Archive/File: holocaust/usa/ihr raven.1294 Last-Modified: 1995/01/03 Article 19568 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!hookup!olivea!wetware!kaiwan.com!kaiwan017.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: The other Himmler Date: Sun, 27 Nov 1994 20:44:47 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 35 Message-ID:References: <3b10ui$ckv@access4.digex.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article <3b10ui$ckv@access4.digex.net>, mstein@access4.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) wrote: > From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) > Newsgroups: alt.revisionism > Subject: The other Himmler > Followup-To: alt.revisionism > Date: Fri, 14 Oct 1994 07:25:38 -0800 > Organization: Institute for Historical Review > Message-ID: > > May 1940 memo to Hitler: "I hope to see the complete elimination of the > concept of the Jew through the possibility of a large-scale emigration of > all Jews to Africa or otherwise in a colony;" "out of inner conviction" > the idea of "physical elimination of a people [must be rejected] as > un-Germanic and impossible." > > We asked Greg for a source, and he never provided one. I'm going to > give a more complete version of this passage now. Sorry. I never saw your request for a source. If you are still interested, check: Himmler memo to Hitler, May 1940. NO-1880. NMT, vol. 13, pp. 147-150.; Vierteljahrshefte fuer Zeitgeschichte, No. 5, 1957, p. 197. -- Greg Raven greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 19569 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!pipex!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!kaiwan017.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Greg reply to Dave in Scotland Date: Sun, 27 Nov 1994 20:48:16 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 27 Message-ID: References: <3av25c$4dp@riscsm.scripps.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article <3av25c$4dp@riscsm.scripps.edu>, misrael@scripps.edu (Mark Israel) wrote: > So those who affirm that there were gas chambers, including all the > history professors, honestly believe that there were gas chambers, right? I wouldn't say that, but it is possible that many do believe the gas chambers to be as real as anything else, even though they themselves never saw them. > > There is immense power to be had by convincing others that one has > > experienced the ultimate victimization. > > Those who experienced the "ultimate victimization" are *dead*! My point is that if you can convince others that you or some group with which you are affiliated are the "ultimate victims," then you can gain a great deal of power. -- Greg Raven greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 19570 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!pipex!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!kaiwan017.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Zionist collaboration with the Third Reich Date: Sun, 27 Nov 1994 20:49:53 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 31 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com 1/11/41: Avraham Stern proposes a formal military pact between the National Military Organization (NMO), of which Yitzhak Shamir, future Prime Minister of Israel, is a prominent leader, and the Nazi Third Reich. This proposal becomes known as the Ankara document, by virtue of its being discovered after the war in the files of the German Embassy in Turkey. It states the following: ". . . The NMO, which is well-acquainted with the goodwill of the German Reich government and its authorities towards Zionist activity inside Germany and towards Zionist emigration plans, is of the opinion that: 1) Common interests could exist between the establishment of a New Order in Europe in conformity with the German concept, and the true national aspirations of the Jewish people as they are embodied by the NMO. 2) Cooperation between the new Germany and renewed folkish-national Hebraium would be possible and 3) The establishment of the historical Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, and bound by a treaty with the German Reich, would be in the interest of a maintained and strengthened future German position in the Near East. [paragraph] Proceeding from these considerations, the NMO in Palestine, under the condition that the above-mentioned national aspirations of the Israeli freedom movement are recognized on the side of the German Reich, offers to actively take part in the war on Germany's side." -- Greg Raven greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 19571 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!kaiwan017.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Trick navigation techniques Date: Sun, 27 Nov 1994 20:59:10 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 20 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com If you are using one of the new URL-cognizant news readers, such as NewsWatcher, you should be able to navigate to my home WWW page or send me e-mail from within your newsreader by clicking on either the e-mail address or URL in my signature. For example, in Mac NewsWatcher, Command-clicking the address opens a new message window preselected to send an e-mail message. Command-clicking my WWW page URL calls up whatever URL helper program you have specified, which then navigates to my home page and displays it over NewsWatcher. The future is right around the corner. -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 19575 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!tequesta.gate.net!seminole.gate.net!publius From: publius@gate.net (Publius) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Zionist collaboration with the Third Reich Date: 29 Nov 1994 20:40:43 GMT Lines: 31 Message-ID: <3bg3kb$1u8h@tequesta.gate.net> References: <3bbt89$26u@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> NNTP-Posting-Host: seminole.gate.net X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] Danny Keren (dzk@cs.brown.edu) wrote: : The only purpose of this "cooperation" was to try and get Jews : out of Europe. The proposition was made by Stern, the leader : of a tiny organization in Palestine, who was at odds with : all the mainstream Zionist organizations in Palestine (as a : matter of fact, his and other radical movements sometimes : had violent confrontations with the mainstream Zionist : organizations). : Stern took a line of violent fight against the British occupation : forces, and was eventually captured by the Brits and shot : on the spot. : It should also be noted that Stern made his offer at a rather : early stage of the Nazi campaign against the Jews, before the : establishment of the major death camps and before hardly any : details about Nazi mass murder leaked out. : To try and represent this attempt of saving Jews from the : Nazis, made by an individual who was in no way a representative : of "Zionism", as "Zionist cooperation with the Nazis", is cheap, : ridiculous propaganda, typical of our Hitler admirer Greg Raven. : -Danny Keren Is there anything to the story that Eichman was a Jew - commissioned by the Nazis to expedite the movement of Jews to Palestine? Some time ago I saw a picture of Eichman's son who lives in Argentina. He certainly looks Jewish. PUBLIUS . Article 19587 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Zionist collaboration with the Third Reich Date: 28 Nov 1994 06:27:21 GMT Organization: Brown University Lines: 24 Message-ID: <3bbt89$26u@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu The only purpose of this "cooperation" was to try and get Jews out of Europe. The proposition was made by Stern, the leader of a tiny organization in Palestine, who was at odds with all the mainstream Zionist organizations in Palestine (as a matter of fact, his and other radical movements sometimes had violent confrontations with the mainstream Zionist organizations). Stern took a line of violent fight against the British occupation forces, and was eventually captured by the Brits and shot on the spot. It should also be noted that Stern made his offer at a rather early stage of the Nazi campaign against the Jews, before the establishment of the major death camps and before hardly any details about Nazi mass murder leaked out. To try and represent this attempt of saving Jews from the Nazis, made by an individual who was in no way a representative of "Zionism", as "Zionist cooperation with the Nazis", is cheap, ridiculous propaganda, typical of our Hitler admirer Greg Raven. -Danny Keren. Article 19596 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!uunet!ankh.iia.org!ralph.vnet.net!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail From: mstein@access4.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: The other Himmler Date: 28 Nov 1994 00:45:26 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Lines: 19 Message-ID: <3bbqpm$n35@access4.digex.net> References: <3b10ui$ckv@access4.digex.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: access4.digex.net In article , Greg Raven wrote: >> We asked Greg for a source, and he never provided one. I'm going to >> give a more complete version of this passage now. > >Sorry. I never saw your request for a source. If you are still interested, >check: > >Himmler memo to Hitler, May 1940. NO-1880. NMT, vol. 13, pp. 147-150.; >Vierteljahrshefte fuer Zeitgeschichte, No. 5, 1957, p. 197. Are you saying that you worked directly from this unabridged primary source, made the translation yourself, and personally removed the crucial word "if" which changed Himmler's conditional formulation "*if* one rejects [Ausrottung]" into the emphatic "must be rejected?" -- Mike Stein The above represents the Absolute Truth. POB 10420 Therefore it cannot possibly be the official Arlington, VA 22210 position of my employer. Article 19606 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!zib-berlin.de!gs.dfn.de!zeus.rbi.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de!terra.wiwi.uni-frankfurt.de!news.th-darmstadt.de!fauern!lrz-muenchen.de!regent!not-for-mail From: erd@regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de (Eric Doenges) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Zionist collaboration with the Third Reich Date: 30 Nov 1994 15:15:20 +0100 Organization: Technical University of Munich, Germany Lines: 21 Message-ID: <3bi1do$4tr@residuum.regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de> References: <3bbt89$26u@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> <3bg3kb$1u8h@tequesta.gate.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: residuum.regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de publius@gate.net (Publius) writes: > Is there anything to the story that Eichman was a Jew - commissioned > by the Nazis to expedite the movement of Jews to Palestine? > Some time ago I saw a picture of Eichman's son who lives in > Argentina. He certainly looks Jewish. PUBLIUS Why, does he have a crooked nose ? Seriously, judging by looks if someone is Jewish or not is utterly impossible because Jews have been spread all across Europe and the Middle East since Roman times. That's almost 2000 years to mix with non-Jews. Any special physical characteristics would be long gone by now. If Jews hadn't been persecuted in one way or another almost all that time, I'd guess they would have ceased to exist as an ethnic group long ago. -- (__) _/_/_/ _/_/ _/_/ (oo) _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ Eric Doenges /--------\/ _/_/ _/_/ _/ _/ (erd@regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de) * o| || _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ ||----|| _/_/_/ _/ _/ _/_/ ooo~~ ~~ Article 19609 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!gatech!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!news.duke.edu!convex!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!pipex!uunet!ankh.iia.org!ralph.vnet.net!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail From: mstein@access4.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Greg reply to Dave in Scotland Date: 28 Nov 1994 17:39:40 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Lines: 40 Message-ID: <3bdm7c$5tr@access4.digex.net> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: access4.digex.net In article , Ross Vicksell wrote: >Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com) wrote: >: In article , cendbj@clust.hw.ac.uk >: (David Johnston) wrote: >: > If it is a mass delusion, then it is unprecedented in history. If >: > they all made it up, the stories show a remarkable consistency. > >Not remarkable at all. They merely copy each others stories. How are these stories communicated from person to person? How do so many people remember all the details of this lie? (It is much harder to keep a lie straight than a true memory.) I've asked you the following quesiton before, but received no answer: What is your EVIDENCE for all this, Ross? So far you have provided none. > The Zionists, who wanted to establish a Jewish State in Palestine. Please provide details of how this hoax worked and was organized, including names, places, and dates. What is your EVIDENCE, Ross? So far you have provided none. >: > Who kept it going? > > The same. Maybe you share Greg Raven's myopia. Let me make this easier for you to see. WHAT IS YOUR EVIDENCE, ROSS? SO FAR YOU HAVE PROVIDED NONE. -- Mike Stein The above represents the Absolute Truth. POB 10420 Therefore it cannot possibly be the official Arlington, VA 22210 position of my employer. Article 19610 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!unixg.ubc.ca!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!uhog.mit.edu!sgiblab!swrinde!pipex!uunet!ankh.iia.org!ralph.vnet.net!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail From: mstein@access4.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Greg reply to Dave in Scotland Date: 28 Nov 1994 17:29:54 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Lines: 93 Message-ID: <3bdll2$14q@access4.digex.net> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: access4.digex.net In article , Greg Raven wrote: >In article , cendbj@clust.hw.ac.uk >(David Johnston) wrote: >> If you assert that the Holocaust did not happen, then those who come forward >> as eyewitnesses saying that it did, and that they saw part of it, must be >> lying. Therefore, either somebody told them what to say, they all made it up, >> or they are all suffering from a mass delusion. If it is a mass >delusion, then >> it is unprecedented in history. If they all made it up, the stories show a >> remarkable consistancy. The only premise left is that it is a deliberate >hoax. >> So who started this hoax? Who kept it going? > >You are again assuming facts not in evidence. I do not "deny" the >"Holocaust." What I DO say is that the Holocaust story, as it is currently >told, contains many errors and falsehoods. You are evading the question (as well as misusing the idiom "assuming facts not in evidence"). I will reprase the question. For the words "If you assert the Holocaust did not happen," please substitute, "If you assert that homicidal gassings did not happen." (I trust you will agree that you have asserted *that*!) The remainder of the question stays as is. Now please stop evading the question and answer it. How did so many witnesses come to tell such consistent stories if the stories were false? There were too many witnesses for this to have happened by chance alone. Therefore there would have to have been a deliberate effort to communicate a false story and suborn people to tell it in place of their honest personal memories. Please provide your evidence for this. >> What did Hoess have to gain? > >To give just two examples, he had to gain 1) the cessation of the torture >to which he was subjected, and 2) the assurance that his family would not >be sent to the Soviet Union. Please provide evidence that he was 1) tortured, and 2) threatened with his family being sent to the Soviet Union. >> but was he [Hoess] tortured all the way through writing his autobiography? >> If not, >> your assertation of torture is worthless. > >We do not know the precise conditions under which Hoess was kept. However, >we do know that between the tortured testimony (which is the most often >quoted) and the outright errors, Hoess' post-war utterances on this matter >must be approached with the utmost care ... something that the >exterminationists have failed to do until very recently, when, for >example, Deborah Lipstadt and Christopher Browning effectively discarded >Hoess as proof of the Holocaust extermination story. To the best of my knowledge this is false. Lipstadt and Browning have discarded Hoess as reliable evidence of the number of people killed at Auschwitz. They have not discarded Hoess as reliable evidence of the fact that there were homicidal gassings. If you have a source which says otherwise, please cite it. Give the name of the publication, date (if a periodical), publisher and year (if a book), and page number. If you provide a quote, please quote the entire relevant paragraph(s) word for word without trying to omit or reword anything. >> No, no, no. You've got to prove they are lies. Just saying they are lies >> doesn't make them lies. And surely you mean *all*. Saying most are lies >> implies some are true. Doesn't help your case much if you admit that. > >You can prove it to yourself even without me. Read a so-called eyewitness >account. If it conflicts with physical reality, then it contains a lie. This is not true. It may contain an error. A lie is a *deliberate* statement contrary to fact. An error is an *unintentional* statement contrary to fact. Suppose, for example, I say that I ate turkey with my parents on the afternoon of Nov. 23rd. However, it is patently clear that I was nowhere near my parents at that time, but hard at work in my office. The obvious explanation for this conflict with physical reality is that I was confused about the day of month on which Thanksgiving fell - I did eat turkey with my parents, but on the 24th. My misstatement is not a lie, but an error. >As for the overall veracity of these so-called witnesses, I think you will >find that there are many parts of there stories that contain truthful >statements. However, when you get to statements dealing with the so-called >gas chambers, for which we have no physical evidence as to their >existence, False. Even Fred Leuchter found cyanide traces. That is physical evidence consistent with a claim of homicidal gassing. -- Mike Stein The above represents the Absolute Truth. POB 10420 Therefore it cannot possibly be the official Arlington, VA 22210 position of my employer. Article 19612 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!kmcvay From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay) Subject: Re: Greg reply to Dave in Scotland References: <3bdll2$14q@access4.digex.net> Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac Message-ID: <1994Dec04.015155.10944@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> Date: Sun, 04 Dec 94 01:51:55 GMT In article <3bdll2$14q@access4.digex.net> mstein@access4.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) writes: >In article , >Greg Raven wrote: >>You are again assuming facts not in evidence. I do not "deny" the >>"Holocaust." What I DO say is that the Holocaust story, as it is currently >>told, contains many errors and falsehoods. >>> What did Hoess have to gain? >>To give just two examples, he had to gain 1) the cessation of the torture >>to which he was subjected, and 2) the assurance that his family would not >>be sent to the Soviet Union. > Please provide evidence that he was 1) tortured, and 2) threatened >with his family being sent to the Soviet Union. Further, one might ask Mr. Raven to demonstrate that Hoess was tortured _after_ his detention by the British, before his trial. >>We do not know the precise conditions under which Hoess was kept. However, >>we do know that between the tortured testimony (which is the most often >>quoted) and the outright errors, Hoess' post-war utterances on this matter >>must be approached with the utmost care ... something that the >>exterminationists have failed to do until very recently, when, for >>example, Deborah Lipstadt and Christopher Browning effectively discarded >>Hoess as proof of the Holocaust extermination story. > To the best of my knowledge this is false. Lipstadt and Browning have >discarded Hoess as reliable evidence of the number of people killed at >Auschwitz. They have not discarded Hoess as reliable evidence of the fact >that there were homicidal gassings. If you have a source which says >otherwise, please cite it. Give the name of the publication, date (if a >periodical), publisher and year (if a book), and page number. If you >provide a quote, please quote the entire relevant paragraph(s) word for >word without trying to omit or reword anything. Note how Mr. Raven changes his position from "Hoess was dismissed" as a witness to "he was effectively discarded." It would seem his myopia does not extend to the refutations of his incorrect assertions about what Lipstadt and Browning had to say.. it is always fascinating to note how such claims are made, refuted, and then made again and again, as if never refuted in the first instance. >>As for the overall veracity of these so-called witnesses, I think you will >>find that there are many parts of there stories that contain truthful >>statements. However, when you get to statements dealing with the so-called >>gas chambers, for which we have no physical evidence as to their >>existence, > False. Even Fred Leuchter found cyanide traces. That is physical >evidence consistent with a claim of homicidal gassing. It is interesting to note that the defense attornies at Nuremberg were disinclined to cross-examine death camp survivors during the Soviet portion of the Nuremberg trials ("Crimes against humanity in the East" portion, which the Soviets conducted), even though they were quite happy to spend three hours in their cross-examination of General Paulis. Why does Mr. Raven suppose they would vigorously question the General, and yet remain utterly silent when confronted with survivors from Auschwitz and Treblinka? Mr. Raven's interpretation of such realities should be interesting. -- /^\__/^\ The Old Frog's Almanac / @ @ \ A Salute to That Old Frog Himse'f, Ryugen Fisher ( ) Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada \ ~~~~ / Article 19617 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!uhog.mit.edu!rutgers!rochester!casaba.srv.cs.cmu.edu!spok From: spok+@cs.cmu.edu (John Ockerbloom) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: World wide web holocaust site Date: 28 Nov 1994 22:06:34 GMT Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon Lines: 45 Message-ID: <3bdk9a$nei@casaba.srv.cs.cmu.edu> References: <1706BF417S86.DEACON@VM.TEMPLE.EDU> <3ag7s3$cp0@casaba.srv.cs.cmu.edu> <3agc4j$hse@casaba.srv.cs.cmu.