NZ POLITICS 43 HOLOCAUST REPOSTED NEW THREAD RECOMMENDED READING
From: "Redbaiter" (don't@no-spam)
Subject: Holocaust Reposted (New Thread - recommended Reading)
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 01:40:40 GMT


"Redbaiter" <don't@no-spam> wrote:

>Was there a 1st?
>
>--

A VERY good question!!!

=======

THE HOLOCAUST STORY: How Much is False? The Case for Open Debate
By BRADLEY R. SMITH
THE CONTEMPORARY ISSUE
No subject enrages America's thought police more than Holocaust revisionism. The politically correct line on the Holocaust story is, simply, it happened. You don't debate "it." You do debate every other historical event of course, but the Holocaust is an exception. If someone does express doubt about some aspect of the Holocaust story, it's politically correct to respond with outrage,
contempt and guilt-by-association smear tactics. We used to call that behavior McCarthy-ite. Now we say it's "progressive."

The Holocaust lobby claims that it is a social good when ideology replaces free inquiry, intimidation represses open debate, and when the ideals of the university itself are exchanged for intellectual taboos and not-so-secret political agendas. Let's ask these people -- what makes such behavior a social good? Who benefits?

THE HISTORICAL ISSUE
For half a century it has been asserted that during World War II the German State had a policy to "exterminate" the Jews and other peoples of Europe in execution gas chambers. This allegation was institutionalized at the great Nuremberg trial, led by the Soviets and the U.S. While the proceedings at Nuremberg were politically correct, the evidence supports the then Chief Justice of the U.S.
Supreme court, Harlan Fiske Stone, who called the Nuremberg court simply "a lynching party for Germans." Mainline Holocaust historians are under considerable pressure from Revisionist scholarship to address the more blatant examples of Holocaust fraud and falsehood. Increasingly, academics are committing themselves to publishing their own revisions of the orthodox Holocaust story. The "rewriting" of the Holocaust story has begun in earnest.

Auschwitz
Arno J. Mayer, chaired professor of European history at Princeton University, has written in his Why Did The Heavens Not Darken?,
that at Auschwitz more people died of "natural causes" than were killed. Mayer is a Jew and himself a refugee from the Nazi regime.
British historian David Irving, perhaps the most widely read historian writing in English, has called the Auschwitz death-camp story a "sinking ship" and states that there were "no gas chambers at Auschwitz..." Yehuda Bauer, Director of Holocaust Studies at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, states that it is "patently false"
that 4 million Jews and others were killed at Auschwitz.

The Auschwitz State Museum has "revised" its half-century-old claim that 4-million humans were killed there. The Museum now says maybe it was 1 million. What documentary evidence does the Museum proffer for the 1 million figure? None. The 4 million number was engraved in stone at Auschwitz where it has been seen by millions of tourists. What to do? A workman was ordered to chisel out the 4
million number. Nothing to it, really. History in the making. But where have those 3 million souls been the last 45 years? And why is no one celebrating?

The Leuchter Report contains the results of the first-ever forensic examination of the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz. The Report is the work of Boston engineer Fred A. Leuchter. It concludes that no mass gassings ever did or ever could have taken place in so-called gas chambers. The chemical analysis used in the Report was performed by the Alpha Analytical Laboratories in Ashland MA. Fred Leuchter has called for an international commission of scientists and historians to investigate the so-called gas chambers of Auschwitz.

Winston Churchill wrote his monumental six-volume history of World War II without mentioning the "gas chambers" or the "extermination"
of the Jews. Maybe it slipped his mind. On the other hand, maybe not. Dwight D. Eisenhower, in his memoir Crusade in Europe, also forgot to mention the "gas chambers." Why wasn't the weapon used to murder 6 million Jews worthy of a passing reference? Was our future president being "insensitive" to Jews?

"The Photographs"

We've all seen "The Photographs." Endlessly. Newsreel photos taken by U.S. and British photographers at the liberation of the German camps, and especially the awful scenes at Dachau, Buchenwald and Bergen-Belsen. We have seen them so many times over four decades we don't even have to ask what "they" are. They're "The Photographs."
These documents are typically presented in a way where it is either stated or implied that the scenes resulted from deliberate policies on the part of the Germans. The documents are real. The uses to which they are put are base. There was no German policy at any of those camps to deliberately kill the internees. In the last months of the war Soviet armies were advancing on Germany from the east.
The British and U.S. air arms were destroying every major city in Germany saturation bombing. Transportation, the food distribution system and medical and sanitation services all broke down. That was the purpose of the Allied bombing, which has been described as the most barbarous form of warfare in Europe since the Mongol invasions. It was successful.

Millions of refugees fleeing the Soviet armies were pouring into Germany. The camps still under German control were overwhelmed with internees from the eastern camps. By early 1945 the inmate population was swept by malnutrition and by epidemics of typhus,
typhoid, dysentery and chronic diarrhea. Even the mortuary systems broke down. When the press entered the camps with British and U.S.
soldiers, they found the results of all that. They took "The Photographs."

The Allied propaganda machine laboring furiously to produce anti-
German hate propaganda. "The Photographs" became their most successful tools. Today the same tools are still being used to "educate" Americans. Still, at Buchenwald, Dachau and Bergen-Belsen tens of thousands of healthy internees were liberated. They were there in the camps when "The Photographs" were taken. There are newsreels of these internees walking through camp streets laughing and talking. Others show joyful, well-fed internees throwing their caps in the air and cheering their liberators. You haven't seen those films and photographs, you say? Why do you think that is?
Does it suggest to you questions, about the camps that are not politically correct to ask?

The Dachau "Gas Chambers"

In the first years after the war there was much eyewitness testimony about "mass gassings" at Dachau. In his summing up for the prosecution at Nuremberg, Sir Hartley Shawcross, chief prosecutor for Great Britain, spoke of murder "conducted like some mass production industry in the gas chamber (s) of... Dachau...."

Today no responsible scholar attempts to claim that there were mass gassing at Dachau. Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust Studies, states simply: "There were no gas chambers at Dachau."

The Jewish Soap Story
This ugly rumor has been repeated endlessly in our media and universities. First Amendment scholar Nat Hentoff can write seriously that he has seen human soap made from the "tissues of murdered Jews" displayed on stone tablets in the Chamber of the Holocaust in Jerusalem. Israeli historian Yehuda Bauer and Jewish-
American historians like Raul Hilberg and Deborah Lipstadt all state that this anti-German hate story is untrue. Lipstadt writes:
"The Nazis never used the bodies of Jews, or for that matter anyone else, for the production of soap."

"Eyewitness" Testimony
As documentary "proofs" mass-murder of the European Jews fall by the wayside, Holocaust historians depend increasingly on "eyewitness" testimonies to support their theories. Many of these testimonies are ludicrously unreliable.

Shmuel Krakowski is archives director for Yad Vashem, which is the international center for Holocaust documentation in Jerusalem.
Krakowski states that more than 10,000 "eyewitness" testimonies about German atrocities against Jews have been shown to be false at Yad Vashem alone!

"Human Skin" Lamp Shades
Uncounted Hollywood epics and "eyewitness" testimonies accuse Germans of skinning Jews to make lamp shades from their hides.
General Lucius D. Clay, Military Governor of the U.S. Occupation Zone of Germany (1947-49) discovered that the infamous "human skin"
lamp shades found at Buchenwald were actually made of "goat" skin.
Which of your professors has denounced this cheap anti-German bigotry for what it is?

THE FREE INQUIRY ISSUE
Students and professors alike should be free to investigate the Holocaust story in the same way they are free to examine every other historical event. This is not a radical point of view. The premises for it were worked out three centuries ago during a little something called the Enlightenment. The tools used to arrive at historical understanding are useless without the rights of Free Inquiry and Open Debate. We are told that it is "anti-Jewish" to question orthodox assertions about German criminality. Yet we find that it is Jews themselves like Mayer, Bauer, Hier, Hilberg,
Lipstadt and others who are beginning to challenge the establishment Holocaust story. The charges of anti-Semitism are oftentimes, in fact, used merely to suppress Revisionist scholarship and the free exchange of ideas necessary to judge its merits.

