From jfbe@odyssee.net Thu Nov 30 00:49:42 PST 1995
Article: 14356 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!sparky.insinc.net!atlas.odyssee.net!news
From: jean-francois beaulieu 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Jewish immigration in USA
Date: 26 Nov 1995 22:21:33 GMT
Organization: Odyssee Internet
Lines: 93
Message-ID: <49ap9d$cs2@atlas.odyssee.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pool12_10.odyssee.net

   Recently I think that somebody here claimed that the number of 500,000
    jews who came in United States after the war is wrong. I've look
    in one of Hilberg book this afternoon and he gave something like
    70,000. Here there's a subtility. I said that the UNRRA was
    obligated to declare the DP's who immigrated in USA and this is
    true: for the period 1948-1952 it's 409,674. It is said somewhere
    that some UNRRA officials told that just a small fraction of them
    were jews. Lets take a look at the UNRRA story.
    Thw war refugee board was set up in 1944as an apparently joint venture
    of the US State, Treasury and War Departement but it was, in the fact,
    under the control of secretary of Treasury Morgenthau. The WRB worked
    very closely with the Joint Distribution Comittee and the World Jewish
    Congress.
    The UNRRA  had been set in 1943, and its first director, appointed by
    Roosevelt, was Herbert Lehman, ex-Governor of New-York state.
    Lehman was succeded in 1946 by Fiorello LaGuardia, who's mother was
    jewish. This organisation did a lot to help jew and was largely
    under 'jewish control'.
    I mentioned earlier the lage amount of jews who were crossing the
    border between poland and germany (us officials declarations)
    but there's other elements: in 1946, British General Sir Frederic
    E. Morgan made a public issue about UNRRA operations: At a conference
    press in Frankfurt he charged that an organized Jewish group was
    sponsering an exodus of jews from Poland into the U.S. zone in Germany.
    He ridiculed 'all that talk about progroms within Poland", pointing
    out that jews arriving in trainload in Berlin were well fed, well
    dressed and had plenty of money: 'They certanly do not look like a
    persecuted people. I believe that they have got a plan to get out
    of Europe". He added that their money was in a great extent occupation
    marks, printed by the Russians.

        Here I have a claim, that just a fraction of the DP's admitted
     by the UNRRA where jews. I have a statement that the bulk of the half
    million DP, if not more if we count other periods and illegal
    immigration, were mainly goyim that the leaders of the UNRRA  were
    helping 5 times more non jews than jews. There's also many strange
    coincidences about the original country: it wasn't a state policy
    to ask to a jew to declare himself as one after WWII, but the
    board reproduce was clear:

                Regular immigration    DP's, 1948-52   jewish pop
                  1941-1950                             int the 30's
Austria            24,860                8,956          230,000
Belgium            12,189                  951           60,000
Czechoslovakia      8,347               12,638          260,000
Denmark             5,393                   62            7,000
Estonia               212               10,427            5,000
France             38,809                  799          250,000
Germany           226,578               62,123          500,000
Greece              8,973               10,277           75,000
Hungary             3,469               16,627          320,000
Italy              57,661                2,268           50,000
Latvia                361               36,014           80,000
Lithuania             683               24,698          160,000
Netherland         14,860                   64          120,000
Poland              7,571              135,302        3,100,000
Rumania             1,076               10,618          900,000
USSR                  548               35,747        3,000,000
Yugoslavia          1,576               33,367           70,000

  For the third column, I'll mention that for germany and Austria data
  are not reliable since jewish population drop drastically at the
  end of the 30's (40,000 for Austria and 180,000 for germany I think)
  I'm interest also to mention the ration jews/population in the third
  column: in latvia,80,000 jews over 2 or 3 millions was a lot more
  than 75,000 in Greece for this ratio.
  So I have the statement that in countries were jews were massivelly
  present before WW2, there 's a large proportion of DP's admission
  wich is often much important than regular immigration (Poland,
  Rumania,USSR, Yugoslavia,Lituania,Latvia,Hungary,Estonia) while
  in countries wehe there was a lower proportion of jews in the 30's
  (Germany,Greece,Austria, Czecoslovakia) data's of regular immigration
  and DP'S are comparable while in countries were there was a small
  % of jews (Italy,Denmark) there's almos no DP's who came. Netherland
  is the only enigma in that.

  Obviously the statement that a small fraction of those DP were jews
  is a lie. If one would like to bring a serious proof that there wasn't
  500,000 jews or more admitted in USA, he'll have to bring a story
  in wich jews were obligated to declare themself as 'jews' on a sheet
  that they signed when they immigrated, because in such a case it
  would be a non sense to immagine 500,000 jews lying for an obscur
  reason, an impossible large scale plot. But the classification in
  the category 'jews among other races' was drop, and the data wich
  claim that 70,000 jews came in USA were given by a couple of officials.
  This is the reason why I stated earlier that a claim maden by a
  top level jew who was in contact with the Nuremberg prosecution staff
  is not a proof: there's many coincidence to explain. And then I'm
  not rejecting such a claim that few jes immigrated in USA because
  it is convenient but because the story of the UNRRA doesn't fit
  with the official claim, and also because of the coincidence with
  the countries of origin for those jews.