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: gs1.sp.cs.cmu.edu In article , Greg Raven wrote: [I wrote:] >> > And since many of the points have been specifically deflated >> >since Raven got here, he can't claim ignorance that he's not aware he's >> >propagating falsehoods. > >You are free to believe that many (or even all) of my points have been >deflated. However, I firmly believe that any fair-minded person would see >that few if any of my points have been deflated. Can you site any specific >claims you think have been deflated? Well, yes, plenty. But since you like to deal with one piece of evidence at a time, I'll just give my first citation now: From "Auschwitz: Myths and Facts" (an IHR pamphlet): "No Documentary Evidence Many thousands of secret German documents dealing with Auschwitz were confiscated after the war by the Allies. Not a single one refers to a policy or program of extermination. In fact, the extermination story cannot be reconciled with the documentary evidence." NOTE CAREFULLY: The paragraph above is reproduced in its entirety. It states that there is no reference to any policy or program of extermination. Unlike some of Greg's posts, it does not restrict the domain of discussion to policies involving gas chambers. Since May 4, you have been presented with a number of German documents referring to policies of extermination. Most prominently presented were wartime speeches by Himmler saying that the extermination of the Jews "is in our program". Does this not refer to a policy or program of extermination? If you claim it does not, explain why Himmler's explicit references to the "extermination of the Jews" don't really refer to the extermination of the Jews. Note that stating that Himmler's speech doesn't refer to gas chambers doesn't show anything, since the paragraph I quoted from your brochure doesn't refer to gas chambers either. John Ockerbloom -- ========================================================================== ockerbloom@cs.cmu.edu 1603 Beechwood Blvd., Pittsburgh PA 15217 Article 19655 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!pipex!uunet!heifetz.msen.com!lpi.pnet.msen.com!user From: k044477@kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Mr. Raven, we have unfinished business Date: Thu, 01 Dec 1994 00:32:07 -0500 Organization: Msen, Inc. -- Ann Arbor, MI (account info: +1 313 998-4562) Lines: 45 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lpi.pnet.msen.com Mr. Raven, you appear to be back on-line. When I last exchanged email with you, about a week and a half ago, you stated you were too busy to contribute anything to the Himmler thread we had going. You said you were quite busy finishing up the Journal, and that you were going to be moving. So I told you I'd be getting back in touch with you in early December. Well, it's half an hour into December, and I just now got time to catch up on Usenet. Much to my surprise, you seem to have had enough free time to have posted a half-dozen Usenet articles. Do you now have enough time to resume the discussion of Himmler where you left off? And, as long as you're bringing up the subject of the Web: > If you are using one of the new URL-cognizant news readers, such as > NewsWatcher, you should be able to navigate to my home WWW page [...] As you're aware, Mr. Raven, you and I both are starting up our own Web sites. We each have quite a different "take" on the goings-on in alt.revisionism, and the revisionist movement in general. Since I am in favor of showing people all sides of the story, I've provided a link to your Web home page on the home page of my Web. I'm not afraid to let the user read as much as he or she desires, and to make up his or her own mind; in fact, I actively encourage people to examine your Web pages for inaccuracies. For example, see: http://www.kzoo.edu/~k044477/RUE2-RavenTrustworthy.html I've asked you in email, Mr. Raven, if you will put a link to _my_ Web site on _your_ home page. You have declined even to answer me. I now ask you again, publicly this time. Will you allow -- nay, invite, encourage -- readers of your Web pages the opportunity to see a viewpoint besides your own? And if not -- what are you afraid of? Posted and emailed. Article 19882 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!spool.mu.edu!sgiblab!wetware!kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Human Soap Date: Sun, 11 Dec 1994 08:32:34 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 297 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com "Jewish Soap" by Mark Weber One of the most lurid and slanderous Holocaust claims is the story that the Germans manufactured soap from the bodies of their victims. Although a similar charge during the First World War was exposed as a hoax almost immediately afterwards, it was nevertheless revived and widely believed during the Second. More important, this accusation was "proved" at the main Nuremberg trial of 1945-1946, and has been authoritatively endorsed by numerous historians in the decades since. In recent years, though, as part of a broad retreat from the most obviously untenable aspects of the "orthodox" extermination story, Holocaust historians have grudgingly conceded that the human soap tale is a wartime propaganda lie. In their retreat, though, these historians have tried to dismiss the soap story as a mere wartime "rumor," neglecting to mention that international Jewish organizations and then Allied governments endorsed and sanctioned this libelous canard. Wartime rumors that the Germans were manufacturing soap from the corpses of slaughtered Jews were based in part on the fact that soap bars distributed by German authorities in Jewish ghettos and camps bore the impressed initials "RIF," which many took to stand for "Rein juedisches Fett" or "Pure Jewish Fat." (It did not seem to matter that the letters were "RIF" and not "RJF.") These rumors spread so widely in 1941 and 1942 that by late 1942 German authorities in Poland and Slovakia were expressing official concern about their impact. According to a Polish source quoted in a secret wartime U.S. Army military intelligence report, for example, the Germans were operating a "human soap factory" in 1941 at Turek, Poland. "The Germans had brought thousands of Polish teachers, priests and Jews there and after extracting the blood serum from their bodies, had thrown them on large pots and melted off grease to make soap," the intelligence report added. Macabre "Jewish soap" jokes became popular in the ghettos and camps, and many non-Jews on the outside came to believe the story. When trains loaded with Jewish deportees stopped temporarily at rail stations, Poles reportedly would gleefully shout at them: "Jews to soap!" Even British prisoners of war interned at Auschwitz in 1944 testified later about the wartime rumors that corpses of gassing victims were being turned into soap there. In spite of its inherently incredible character, the soap story became an important feature of Jewish and Allied war propaganda. Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, wartime head of both the World Jewish Congress and the American Jewish Congress, publicly charged in November 1942 that Jewish corpses were being "processed into such war-vital commodities as soap, fats and fertilizer" by the Germans. He further announced that the Germans were "even exhuming the dead for the value of the corpses," and were paying fifty marks for each body. In late 1942, the Congress Weekly, published by the American Jewish Congress, editorialized that the Germans were turning Jews "by scientific methods of dissolution into fertilizer, soap and glue." An article in the same issue reported that Jewish deportees from France and Holland were being processed into "soap, glue and train oil" in at least two special factories in Germany. Typical of many other American periodicals, the influential New Republic reported in early 1943 that the Germans were "using the bodies of their Jewish victims to make soap and fertilizer in a factory at Siedlce." During June and July 1943, two prominent representatives of the Moscow-based "Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee" toured the United States and raised more than two million dollars for the Soviet war effort at a series of mass meetings. At each of these rallies, Soviet Jewish leader Solomon Mikhoels showed the crowd a bar of soap that he said was made from Jewish corpses. After the war the soap story was given important legitimacy at the main Nuremberg trial. L. N. Smirnov, Chief Counsellor of Justice for the USSR, declared to the Tribunal: ... The same base, rationalized SS technical minds which created gas chambers and murder vans, began devising such methods of complete annihilation of human bodies, which would not only conceal the traces of their crimes, but also to serve in the manufacturing of certain products. In the Danzig Anatomical Institute, semi-industrial experiments in the production of soap from human bodies and the tanning of human skin for industrial purposes were carried out. Smirnov quoted at length from an affidavit by Sigmund Mazur, an Institute employee, which was accepted as Nuremberg exhibit USSR-197. It alleged that Dr. Rudolf Spanner, the head of the Danzig Institute, had ordered the production of soap from corpses in 1943. According to Mazur's affidavit, Dr. Spanner's operation was of interest to high-ranking German officials. Education Minister Bernhard Rust and Health Leader Dr. Leonardo Conti, as well as professors from other medical institutes, came to witness Spanner's efforts. Mazur also claimed to have used the "human soap" to wash himself and his laundry. A human soap "recipe," allegedly prepared by Dr. Spanner (Nuremberg document USSR-196), was also presented. Finally, a sample of what was supposed to be a piece of "human soap" was submitted to the Nuremberg Tribunal as exhibit USSR-393. In his closing address to the Tribunal, chief British prosecutor Sir Hartley Shawcross echoed his Soviet colleague: "On occasion, even the bodies of their victims were used to make good the wartime shortage of soap." And in their final judgment, the Nuremberg Tribunal judges found that "attempts were made to utilize the fat from the bodies of the victims in the commercial manufacture of soap." It is worth emphasizing here that the "evidence" presented at the Nuremberg Tribunal for the bogus soap story was no less substantial than the "evidence" presented for the claims of mass extermination in "gas chambers." At least in the former case, an actual sample of soap supposedly made from corpses was submitted in evidence. After the war, supposed Holocaust victims were solemnly buried, in the form of soap bars, in Jewish cemeteries. In 1948, for example, four such bars wrapped in a funeral shroud were ceremoniously buried according to Jewish religious ritual at the Haifa cemetery in Israel. Other bars of "Jewish soap" have been displayed as grim Holocaust relics at the Jewish Historical Institute in Warsaw, the Stutthof Museum near Gdansk (Danzig), the Yivo Institute in New York, the Holocaust Museum in Philadelphia, the Jewish Holocaust Centre in Melbourne (Australia), and at various locations in Israel. Numerous Jews who lived in German ghettos and camps during the war helped keep the soap story alive many years later. Ben Edelbaum, for example, wrote in his 1980 memoir Growing Up in the Holocaust: Often with our rations in the ghettos, the Germans had included a bar of soap branded with initials R.J.F. which came to be known as "Rif" soap. It wasn't until the war had ended that we learned the horrible truth about the bar of soap. Had we known in the ghetto, every bar of "Rif" soap would have been accorded a sacred Jewish funeral in the cemetery at Marysin. As it was, we were completely oblivious to its origin and used the bones and flesh of our murdered loved ones to wash our bodies. Nesse Godin was transferred from a ghetto in Lithuania to the Stutthof concentration camp in the spring of 1944. In a 1983 interview, she recalled her arrival there: That day they gave us a shower and a piece of soap. After the war we found out the soap was made out of pure Jew fat, Rein Juden Fett, marked in the initials on the soap that I washed with. For all I know sometimes maybe there was a little bit of my father's fat in that soap that I washed with. How do you think I feel when I think about that? Mel Mermelstein, the former Auschwitz inmate who was featured in the sensationalized April 1991 cable television movie "Never Forget" (and who is currently suing the Institute for Historical Review and three other defendants for $11 million), declared in a 1981 sworn deposition that he and other camp inmates used soap bars made from human fat. It was an "established fact," he insisted, that the soap he washed with was made from Jewish bodies. Renowned "Nazi hunter" Simon Wiesenthal repeated the soap tale in a series of articles published in 1946 in the Austrian Jewish community paper Der Neue Weg. In the first of these he wrote: During the last weeks of March the Romanian press reported an unusual piece of news: In the small Romanian city of Folticeni twenty boxes of soap were buried in the Jewish cemetery with full ceremony and complete funeral rites. This soap had been found recently in a former German army depot. On the boxes were the initials RIF, "Pure Jewish Fat." These boxes were destined for the Waffen-SS. The wrapping paper revealed with completely cynical objectivity that this soap was manufactured from Jewish bodies. Surprisingly, the thorough Germans forgot to describe whether the soap was produced from children, girls, men or elderly persons. Wiesenthal went on: After 1942 people in the General Government [Poland] knew quite well what the RIF soap meant. The civilized world may not believe the joy with which the Nazis and their women in the General Government thought of this soap. In each piece of soap they saw a Jew who had been magically put there, and had thus been prevented from growing into a second Freud, Ehrlich or Einstein. In another article he observed: "The production of soap from human fat is so unbelievable that even some who were in concentration camps find it difficult to comprehend." Over the years, numerous supposedly reputable historians have promoted the durable soap story. Journalist-historian William L. Shirer, for example, repeated it in his best-selling work, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. Leading Soviet war propagandist Ilya Ehrenburg wrote in his postwar memoir: "I have held in my hand a cake of soap stamped with the legend 'pure Jewish soap', prepared from the corpses of people who had been destroyed. But there is no need to speak of these things: thousands of books have been written about them." A standard history studies textbook used in Canadian secondary schools, Canada: The Twentieth Century, told students that the Germans "boiled" the corpses of their Jewish victims "to make soap." The Anatomy of Nazism, a booklet published and distributed by the Zionist "Anti-Defamation League" of B'nai B'rith, stated: "The process of brutalization did not end with the mass murders themselves. Large quantities of soap were manufactured from the corpses of those murdered." A detailed 1981 work, Hitler's Death Camps, repeated the soap story in lurid detail. While noting that "some historians claim that the Nazi manufacture of soap from human fat is just a grim rumor," author Konnilyn Feig nevertheless accepted the story because "most East European camp scholars...validate the soap stories, and other kinds of bars made from humans are displayed in Eastern Europe -- I have seen many over the years." New York Rabbi Arthur Schneier repeated the tale at the opening ceremony of the largest Holocaust meeting in history. In his invocation to the "American Gathering of Jewish Holocaust Survivors," held in Washington in April 1983, the Rabbi solemnly declared: "We remember the bars of soap with the initials RJF -- Rein j|disches Fett, Pure Jewish Fat -- made from the bodies of our loved ones." In spite of all the apparently impressive evidence, the charge that the Germans manufactured soap from human beings is a falsehood, as Holocaust historians are now belatedly acknowledging. The "RIF" soap bar initials that supposedly stood for "Pure Jewish Fat" actually indicated nothing more sinister than "Reich Center for Industrial Fat Provisioning" ("Reichsstelle f|r Industrielle Fettversorgung"), a German agency responsible for wartime production and distribution of soap and washing products. RIF soap was a poor quality substitute that contained no fat at all, human or otherwise. Shortly after the war the public prosecutor's office of Flensburg, Germany, began legal proceedings against Dr. Rudolf Spanner for his alleged role in producing human soap at the Danzig Institute. But after an investigation the charge was quietly dropped. In a January 1968 letter, the office stated that its inquiry had determined that no soap from human corpses was made at the Danzig Institute during the war. More recently, Jewish historian Walter Laqueur "denied established history" by acknowledging in his 1980 book, The Terrible Secret, that the human soap story has no basis in reality. Gitta Sereny, another Jewish historian, noted in her book Into That Darkness: "The universally accepted story that the corpses were used to make soap and fertilizer is finally refuted by the generally very reliable Ludwigsburg Central Authority for Investigation into Nazi Crimes." Deborah Lipstadt, a professor of modern Jewish history, similarly "rewrote history" when she confirmed in 1981: "The fact is that the Nazis never used the bodies of Jews, or for that matter anyone else, for the production of soap." In April 1990, professor Yehuda Bauer of Israel's Hebrew University, regarded as a leading Holocaust historian, as well as Shmuel Krakowski, archives director of Israel's Yad Vashem Holocaust center, confirmed that the human soap story is not true. Camp inmates "were prepared to believe any horror stories about their persecutors," Bauer said. At the same time, though, he had the chutzpah to blame the legend on "the Nazis." In fact, blame for the soap story lies rather with individuals such as Simon Wiesenthal and Stephen Wise, organizations like the World Jewish Congress, and the victorious Allied powers, none of whom has ever apologized for promoting this vile falsehood. Why did Bauer and Krakowski decide that this was the appropriate time to officially abandon the soap story? Krakowski himself hints that a large part of the motivation for this "tactical retreat" has been to save what's left of the sinking Holocaust ship by throwing overboard the most obvious falsehoods. In the face of the growing Revisionist challenge, easily demonstrable falsehoods like the soap story have become dangerous embarrassments because they raise doubts about the entire Holocaust legend. As Krakowski put it: "Historians have concluded that soap was not made from human fat. When so many people deny the Holocaust ever happened, why give them something to use against the truth?" The bad faith of those making this calculated and belated concession to truth is shown by their failure to note that the soap myth was authoritatively "confirmed" at Nuremberg, and by their unwillingness to deal with the implications of that confirmation for the credibility of the Tribunal and other supposedly trustworthy authorities in establishing other, more fundamental aspects of the Holocaust story. The striking contrast between the prompt postwar disavowal by the British government of the infamous "human soap" lie of the First World War, and the way in which a similarly baseless propaganda story from the Second World War was officially endorsed by the victorious Allied powers and then authoritatively maintained for so many years not only points up the dispiriting lack of integrity on the part of so many Western historians, but underscores the general decline in Western ethical standards during this century. The "human soap" story demonstrates anew the tremendous impact that a wartime rumor, no matter how fantastic, can have once it has taken hold, particularly when it is disseminated as a propaganda lie by influential individuals and powerful organizations. That so many intelligent and otherwise thoughtful people could ever have seriously believed that the Germans distributed bars of soap brazenly labeled with letters indicating that they were manufactured from Jewish corpses shows how readily even the most absurd Holocaust fables can be -- and are -- accepted as fact. -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 19883 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!spool.mu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.kei.com!travelers.mail.cornell.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Jews into soap Date: Sun, 11 Dec 1994 08:38:11 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 12 Message-ID: References: <5e73WjD.declan@delphi.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com See my posting of the pamphlet "Human Soap" by Mark Weber, elsewhere in alt.revisionism. -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 19934 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!caen!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!pm005-03.dialip.mich.net!user From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Jews into soap Date: Sun, 11 Dec 1994 13:59:00 -0500 Organization: University of Michigan Lines: 561 Message-ID: References: <5e73WjD.declan@delphi.