Students should be encouraged to question who benefits from promoting false Holocaust stories on the one hand and using charges of "anti-Semitism' to suppress free inquiry into those stories on the other.

It is difficult to understand why the concept of Free Inquiry should be so alarming to those who manage our universities. Free Inquiry makes no promise to Revisionism that it does not make to every other school of thought. The promise of Free Inquiry is that it will demonstrate what is true and false in Revisionist scholarship at the time that it does so for the orthodox Holocaust literature.

Free Inquiry does not follow a political or ideological line or it isn't free. Free Inquiry is an equal opportunity ideal. Christian,
Jew and Moslem, Black and White, professor and student and layman -- it's there for everyone. Free Inquiry holds out its arms to each one of us, urging us to embrace it, use it, exhaust it in our passion for understanding. Understanding, however, unlike Free Inquiry, promises nothing. That's why there are professors willing to denounce a scholar while refusing to exchange ideas with him.
They would rather see certain books suppressed than have to face the awful possibility of coming to understand something that they have committed their lives and their careers to not understanding.

THE MORAL ISSUE
When we suppress open debate on the Holocaust we promote bad history and undermine the traditionally humane values of the university. Bad history replaces historical understanding with self-righteous nationalism both here and abroad. It encourages us to scape-goat old enemies and to seek vengeance rather than reconciliation. (It isn't easy, is it, to "reconcile" ourselves with a people that skins Jews and cooks them?). The suppression of Free Inquiry into the Holocaust story corrupts public discourse institutionalizes double standards of justice, legitimizes charges of guilt-by-association and a moral cowardice in facing our own limitations as individuals and as a people.

Our refusal to allow critical examination of even the most bizarre accusations made against Germans encourages men and women to bear false witness, betray their chosen professions, and contributes to the vulgarization of Jewish suffering.

Enough is enough!

--Bradley R. Smith
Committee for Open Discussion of the Holocaust http://www.codoh.com/

--
--
Redbaiter In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts,
foreign ideas, alien philosophies and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.

-- President John F. Kennedy

From: Ernest (deadly0711@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Holocaust Reposted (New Thread - recommended Reading)
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 13:02:12 GMT

The only thing he got right in the whole post was that nothing should be beyond being questioned or debated.

After that he delved into a lot of biased bullshit that started out with the idea that the Nazis did not set out to exterminate the Jews.

I find it interesting that the German records document how they killed millions of people and some people refuse to believe it happened because they hate Jews.

Another case of don't shake my prejudice with any contrary facts.


From: "The Enlightenment" (bernxard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Holocaust Reposted (New Thread - recommended Reading)
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 10:14:21 +1000

"Ernest" <deadly0711@no-spam> wrote in message news:7d13gvogva9fuchjc201744j30dbfs8v6v@no-spam >
> The only thing he got right in the whole post > was that nothing should be beyond being > questioned or debated.
>
> After that he delved into a lot of biased bullshit > that started out with the idea that the Nazis > did not set out to exterminate the Jews.
>
> I find it interesting that the German records > document how they killed millions of people > and some people refuse to believe it happened > because they hate Jews.
>

Ain't no such documents.

Put up or shut up.


From: bernxard@no-spam (The Enlightenment)
Subject: Re: Holocaust Reposted (New Thread - recommended Reading)
Date: 2 Jul 2003 19:33:54 -0700

Ernest <deadly0711@no-spam> wrote in message news:<mih4gv8culgc4vvmp444p28gn47e17pjkm@no-spam>...

