGS article that Karski said he was wearing a Polish policeman's uniform is clearly absurd. Karski would never have given the impression to Zygelbojm and Schwarzbart that the Polish police force were involved in the nazis' death camps.


All that you cityed above is precient but it is undone by three very obvious facts

1. the article was a second hand publication, so not every detail can be expected to be in line with everything Karski wrote.

2. Zygelbojm was not a zionist at all, but a member of the Bund, and was therefore excluded from Sikorski's directive

3. The detail of the policeman's uniform was barely relevant in the article. You would have a point if it described the auxiliaries as Polish, or displayed an overtly Polonophobic tone, but that one detail does not meet the litmus test for doubt. I am very sorry that you have wasted your time and effort on such a worthless rant.


Once again; there's no evidence Karski or Koestler were even aware of the TGS article published in NY let alone that it "influenced" them. So, my point stands despite your bleating; Koestler's version presents Karksi's story fairly accurately in comparison to what Karski himself published in late 1944.


You are repeating yourself. Also: Koestler's account and later radio play were quite clear in identifying the camp as being sixteen kilometers outside Belzec.


Simple, because his story contradicted what was already known about Belzec, i.e. that Jews were sent there to be killed, not shipped off elsewhere. Stanislaw Mikolajczyk obviously saw similar issues with Karski's story, hence why he did something similar in the press release that appears in the NYT 25.11.42 and stuck with the account from March 1942 about Jews being electrocuted at Belzec in his lengthy report that Frank Savery had translated by 03.12.42, and only incorporated Karski's details on what was happening in the Warsaw ghetto.


And you know this how???? Also, Karski's 1944 account did not identify Belzec as a transit camp, it stated that it was an extermination camp where Jews were killed by quicklime in trains, with the trains just parking elsewhere. This salacious detail would have been sized on by any propagandist worth his salt and your attempts to perform retarded telepathy on Mikolajczyk are a source of amusement for me.



This is all nonsense of course, fallacious assertion after fallacious assertion, all of which is exposed as the ramblings of a man who simply has done any research into this issue but has the temerity to draw supposed conclusions!


And we conclude with a remarkable example of self projection, the latest of many. God what a sad case you are..... :lol:

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4551
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:47 pm

Footnote:

3. In his oral reports during the war, in his memoirs, published in 1944 (Jan Karski, Story of a Secret State, Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1944) and in the statements to Lanzmann and, later, to Walter Laqueur (The Terrible Secret, New York: Henry Holt, 1998, p. 231), Karski says he visited the Belzec extermination camp. In Perpetrators, Victims, Bystanders: The Jewish Catastrophe (New York: Harper, 1993), Raul Hilberg has shown that his testimony does not fit with Belzec (see also R. Hilberg, Sources of Holocaust Research: An Analysis, Lanham [Maryland]: Ivan R Dee, 2001). In 1990, David Engel postulated that Karski had not been to Belzec, but to the camp at Belzyce (‘The Western Allies and the Holocaust’ [note 2], 374). It may be, however, that Karski went to the Belzec secondary camp at Izbica Lubelska, see E. Thomas Wood and Stanislaw M. Jankowski, Karski: How One Man Tried to Stop the Holocaust (New York: Wiley, 1994), which draws on research by Polish historian Józef Marszalek. As Jean-Louis Panné points out, ‘When [Karski] was able to visit Poland in 1993, he visited both camps and formally identified Izbica, between Lublin and Belzec, not far from Zamosc: Jean-Louis Panné, Jan Karski, le roman et l’histoire (Paris: Pascal Galodé, 2010), 20. In an interview filmed in 1995, Karski explained that he had certainly been to Izbica and not – as he had long believed – to Belzec: Diane Glazer Show (Los Angeles: Jewish Television Network, 1995), video consultable in the Jan Karski Papers, Hoover Institution Archives, Stanford University, box 31, file 11. In the Polish version of his memoirs, published in 1999, Karski has had Belzec replaced by Izbica, as Céline Gervais-Francelle points out in the preface to Jan Karski, mon témoignage devant le monde, Histoire d’un état clandestin [the French translation of Karski’s Story of a Secret State] (Paris: Robert Laffont, 2010), xx and 389, note 4.

https://etudesphotographiques.revues.org/3467

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby BRoI » Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:50 pm

I see you put a lot of time and effort into that response, bringing many new sources to the table.

:lol:
"... these witnesses would swear to anything if it gets the Germans killed."
- Solomon Surowitz, Assistant Prosecutor at the 1947 Buchenwald trial.

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby BRoI » Tue Oct 11, 2016 9:21 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:Footnote:

[...]

https://etudesphotographiques.revues.org/3467


Jeff, I posted and examined those claims on this very thread days ago:
So, Besson's claim:
In the Polish version of his memoirs, published in 1999, Karski has had Belzec replaced by Izbica, as Céline Gervais-Francelle points out ...

Is complete BS. She said no such thing about Karski *having had* Belzec replaced by Izbica in the 1999 Polish edition.

http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=539756#p539756


Sure, the "Diane Glazer Show (Los Angeles: Jewish Television Network, 1995" sounds like it would finalise the issue, but as I've already said:
... why didn't Besson quote what Karski said? It's not like it's an easy source to check.


As for Karski's "1993" trip to Izbica and Belzec which—as I've already said—Panné cites no source for it, I already posted a video on this thread which shows Karski at Izbica. Unfortunately it has no subtitles, but if we could learn what he's saying this might be proof that he did concede he went to Izbica:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urA7XZVeg-I
Karski's filmed at Izbica in 1995 in this video @ 1:20
"... these witnesses would swear to anything if it gets the Germans killed."
- Solomon Surowitz, Assistant Prosecutor at the 1947 Buchenwald trial.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4551
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Tue Oct 11, 2016 9:25 pm

BRoI wrote:
Jeffk 1970 wrote:Footnote:

[...]

https://etudesphotographiques.revues.org/3467


Jeff, I posted and examined those claims on this very thread days ago:
So, Besson's claim:
In the Polish version of his memoirs, published in 1999, Karski has had Belzec replaced by Izbica, as Céline Gervais-Francelle points out ...

Is complete BS. She said no such thing about Karski *having had* Belzec replaced by Izbica in the 1999 Polish edition.

http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=539756#p539756


Sure, the "Diane Glazer Show (Los Angeles: Jewish Television Network, 1995" sounds like it would finalise the issue, but as I've already said:
... why didn't Besson quote what Karski said? It's not like it's an easy source to check.


As for Karski's 1993 trip to Izbica and Belzec which—as I've already said—Panné cites no source for it, I already posted a video on this thread which shows Karski at Izbica. Unfortunately it has no subtitles, but if we could learn what he's saying this might be proof that he did concede he went to Izbica:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urA7XZVeg-I
Karski's filmed at Izbica in 1995 in this video @ 1:20



Sorry, trying to find anything to break this deadlock. Didn't mean to double up on your source.
I did find a radio interview that Karski gave in 1993, I'm listening to it to see if he said anything about the camp or camps he visited.
Doing this at work so it might be a bit.

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby BRoI » Tue Oct 11, 2016 9:30 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:Sorry, trying to find anything to break this deadlock. Didn't mean to double up on your source.

Not to worry. Lesser-Jeff plagiarised Besson's sources [which I'd already posted] and passed them off like this, not a hint of accreditation in sight:

LJ wrote:In 1993, Karski visited Izbica and Belzec. It was likely his first trip to Poland in decades and he identifies Izbica as the place he had visited. This is recounted in a book on Karski, in French, titled Jan Karski, le roman et l’histoire. Furthermore, in 1995, in an appearance on a Los Angeles talk show he informed the host that he had visited Izbica, and corrected his earlier claims. The footage is viewable in the Jan Karski Papers, Hoover Institution Archives, Stanford University, box 31, file 11. You are free to check.



Jeffk 1970 wrote:I did find a radio interview that Karski gave in 1993, I'm listening to it to see if he said anything about the camp or camps he visited.
Doing this at work so it might be a bit.

That's sounds interesting. Look forward to reading your findings.
"... these witnesses would swear to anything if it gets the Germans killed."
- Solomon Surowitz, Assistant Prosecutor at the 1947 Buchenwald trial.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4551
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Tue Oct 11, 2016 9:41 pm

Unfortunately I don't get paid to be an amateur historian at my job.....:lol:

I may have to listen to this tonight when I get home.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1326
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Balsamo » Tue Oct 11, 2016 10:28 pm

BRoI wrote:
I surprised that you of all people should fall for Jeff's nonsense based on bits and bobs he's scrapped from the internet.


Not sure who you are thinking of, but as far as i know, we agreed only with the fact that JK did not visit the Belzec camp as it existed. I personally wonder how this visit switched from the mention of Belzec to the ghetto of Izbica which fits even less with the description - and that is me being polite.
That is about it as far as i am concerned.

Now to speak frankly, i really fail to see what's the point you want to make. Is it to use JK's testimony as a proof that Belzec was a transit camp? Somehow, i doubt it. You just wrote that you considered the "transit camp" theory as more or less dead.
So what is the point? It is not like Karski is the cornerstone of the Holocaust historiography. Of course, it is a very interesting element in a study of how the knowledge of the mass murders spread from the East to the West - this is how i came to know Karski - a knowledge made of facts, propaganda induced by political consideration, as well as a certain degree of pure lies. This the subject i am on at the moment.