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: pm005-03.dialip.mich.net greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote: > See my posting of the pamphlet "Human Soap" by Mark Weber, elsewhere in > alt.revisionism. Mr. Raven! You're back. So you _are_ still reading alt.revisionism. And posting to it, too. Would you do me the courtesy of responding to my questions about Himmler's Poznan speeches? I'll repost them, below, in case you've lost them. These questions, a summary of the faults in your logic, were posted over a month ago, on November 9th. And these are not the only faults which need attending to. These are simply the core issues, the problems which you most need to address if you are to make your case. There is plenty on the periphery that also needs answers from you, Mr. Raven, but which I am willing to overlook so as not to overburden you with trivia. As I wrote to you on November 15th, when I emailed you a copy of this November 9th article: I have a whole lot of questions for you, and things that I'd like you to comment on, that I'm withholding. I'm trying to prioritize things. And as I see it, the Himmler speeches and their impact on your view of revisionism have top priority. It would help if you would make your intentions clear. If you intend to answer these questions eventually, please let me know so I don't give up on you. If not, please let me know so I can call the case closed and get on to something else. Thank you. I point out that I have not heard back from you, Mr. Raven, since then. Do you intend to answer me, or don't you? Here, for at least the third time, is the "major issues" list. Newsgroups: misc.test,alt.revisionism From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie R. McCarthy) Subject: The major issues which Mr. Raven has not addressed Message-ID: <1994Nov9.175539.4199@hobbes.kzoo.edu> Followup-To: alt.revisionism Date: Wed, 9 Nov 1994 17:55:39 GMT Lines: 525 There are many issues which Greg Raven has yet to address. The following are the few of them which I think are important enough to warrant his immediate attention. To the reader who's encountering some of these for the first time, it may appear that I'm picking nits. My defense to that charge is that Mr. Raven, by his persistently ambiguous phrasing and pernicious refusals to pay attention to oft-repeated arguments, is making this take a hell of a lot longer than it should. In other words, I'm trying to nail him down, but he keeps squirming away. I dislike having to get obsessive about it, but I don't see any other way to keep him from dodging the issues. At this point Mr. Raven and I need to work through them before moving on. He's painted himself into a logical corner that's so provocative, he simply mustn't drop it without explaining himself -- or at least, not if I have anything to say about it. That corner is, simply put, the fact that he has asked for a single piece of evidence that proved the Holocaust. He probably didn't think he'd get one. But he was given Himmler's October 1943 Poznan speeches, which are a brick wall in the face of Holocaust-denial: the man said, quote, "'The Jewish people are being exterminated,' says every Party member, 'it is in our program -- elimination of the Jews, extermination, will do.'" Pretty much says it all, doesn't it? There's not much that a revisionist can do to squirm out of that one, and Mr. Raven has been forced to do some serious squirming. I want to eliminate that, by pinning him down as precisely as possible. After I summarize the issues, point by point, I will include some text from articles I've previously posted, to refresh Mr. Raven's memory on some particular points. The most-important issues, as I see them, are as follows: (1) Setting aside the issue of the _gas chambers_ to address the issue of the _policy_ to exterminate European Jewry. (a) Has Mr. Raven indeed admitted that the two issues -- the gas chambers and the extermination plan -- _can_ be dealt with separately? (It seems that he has, but I would like this stated explicitly.) (b) _Will_ he join me in addressing the issue of the plan before turning attention to the issue of the gas chambers? (If it will help, I hereby pledge that, after the issue of the plan is settled to our satisfaction, I will eagerly and immediately address the issue of the gas chambers. Mr. Raven need not fear that I am running away.) (c) Has he dropped the strawman argument that the gas chambers were part of the plan? If not: (1) Why does he admit that, "regardless" of whether the plan existed, the existence of the gas chambers must be proved separately? (2) If his position is merely that the gas chambers were not part of the Nazis' plan, then he will be surprised to learn that every historian in the world agrees with him. He and the historians do disagree on two other, more primary issues: the fact that the gas chambers were used to murder people by the thousands, and the fact that the Nazis had a plan to exterminate European Jewry. Is he willing to discuss these bones of contention, or not? (2) Himmler's Poznan speeches. (a) Will Mr. Raven drop the charge of forgery (which he never actually raised in the first place)? (b) Does he see that, in order to prove a non-physical entity like a "plan" or "policy," the best evidence is certain to be non-physical evidence like written or recorded testimony? If not: (1) Exactly how would Mr. Raven attempt to prove _any_ "plan or policy," other than consulting what the overseers of that plan said about it to their underlings? That is, what evidence could be more convincing than a recorded speech, in which the Reichsfuehrer-SS explicitly says to the officers under him, "the Jewish people will be exterminated, this is very obvious, it is in our program"? (Note that this is not a rhetorical question!) (c) Will he admit that the December 15th speech provides little or no insight into Himmler's meaning for the October 4th speech? If not: (1) How does he explain the similarities of the December 15th speech not to the October _4th_ speech, but to the October _6th_ speech? (2) Why does he think Himmler's comments in December about "Jewish commissars and communists" have any impact on his saying, in October, that "das juedische Volk" -- the Jewish people as a whole -- were being exterminated? (d) Are there any other arguments which Mr. Raven wishes to raise? (3) "Physical evidence." (a) Mr. Raven has stated: "in order to prove that [Nazis] used gas chambers...you must produce one of the gas chambers." (1) Presumably Mr. Raven knows where the gas chambers are. He is also aware of the myriad testimonies about the use to which those chambers were put. Yet he still demands that the gas chambers be "produced." Something's not clicking for him between the testimonies about gassing and the rooms in which the gassings occurred. What is this conceptual barrier? That is, why does he not accept that (for example) the Leichenkeller of Krema II was used to commit mass murder? (2) What exactly does he mean by "produce"? (a) Will he accept a map to the sites of the gas chambers? (b) Will he accept a picture of the (remains of) the gas chambers, as they look today? (c) Will he accept blueprints of the gas chambers? (d) If none of the above: what would he accept? (b) He has stated, many times, that testimony is not evidence. His meaning is that only physical evidence is meaningful. (1) Authorities on historiography have been cited to demonstrate that he is dead wrong on this point. Can he cite one authority that backs him up? If not, why should we believe him; what are his qualifications as a historian? Here is text from articles I've previously posted, explaining my reasoning on these points. Unless I'm mistaken, Mr. Raven has neither responded to nor acknowledged a single word of it: -------- (1)(a-b) -------- Greg Raven has seen fit to set aside