> On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 10:14:21 +1000, "The Enlightenment"
> <bernxard@no-spam> wrote:
> > >
> >"Ernest" <deadly0711@no-spam> wrote in message > >news:7d13gvogva9fuchjc201744j30dbfs8v6v@no-spam > >>
> >> The only thing he got right in the whole post > >> was that nothing should be beyond being > >> questioned or debated.
> >>
> >> After that he delved into a lot of biased bullshit > >> that started out with the idea that the Nazis > >> did not set out to exterminate the Jews.
> >>
> >> I find it interesting that the German records > >> document how they killed millions of people > >> and some people refuse to believe it happened > >> because they hate Jews.
> >>
> >
> >Ain't no such documents.
> >
> >Put up or shut up.
> >
> suggest you go to Germany and visit their > museums. History channel has a couple of > interesting documentaries on this subject > where they have interviewed prison camp > guards, prison camp survivors, and also > showed records from the German archives > about the establishment and operation of > the camps, some of the train schedules and > manifests, diaries of people involved in the > rounding up and transportation of the Jews
Yes there were vast camps, often supplying factories on their outskirts. There were definetly concentration camps full of communists, political activists, jews, partisans etc. Doesn't mean there was gassings or deliberate exterminations especialy in the numbers mentioned. A train timetable does not prove that. To much of old holocuast stories have turned out to be lurid frauds.

> Another point about all this is that most of > the camps were destroyed towards or after > the war, parts of some were still standing > when decisions were made to keep them as > memorials and some were rebuilt as part of > that process. But even the original buildings > that survived intact have been subject to > being cleaned up and maintained for many > years. Thus the likelihood of any forensic > evidence being readily detectable some 40
> to 50 years later are extremely low if not > washed away.
How convenient.
In the meanitime reputable and capable critics are prevented form going there and are intimidated from publishishing their work.

The revisionsits may be right about 95% of the things you say (which is why they are hated) but if you make one mistake or omision , no matter how contoversial or trivial, that is the wedge they use to slander and discredit as much as they can.

> Some of the allied military > arranged forensic testing in some facilitles > immediately following the end of the war > and those reports should be available some > where within the allied military archives.

They report boddies and suffering form typhus and malnutrition. An outcome of the last monts of the war. Survivors and their clothes had to be drenched in DDT. The Germans used Zyklon-B for the clothes becuase they had no DDT.

> > It is always possible to doubt when a few > people claim that atrocities have happened > but it is a different situation when guards > testify to having carried out or witnessed > the same things. Few people will publicly > admit to committing crimes and getting > imprisoned for years, but many of the camp > guards did give such testimony.
There are few such cases. And non of gassings. The witnesses were often brutally treated and severly intimidated. They knew that they would be executed. Even innocent ones like Joh Damjanyuk who were shown to be innocent (becuase they we somewhere and someone else)
continued to be harrased to the death. Even their Jewish lawyers suffered (one was murdered). Holocaust insistors are fantatics if you listen to them becuase they are on a crusade agisnt heresy.

> > The actual evidence for what happened > is greater than that avialble for the proof > of the Wright brother's flight.
>
Rubbish. All we have is circumstantial evidence and a lot of hype.


From: Redbaiter (don't@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Holocaust Reposted (New Thread - recommended Reading)
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 14:57:13 +1200

"SharkMeat" <Elliot> says...

The guy who posted the stuff you're referring to used my nick but was previously posting under the name Darren Smith.

He has flooded nz.politics with hundreds of fake posts, in an arrogant and obsessive attempt to get me to change my nick.

He said the following-

"Are you that thick not to realise that if you go with that nick you deserve ANYTHING and EVERYTHING you get. As I've said use your real name and this ends. That Simple - nothing else will change it - so keep whinging about USENET ABUSE - as if anyone gives fuck."
If this Holocaust-denying newsgroup-flooding impersonating piece of usenet filth is pissing you off in anyway, I suggest you make a complaint to the following-

Rob Wise, Comindico Sydney phone +61-2-8220-6062 fax+61-3-9326-4767

A few more complaints he will probably loose his account. He has been warned already. He's just filth.

> > "Redbaiter" <don't@no-spam> wrote in message > news:3f00e697@no-spam > >
> I asked you about your sig in another thread, now I see by the <snipped > bullshit in your post> that you *are* an idiot who would rather distort > history than believe Germany's attempted extermination of the Jews. Never > mind the fact that even German school children are taught about the > Holocaust > (http://www.iearn.org/hgp/aeti/aeti-1998-no-frames/holocaust-ed-in-germany.h > tm) which pretty much nullifies your 'Allied propaganda' rhetoric.
> > Never mind the wealth of documents found at this address: Such as this one:
> > +++++++++++++++++
> Do a Proper Job on the Jews!
> There are various views on the ultimate aim and task of the German-National >

-- Redbaiter In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low

From: Ernest (deadly0711@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Holocaust Reposted (New Thread - recommended Reading)
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 05:30:04 GMT

On 2 Jul 2003 19:33:54 -0700, bernxard@no-spam (The Enlightenment) wrote:

>Ernest <deadly0711@no-spam> wrote in message news:<mih4gv8culgc4vvmp444p28gn47e17pjkm@no-spam>...

>> On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 10:14:21 +1000, "The Enlightenment"
>> <bernxard@no-spam> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >"Ernest" <deadly0711@no-spam> wrote in message >> >news:7d13gvogva9fuchjc201744j30dbfs8v6v@no-spam >> >>
>> >> The only thing he got right in the whole post >> >> was that nothing should be beyond being >> >> questioned or debated.
>> >>
>> >> After that he delved into a lot of biased bullshit >> >> that started out with the idea that the Nazis >> >> did not set out to exterminate the Jews.
>> >>
>> >> I find it interesting that the German records >> >> document how they killed millions of people >> >> and some people refuse to believe it happened >> >> because they hate Jews.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Ain't no such documents.
>> >
>> >Put up or shut up.
>> >
>> suggest you go to Germany and visit their >> museums. History channel has a couple of >> interesting documentaries on this subject >> where they have interviewed prison camp >> guards, prison camp survivors, and also >> showed records from the German archives >> about the establishment and operation of >> the camps, some of the train schedules and >> manifests, diaries of people involved in the >> rounding up and transportation of the Jews >
>Yes there were vast camps, often supplying factories on their >outskirts. There were definetly concentration camps full of >communists, political activists, jews, partisans etc. Doesn't mean >there was gassings or deliberate exterminations especialy in the >numbers mentioned. A train timetable does not prove that. To much of >old holocuast stories have turned out to be lurid frauds.
>

Camp guards testifying of deliberate and unnecessary killing of inmates in large numbers do provide evidence. train timetables and manifest showing huge numbers of people being shipped to the camps on a weekly basis and then only a fraction being around afterwards provides strong supporting indirect evidence.

Documents from camp commanders to high ranking NAZI officials giving numbers of people killed each week and mentioning some of the methods used are evidence.

Sufficient to prove to any reasonable person beyond a shadow of a doubt.

>
>> Another point about all this is that most of >> the camps were destroyed towards or after >> the war, parts of some were still standing >> when decisions were made to keep them as >> memorials and some were rebuilt as part of >> that process. But even the original buildings >> that survived intact have been subject to >> being cleaned up and maintained for many >> years. Thus the likelihood of any forensic >> evidence being readily detectable some 40
>> to 50 years later are extremely low if not >> washed away. >
>How convenient. >
>In the meanitime reputable and capable critics are prevented form >going there and are intimidated from publishishing their work.
>
I have heard of biased people being refused access, I have even heard of some being closed to the general public for various reasons, but not heard of any academic or investigator with a good reputation being refused access to any of the facilities or records that are safe to access. One of the camps was closed to all access a few years back due to safety concerns as the facility had not been propely maintained.

>The revisionsits may be right about 95% of the things you say (which >is why they are hated) but if you make one mistake or omision , no >matter how contoversial or trivial, that is the wedge they use to >slander and discredit as much as they can.
>
The only ones I have seen coping abuse are those with clearly defined biases who flatly refused to admit that anything at all happened,
one even refused to admit the existence of the camps.

>
>> Some of the allied military >> arranged forensic testing in some facilitles >> immediately following the end of the war >> and those reports should be available some >> where within the allied military archives.
>
>They report boddies and suffering form typhus and malnutrition. An >outcome of the last monts of the war. Survivors and their clothes had >to be drenched in DDT. The Germans used Zyklon-B for the clothes >becuase they had no DDT.
>
And some report deaths from execution by firing suad in large numbers, and some by the use of gas etc.
>
>> >> It is always possible to doubt when a few >> people claim that atrocities have happened >> but it is a different situation when guards >> testify to having carried out or witnessed >> the same things. Few people will publicly >> admit to committing crimes and getting >> imprisoned for years, but many of the camp >> guards did give such testimony. >
>There are few such cases. And non of gassings. The witnesses were >often brutally treated and severly intimidated. They knew that they >would be executed. Even innocent ones like Joh Damjanyuk who were >shown to be innocent (becuase they we somewhere and someone else)
>continued to be harrased to the death. Even their Jewish lawyers >suffered (one was murdered). Holocaust insistors are fantatics if you >listen to them becuase they are on a crusade agisnt heresy.
>
Guards who were at the camps have testified about eyewitness accounts of the gassings,
there are even diary entries and photos of one German junior officer who served in admin possitions at two camps. there are even records where some German soldiers had sent testimony and evidence to Geneva during the war.

Sure there have been cases where some of the camp personnel have proven to be mistaken identities, and some people have been so traumatised by their experiences that they conduct 'witch hunts' to get all those involved. But that does not mean the events did not happen.

Some of the German's who served in the same units that were responsible for the camps have been accused of being involved and some have been able to prove that they were outposted and not involved in the camp activities. In one case a non-commissioned officer served at a local headquarters as a liason person because they did not want to serve at teh camp their unit had been posted to as he had heard stories from other soldiers when he was posted in.

Also some of the German guards have taken on false identities to avoid being charged with what they did at the camps.

>> >> The actual evidence for what happened >> is greater than that avialble for the proof >> of the Wright brother's flight.
>> >
>Rubbish. All we have is circumstantial evidence and a lot of hype.

Eye witnesses from many nations and cultures (including Germans), photos by Germans, and NAZI records. Even testimony from Jews who helped the camp guards in order to stay alive.

Much more clear evidence than the manufactured bullshit called the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Even after the guy who made that up had confessed to it being fiction some idiots still thinks that it is true because that is how certain bigots promote it.

If the type of evidence of the wholesale killing of the Jews, Gypsies and other ethnic undesireables is not enough, then there is not enough evidence to prove that WW2,
WW1, Crimean, Korean, or Vietnam wars ever really occurred.

The extermination of people based on their ethnic make up happened, the evidence of that is overwhelming. What is in question is exactly who was actively involved, who was involved simply to avoid being killed and how many of these people are alive toady and should be held accountable for their actions. The other area of doubt is how many people were killed, there are not definitive records about that, the best estimates are somewhere between 6 to 11 million people were killed. Most of those estimates are based on different sets of records from the various governments.
The most believable are from the German army records and they indicate over 8.5 million people, and they are not complete.

Ernest


From: "Tilly" (climbaboard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Holocaust Reposted (New Thread - recommended Reading)
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 00:59:35 +1200

The Enlightenment wrote:
> "Ernest" <deadly0711@no-spam> wrote in message > news:7d13gvogva9fuchjc201744j30dbfs8v6v@no-spam >>
>> The only thing he got right in the whole post >> was that nothing should be beyond being >> questioned or debated.
>>
>> After that he delved into a lot of biased bullshit >> that started out with the idea that the Nazis >> did not set out to exterminate the Jews.
>>
>> I find it interesting that the German records >> document how they killed millions of people >> and some people refuse to believe it happened >> because they hate Jews.
>>
>
> Ain't no such documents.
>
> Put up or shut up.

There is plenty of documentation and you know it.

Tilly
--
climbaboard@no-spam

From: "Tilly" (climbaboard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Holocaust Reposted (New Thread - recommended Reading)
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 01:00:33 +1200