And to speak frankly, if such reports are illustrative of the kind of news that was reaching London, and other western institution, i understand better why it too them so long to realize what was really going on.
As the discussion has shown, the only institution that were receptive were certain media (mostly the ones controlled by Jews, and that means not much in those days, quite the contrary, actually. And just like today, the original message can be substantially transformed when it come out as an article.
But that is another topic.

To me it is a smelly source, and i have some issues with Thomas Wood and Stanislaw Jankowski twist. As i said, i cannot even figure out how one can even consider Izbica as the place described by JK.
Strange thing that Deniers tend to pick up some funny testimonies and even promote them - in this case just because it mentions Belzec from where Jews are transported through a "transit to heaven" ( not anything East, by the way)- even when most Historian disregard it. Astonishing really.

Again, if JK testimony was the only source for the Holocaust, i would probably be a denier myself. But of course, it is not.

PS: I have read a couple of articles in French about Karski, and i am quite pissed off to see that this switch between Belzec and Izbica has found its way. This is not how history should be done. And such abuse of sources should be denounced.

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby BRoI » Wed Oct 12, 2016 12:43 am

Balsamo wrote:PS: I have read a couple of articles in French about Karski, and i am quite pissed off to see that this switch between Belzec and Izbica has found its way. This is not how history should be done. And such abuse of sources should be denounced.

The French historian Rémy Besson claims that Céline Gervais-Francelle in her forward to the 2010 French edition says that the first Polish edition of the book published in 1999 swaped Belzec for Izbica.

That's not actually true; she only says that the guide is now described as being Ukrainian and Karski wore the uniform of the Ukrainians when he enter the camp. This 2010 French edition is supposedly based on the 1999 Polish one but it still has Karski claiming to have visited Belzec, although it features editorial annotations stating that he was actually in Izbica.

I hope to check the 1999 Polish edition this week.

You can read all extracts I refer to in the 2010 French version here.


Not sure who you are thinking of, but as far as i know, we agreed only with the fact that JK did not visit the Belzec camp as it existed.

Well in that case I suppose I should apologise for assuming you were agreeing with all the points from Jeff-36 that you quoted here, but I don't think it was an unreasonable assumption.


Now to speak frankly, i really fail to see what's the point you want to make. Is it to use JK's testimony as a proof that Belzec was a transit camp? Somehow, i doubt it. You just wrote that you considered the "transit camp" theory as more or less dead.
So what is the point?

I'm simply interested in the topic and I also don't like the abuse of sources by historians, which has been done by those who have asserted the The Ghetto Speaks version should be considered a more accurate account of Karski's story than his own book.


Of course, it is a very interesting element in a study of how the knowledge of the mass murders spread from the East to the West - this is how i came to know Karski - a knowledge made of facts, propaganda induced by political consideration, as well as a certain degree of pure lies. This the subject i am on at the moment.

There certainly seem to be a large helping of all of those things with Jan Karski. Not just his stories of narrowly escaping the fate of those killed at Katyn, tortured by the Gestapo, the horrors of the Warsaw ghetto, the death trains of Belzec, but also how he was chosen by his government to be the man to tell the world of what was happening in Poland.


As the discussion has shown, the only institution that were receptive were certain media (mostly the ones controlled by Jews, and that means not much in those days, quite the contrary, actually. And just like today, the original message can be substantially transformed when it come out as an article.

I certainly think that's true of TGS version of his story. It was simply adapted by the Jewish groups in NY to fit with the information already in their possession about Belzec. The Polish government itself decided to modify Karski's *lime death trains* story for a 24.11.42 press release after he dispatched it to them from Lisbon 23.11.42. They also left it out for the older Belzec electrocution story in a report they gave to the British in late-Nov/early Dec 1942.


To me it is a smelly source, and i have some issues with Thomas Wood and Stanislaw Jankowski twist. As i said, i cannot even figure out how one can even consider Izbica as the place described by JK.

I frown at the way they portrayed the TGS article as more accurate that Karski's own words, but having watched a few Polish videos on Izbica—even not being able to understand a word they say—I think I can see how the description Kaski gives could match the area where the Jews were forced onto trains to go to Belzec. But how he ever thought he was in Belzec, that I can't fathom.
"... these witnesses would swear to anything if it gets the Germans killed."
- Solomon Surowitz, Assistant Prosecutor at the 1947 Buchenwald trial.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Wed Oct 12, 2016 1:58 am

BRoI wrote:I see you put a lot of time and effort into that response, bringing many new sources to the table.