From jfbe@odyssee.net Thu Nov 30 08:12:27 PST 1995
Article: 14385 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!sparky.insinc.net!atlas.odyssee.net!news
From: jean-francois beaulieu 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Argumentum ad populum
Date: 27 Nov 1995 03:45:29 GMT
Organization: Odyssee Internet
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <49bc8p$1bo@atlas.odyssee.net>
References: <480mnn$823@zippy.cais.net> <11NOV199507415758@bpavms.bpa.arizona.edu> <12NOV199514290328@bpavms.bpa.arizona.edu> <48q6g4$pf6@zippy.cais.net> <20NOV199512323402@bpavms.bpa.arizona.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pool7_7.odyssee.net

dmittleman@bpavms.bpa.arizona.edu (Daniel Mittleman) wrote:
>
> In article <48q6g4$pf6@zippy.cais.net>, tm@pacificnet.net (tom moran) writes...
> >dmittleman@bpavms.bpa.arizona.edu (Daniel Mittleman) wrote:
> >>In article <48g4rp$8m9@zippy.cais.net>, tm@pacificnet.net (tom moran) writes...
> 
> >>>	Notice that I use the word "theory" when stating certain things and
> >>>you make absolute statements.
> > 
> >>    Yes, I noticed.  What of it?
> > 
> >	You need to be led by the hand all the way. "What of it?"  At least I
> >avoid professing the absolute.
> 
>     I only profess things to be absolute when I am quite sure of them.  I
>     am quite sure of the *fact* of the Holocaust because:
> 
>     1. Every accredited WWII and Jewish Studies Historian in the world
>     accepts the Holocaust as fact;

    ...and those who don't loose their jobs, are victims of arsons,
    are jail or sue in law....


> 
>     2. There are *no* competing hypotheses circulating among these
>     accredited Historians to explain the trace evidence of the Holocaust;
> 

  ?????
>     3. I came to alt.revisionism in the Spring of 1993 from the newsgroup
>     sci.skeptic looking to see if there was any legitimate and defensible
>     argument against the reality of the Holocaust - I have seen dozens of
>     deniers try to make such arguments - I have seen none of those
>     arguments hold up against the documentation and the logic presented by
>     the archivists.
> 

  
   Strange, I read dozens of revisionnist or anti-revisionnist
   studies on paper and I have the opposite impression. 

>     I am left with the conclusion that there is no legitimate argument
>     against the reality of the Holocaust and therefor the Holocaust is a
>     fact.
> 
>     That is an absolute.  I am comfortable with it.  I will continue to
>     entertain arguments that I am wrong and if someday a solid argument is
>     presented I will reconsider my assertion.  But as time goes on and I
>     learn more, I more and more doubt that will happen.

    I'm not concern with your 'conversion', revisionism is growing
  slowly but increase its influence year after years. We don't
   need laws against earth-flat theoricians. Isn't Edgard Bronfman
   who stated a couple of months ago in a letter that 'we should
    do anything to stop revisionnism now, before it's too late'?
   


From jfbe@odyssee.net Thu Nov 30 08:12:28 PST 1995
Article: 14391 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!sparky.insinc.net!atlas.odyssee.net!news
From: jean-francois beaulieu 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: butz et l'holocauste
Date: 27 Nov 1995 03:51:24 GMT
Organization: Odyssee Internet
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <49bcjs$1bo@atlas.odyssee.net>
References: <48u1e6$sd0@atlas.odyssee.net> <494r8f$mnt@gwdu19.gwdg.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pool7_7.odyssee.net

Subject: Re: butz et l'holocauste
From: uroessl1@gwdu19.gwdg.de (Ulrich Roessler)


:   case, I can refer to the Luther memorendum
:   'The German legation in Bucharest reports with reference to D lll 602
:   Secret, that the Rumanian Government would leave it to the Reich
:   Government to deport their Jews along with the German Jews to the
:   ghettos in the East. They are not interested in having the Rumanian

>This one seems a strange quote - looks more like a note about diplomatic
>correspondence and not like a memorand. Would you, please, post a proper
>reference, allowing to identify the paragraph?


 Recently you gave me a reference, 'the destruction of hungarian jews',
 who is suppose to proove that the Luther memorendum is not signed
 while it is, and now you ask for a reference to find the NG-2586-J
 document, the Luther memorendum, NMT, vol 13, 243-249. I don't know
 what you're talkin about, if you have the complete text of the memorendum
 in your book and you don't recognize this sentence...!

>I'll investigate the fate of these Rumanian Jews in Transnistria
>possibly later. However, note that at first you are speaking here about
>the Rumanian military sector and occupation zone in any case -
>although _Einsatzgruppe_ D was operating there along with Rumanian units
>in 1941. Apparently, the Rumanian Jews where deported there only later.

  It is say in the report that jews were submit to german brutallity
 some times, not mass murders but brutallity, while germans troops
 where patrolling this sector (1942-43). It doesn't require a genius
 to guess that the troops were einzengruppen SS in charge of the liquidation
 of partisans activities. The text state explicitly that jews there
 had often problems with german troops passing through this sector,
 and I don't believe that the Wermach is the first suspect if we talk
 about brutalities against jews.


Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor