Off Topic Conspiracy Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
terrifictraore said:
I thought treblinka had a russian tank? how did they make it more "efficient"?
Click to expand...

They did. An SS officer installed the tank's engine to the gas chambers by running the exhaust pipe underground and into the chambers. That was more efficient for the Nazis than using engines from other vehicles as they did before to gas people. They eventually started constructing more chambers and used more engines, instead of one tank engine.
 
Spook said:
They did. An SS officer installed the tank's engine to the gas chambers by running the exhaust pipe underground and into the chambers. That was more efficient for the Nazis than using engines from other vehicles as they did before to gas people. They eventually started constructing more chambers and used more engines, instead of one tank engine.
Click to expand...

Thought I would have a bit more of a look at this and there seems to be a bit of confusion over the engines, according to this site http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/ (who seem genuine)

"According to Martin Gilbert in his book, Holocaust Journey, the gas chambers at Treblinka utilized carbon monoxide from diesel engines. Many writers say that these diesel engines were obtained from captured Russian submarines, but according to the Nizkor Project, they were large 500 BHP engines from captured Soviet T-34 tanks. At the Nuremberg trial of the Nazi war criminals, the American government charged that the Jews were murdered at Treblinka in "steam chambers," not gas chambers"
 
Spook said:
They did. An SS officer installed the tank's engine to the gas chambers by running the exhaust pipe underground and into the chambers. That was more efficient for the Nazis than using engines from other vehicles as they did before to gas people. They eventually started constructing more chambers and used more engines, instead of one tank engine.
Click to expand...

More conspiracy stuff around this with people arguing that diesel fumes don't suffocate you so that must be false.
 
terrifictraore said:
More conspiracy stuff around this with people arguing that diesel fumes don't suffocate you so that must be false.
Click to expand...

T-26s had gasoline engines. T-34s were diesel. Most tanks during WW2 were gasoline with the exception of a few Soviet tanks but the one originally used at Treblinka was a T-26.
 
Spook said:
T-26s had gasoline engines. T-34s were diesel. Most tanks during WW2 were gasoline with the exception of a few Soviet tanks but the one originally used at Treblinka was a T-26.
Click to expand...

Fair enough that puts that one to bed , wonder why the confusion then, how do we know it was a T-26 engine?
 
terrifictraore said:
Fair enough that puts that one to bed , wonder why the confusion then, how do we know it was a T-26 engine?
Click to expand...

The sources I've read just say a Russian tank but T-26s were the most common Soviet tanks. Plus, like you said, diesel engines wouldn't gas someone as they have like 20% oxygen.
 
Spook said:
The sources I've read just say a Russian tank but T-26s were the most common Soviet tanks. Plus, like you said, diesel engines wouldn't gas someone as they have like 20% oxygen.
Click to expand...

Makes sense but then why the submarine engine /T-34/ steam stuff put forward by others. That to me makes it sound like we don't know at all.
 
Norman Finklestein lost family in the camps, and has direct experience of many of the issues, which makes his book, the holocaust industry, an interesting read.
 
terrifictraore said:
Makes sense but then why the submarine engine /T-34/ steam stuff put forward by others. That to me makes it sound like we don't know at all.
Click to expand...

You're right, we don't. History as a subject isn't so much about 'facts' or 'the past'; it's about interpreting those facts. History itself means knowledge by inquiry in Ancient Greek. World War II began on the 1st September 1939 when Germany invaded Poland; that's a fact. However, the context and interpretation is more important than the dates and statistics.
 
Spook said:
You're right, we don't. History as a subject isn't so much about 'facts' or 'the past'; it's about interpreting those facts. History itself means knowledge by inquiry in Ancient Greek. World War II began on the 1st September 1939 when Germany invaded Poland; that's a fact. However, the context and interpretation is more important than the dates and statistics.
Click to expand...

Yes history is very often about interpretation and I think that brings us round in a nice way to how we got here.

The interpretation of Germany's action is now so heavily biased that we often lose our critical thinking skills when talking about that time.
 
terrifictraore said:
Yes history is very often about interpretation and I think that brings us round in a nice way to how we got here.

The interpretation of Germany's action is now so heavily biased that we often lose our critical thinking skills when talking about that time.
Click to expand...

Hitler wanted a war. He had told his Generals to prepare for a war. He signed a non aggression pact with Stalin to be free to invade Poland. He invaded Poland. So what interpretation of Hitler's actions do your critical thinking skills lead you to?
 
look_back_in_amber said:
Loving this thread, except the usual petty arguments.
Click to expand...

Glad you're enjoying it :emoticon-0100-smile

Below is another video. I'd just like to say that I don't necessarily believe everything in the videos I've posted so far. I also don't believe everything reported by the msm. I just like to look a bit deeper and ask questions.

I will accept things being debunked if the evidence is there. I'll also stand by my belief to question when there are questions to be asked. In an ideal world, that world is perfect. But we all know this isn't an ideal world...

*contains graphic images*

You must log in or register to see media
 
  • Like
Reactions: Real ale tiger, terrifictraore and look_back_in_amber
Spook said:
You're right, we don't. History as a subject isn't so much about 'facts' or 'the past'; it's about interpreting those facts. History itself means knowledge by inquiry in Ancient Greek. World War II began on the 1st September 1939 when Germany invaded Poland; that's a fact. However, the context and interpretation is more important than the dates and statistics.
Click to expand...

Strictly speaking, didn't it start in 1933 when Judea declared war on Germany?
 
Castro's Coffin said:
Hitler wanted a war. He had told his Generals to prepare for a war. He signed a non aggression pact with Stalin to be free to invade Poland. He invaded Poland. So what interpretation of Hitler's actions do your critical thinking skills lead you to?
Click to expand...

That he probably wanted to invade Poland, there are alternative narratives to that suggesting it was a defensive measure. Not sure I agree with that alternative narrative but it appears reasonable as a theory to me.
 
Diego said:
I am always open to being corrected. I will argue my point (as I see it) but if someone proves me wrong then I have learnt something.
There is no such thing as a normal teenager, trust me on this just for now, I have been one, grown up with many and raised three (plus all their mates) :emoticon-0100-smile
Click to expand...

Im ****ing normal
 
  • Like
Reactions: Diego
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back