:lol:


I listed two that you have not considered: Panne's book, and the 1995 interview. I also plan on having a native Polish speaker look at the video to see exactly what Karski is saying.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Wed Oct 12, 2016 2:15 am

look, the notion that Karski's 1944 account is proof in of itself that Belzec was a transit camp is laughable on its face. It is backed up by no other account and it contains many absurdities and contradictions. Like it or not, the article featured in The Gehtto Speaks is a blood relative of Karski's book as the latter repeats the formers descriptions, errors, and observations. Hillberg has stated that Karski is not an acceptable source, and with good reason. His account of the Warsaw ghetto is highly anachronistic, and not reflective of the way things were at the time of his supposed visit there in August of 1942. One can certainly theorize that he took his account of Warsaw from information received from other sources rather than his own experiences. The truth is that Karski was an unreliable witness who gave different stories until the publication of his book. Do you propose that he was a perfect little witness?

Also, the article in TGS was sent by diplomatic bag to the Polish embassy in Washington from Schwartzbart and Zygielbojm. Although the two of them met with Karski independently of each other the fact that the article lists them as the source, and the fact that they had met Karski within a few days of each other, combined with the shocking similarity of the accounts naturally leads any rational researcher (which you are not) to conclude that the report is a result of Karski's words, as spoken to the two of them. The fact that you continue to deny this amount to an epic failure an In my opinion strips you of your credibility in every conceivable way. You claim, laughably that Karski's story was modified by the mysterious, nebulous, "New York editors". Why would they leave out a salacious, nasty detail like a gruesome death by quicklime? Your ideal "propagandists" must suck ass.

I have given you the archival reference for Karski's reversal. Now stop hanging around like a lice-riddled rent-boy and get to work!

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby BRoI » Wed Oct 12, 2016 2:42 am

Jeff_36 wrote:
BRoI wrote:I see you put a lot of time and effort into that response, bringing many new sources to the table.

:lol:


I listed two that you have not considered: Panne's book, and the 1995 interview. I also plan on having a native Polish speaker look at the video to see exactly what Karski is saying.


:lol:

I cited Panné's book and the TV show three days ago.
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=539756#p539756

Do try to keep up.
"... these witnesses would swear to anything if it gets the Germans killed."
- Solomon Surowitz, Assistant Prosecutor at the 1947 Buchenwald trial.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Wed Oct 12, 2016 2:58 am

BRoI wrote:
Jeff_36 wrote:
BRoI wrote:I see you put a lot of time and effort into that response, bringing many new sources to the table.

:lol:


I listed two that you have not considered: Panne's book, and the 1995 interview. I also plan on having a native Polish speaker look at the video to see exactly what Karski is saying.


:lol:

I cited Panné's book and the TV show three days ago.
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=539756#p539756

Do try to keep up.


then why, if not sheer cowardly delusion, do you insist that Karski held to his story "maybe until his death"? This if anything makes you look worse.Overall I'm not impressed with your performance.

It's almost 4 in the morning where you are, are you some kind of a tweaker? That would explain a lot.....

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Wed Oct 12, 2016 3:02 am

The only thing we know for sure about Karski is that he met with two Jewish leaders in Warsaw outside the ghetto in 1942. This is because he brought messages back from them to London.

It is telling that in his account of his conversation with Roosevelt, he made no mention of his visit to the camp.

User avatar
BRoI
Poster
Posts: 235
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby BRoI » Wed Oct 12, 2016 3:06 am

Jeff_36 wrote:I have given you the archival reference for Karski's reversal. Now stop hanging around like a lice-riddled rent-boy and get to work!

Yet more references to homosexual men! What is your issue with homosexual men? I remember you having comments deleted on HC which included references to homosexual men, and you were told by HC not to post homophobic things on their blog.

I already knew of the TV show, I posted on this tread about it days ago. Plus, unlike you, I credited the person who I learnt that information from.

I live in the UK, Jeff, getting to California to see this TV show would be tricky. It's a pretty difficult source for anyone to check, which is surprising why Besson didn't quote what Karski says in the video.
"... these witnesses would swear to anything if it gets the Germans killed."
- Solomon Surowitz, Assistant Prosecutor at the 1947 Buchenwald trial.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3956
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm

Re: Jan Karski's visit to Belzec/Izbica

Postby Jeff_36 » Wed Oct 12, 2016 3:10 am

BRoI wrote:Yet references to homosexual men! What is your issue with homosexual men? I remember you having comments deleted on HC which included references to homosexual men, and you were told by HC not to post homophobic things on their blog.


I call it as I see it. Your myriad insecurities and comically thin skin point to some kind of repressed personal strife. :lol:
You know, what with the Catholic Church and kids way back when.......

It's a pretty difficult source for anyone to check, which is surprising why Besson didn't quote what Karski says in the video.


Like I said, I will try to get in touch with friend of mine who is the son of Polish immigrants and speaks the language fluently. It may take a few days or a week as I have not spoken to him in some time and will have to break the ice first.

What will your reaction be if it turns out that the video shows exactly what Panne stated?


Return to “Holocaust Denial”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Balmoral95 and 1 guest