The Enlightenment wrote:
> Ernest <deadly0711@no-spam> wrote in message > news:<mih4gv8culgc4vvmp444p28gn47e17pjkm@no-spam>...
>> On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 10:14:21 +1000, "The Enlightenment"
>> <bernxard@no-spam> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Ernest" <deadly0711@no-spam> wrote in message >>> news:7d13gvogva9fuchjc201744j30dbfs8v6v@no-spam >>>>
>>>> The only thing he got right in the whole post >>>> was that nothing should be beyond being >>>> questioned or debated.
>>>>
>>>> After that he delved into a lot of biased bullshit >>>> that started out with the idea that the Nazis >>>> did not set out to exterminate the Jews.
>>>>
>>>> I find it interesting that the German records >>>> document how they killed millions of people >>>> and some people refuse to believe it happened >>>> because they hate Jews.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ain't no such documents.
>>>
>>> Put up or shut up.
>>>
>> suggest you go to Germany and visit their >> museums. History channel has a couple of >> interesting documentaries on this subject >> where they have interviewed prison camp >> guards, prison camp survivors, and also >> showed records from the German archives >> about the establishment and operation of >> the camps, some of the train schedules and >> manifests, diaries of people involved in the >> rounding up and transportation of the Jews >
> Yes there were vast camps, often supplying factories on their > outskirts. There were definetly concentration camps full of > communists, political activists, jews, partisans etc. Doesn't mean > there was gassings or deliberate exterminations especialy in the > numbers mentioned. A train timetable does not prove that. To much of > old holocuast stories have turned out to be lurid frauds.
>
>
>> Another point about all this is that most of >> the camps were destroyed towards or after >> the war, parts of some were still standing >> when decisions were made to keep them as >> memorials and some were rebuilt as part of >> that process. But even the original buildings >> that survived intact have been subject to >> being cleaned up and maintained for many >> years. Thus the likelihood of any forensic >> evidence being readily detectable some 40
>> to 50 years later are extremely low if not >> washed away.
>
> How convenient.
>
> In the meanitime reputable and capable critics are prevented form > going there and are intimidated from publishishing their work.
>
> The revisionsits may be right about 95% of the things you say (which > is why they are hated) but if you make one mistake or omision , no > matter how contoversial or trivial, that is the wedge they use to > slander and discredit as much as they can.
>
>
>> Some of the allied military >> arranged forensic testing in some facilitles >> immediately following the end of the war >> and those reports should be available some >> where within the allied military archives.
>
> They report boddies and suffering form typhus and malnutrition. An > outcome of the last monts of the war. Survivors and their clothes had > to be drenched in DDT. The Germans used Zyklon-B for the clothes > becuase they had no DDT.
>
>
>>
>> It is always possible to doubt when a few >> people claim that atrocities have happened >> but it is a different situation when guards >> testify to having carried out or witnessed >> the same things. Few people will publicly >> admit to committing crimes and getting >> imprisoned for years, but many of the camp >> guards did give such testimony.
>
> There are few such cases. And non of gassings. The witnesses were > often brutally treated and severly intimidated. They knew that they > would be executed. Even innocent ones like Joh Damjanyuk who were > shown to be innocent (becuase they we somewhere and someone else)
> continued to be harrased to the death. Even their Jewish lawyers > suffered (one was murdered). Holocaust insistors are fantatics if you > listen to them becuase they are on a crusade agisnt heresy.
>
>>
>> The actual evidence for what happened >> is greater than that avialble for the proof >> of the Wright brother's flight.
>>
>
> Rubbish. All we have is circumstantial evidence and a lot of hype.

I suggest you have a look at the evidence the Red Cross has for a start.
There is plenty of evidence.

Tilly
--
climbaboard@no-spam

From: "Redbater" (don't@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Holocaust Reposted (New Thread - recommended Reading)
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 13:10:03 GMT

What soc.culture.jewish posts? I don't recall any?

--
--
Redbater In the leftist's lexicon, the slowest of the slow
"Tilly" <climbaboard@no-spam> wrote in message news:1KVMa.64897$JA5.1183948@no-spam > Ernest wrote:
> > The only thing he got right in the whole post > > was that nothing should be beyond being > > questioned or debated.
> >
> > After that he delved into a lot of biased bullshit > > that started out with the idea that the Nazis > > did not set out to exterminate the Jews.
> >
> > I find it interesting that the German records > > document how they killed millions of people > > and some people refuse to believe it happened > > because they hate Jews.
> >
> > Another case of don't shake my prejudice > > with any contrary facts.
>
>
> Redbaiter (the one at .comindico.com.au) Is a Jew hater ,revisionist & neo > Nazi if his posts at soc.culture,jewish are anything to go by.
>
> Tilly > --
> climbaboard@no-spam >
>