the question of whether or not the Nazis used gas chambers in their plan to exterminate European Jewry. He agrees that the question of whether or not they planned to exterminate the Jews can be separated from the question of whether or not they used gas chambers in the fulfillment of that plan. Lest you think I'm making this up, I present his own words: To restate my position, regardless of whether the Nazis had a policy ^^^^^^^^^^ or plan to exterminate the Jews, in order to prove that they used gas chambers, you must produce one of the gas chambers that they used to commit this crime. Greg Raven, 31 Oct 1994 (id AADAEA609668E40B7@greg-ihr.earthlink.net) Regardless of whether the policy to exterminate Jews generally existed, the question of whether the gas chambers existed must be answered separately. I agree with Mr. Raven completely on this point. Of course, this cuts both ways. That is, regardless of whether the _gas chambers_ existed, the question of the existence of the Nazi _policy_ to exterminate European Jewry must also be answered separately. And I think it's best to tackle that question first, for several reasons. Of course, the obvious one is that, if there was no plan to exterminate anyone, then what the hell would gas chambers be used for anyway? Almost as obvious is the fact that we've been discussing some evidence for that plan for quite some time now: Himmler's October 1943 speeches at a little Polish town called Poznan. ------ (1)(c) ------ The strawman, in this case, is Mr. Raven's demand that someone produce evidence that proves that the Nazis had a plan to exterminate Jews _specifically_ in gas chambers. He's going to have to wait a long time for that one, because that _wasn't_ their plan. Their plan was to kill them however possible, and, through trial and error, they found out that gas chambers were the best way to do the job. And this has been explained to Mr. Raven before, several times. For example, I put it this way two weeks ago: Though gassing did turn out to be the most effective means of killing, that was not part of the plan or policy. To take a more modern example, one might ask whether the U.S. Government has a plan or policy to repel a possible Iraqi invasion of Kuwait with A-10 "Tank Killer" aircraft. Certainly the government is currently moving against such an invasion. But that particular model of aircraft, though it plays a pivotal role in the President's agenda, is nowhere mentioned in the President's announcements of our policy toward Iraq. (Jamie McCarthy, 18 October 1994, ) So what does Mr. Raven write to Dr. Keren? ...the revisionist position is that no Jews were killed in gas chambers as part of a Nazi plan or policy. Is this the best evidence you have that the Nazis had a plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in gas chambers? Whether or not Mr. Raven will give up this strawman remains to be seen. I would hope that at some point he would notice that people are seeing right through it. But again, only time will tell. -------- (2)(a-d) -------- So, where did we leave off this discussion of the Poznan speeches? Well, it's a little hard to say, because the discussion got fragmented. As I recall, Mr. Raven had dropped most of the objections he'd previously raised. My recollections could be wrong -- even with the aid of my archives, it's difficult to figure out exactly what went on. Though I don't think I'm leaving anything out, I welcome corrections to my imperfect memory. Mr. Raven appears to have dropped these three objections: (1) That the speeches might be a forgery. (Mr. Raven hinted that he might make a case for this, but then dropped it later.) (2) That a later speech by Himmler provided "context" for the October speeches, showing that Himmler was really talking about shooting Jews, not gassing them. (In the later speech he is specifically talking about Jewish commissars and communists, not about "das juedische Volk," as he says in the October speeches. So this isn't really an argument. I've expressed my befuddlement at this logic several times. When I explained my reasoning on October 13th and 20th, Mr. Raven had no reply. If he wishes to bring this objection up again, he's welcome to do so; I'll again post my reasoning at the end of this article, and he may reply to that.) (3) That Himmler's speeches, being speeches, are not evidence. Rather, they are merely "testimony." (I'm not sure what we are supposed to do with this one. How could I possibly prove the existence of a "plan or policy," except by presenting oral or written declarations about it? Plans and policies are not solid items. You can't pick them up, or weigh them, or take pictures of them. There can be no physical evidence of a policy, except recorded or written declarations about it -- the only way to document it is to document what the planners said about it. Himmler was the Number Two man in Germany, and he was the one in charge of the Final Solution. What source could be better? Again, when I put forth that reasoning, Mr. Raven had no answer; again, if he'd like to continue with this objection, he's welcome to respond to my previous text, which I'll post at the end of this article.) And Mr. Raven's final objection was this one: (4) That Himmler's Poznan speeches, though they may provide evidence of a Nazi plan to exterminate European Jewry, do not have any impact on the existence of a Nazi plan to exterminate European Jewry in _gas chambers_, because they not specifically mention gas chambers. And we've agreed, now, to put aside the question of the gas chambers, so that we may focus solely on the plan to exterminate European Jewry. This objection, then, is moot. I look forward to seeing whether Mr. Raven is capable of coming up with any further objections to the Himmler speeches. If not, I think we must assume that he has admitted that the Nazis had a plan to exterminate European Jewry. Once we all agree on the existence of the plan, I'll be happy to move on to the means that they used to carry out that plan, including the gas chambers, which Mr. Raven seems eager to discuss. Indeed, I look forward to moving on -- I'm always looking for new areas in which to demonstrate that Mr. Raven is being fraudulent and deceitful. --------- (2)(b)(1) --------- What evidence does Mr. Raven think there should be? If he will provide us with a list of evidence that should be there, but is missing, then his claim will have some merit. Otherwise, it would seem that he's merely latched on to an excuse. I hasten to point out that the reason that I have not provided physical evidence to contradict Mr. Raven's thesis, is that the thesis' central concern is the Nazi plan of extermination. Evidence for a single gas chamber certainly does not point to a plan -- if I had provided such, then I'm sure Mr. Raven would be the first to point that out to me! If his thesis were that the gas chambers did not exist, I would provide physical evidence (as well as testimony) that they did. --------- (2)(c)(1) --------- Perhaps I don't understand what you meant by "other versions of the speech given around that same time." Is it your claim that Himmler was giving nearly the same speech, and simply chose to rephrase that part slightly differently, keeping the same meaning? If so, you may be a little confused. There were two speeches at Poznan, on the 4th and 6th of October. The excerpt from the December speech you quote sounds a lot like a section of the October 6th speech, in which he asks "how was it with the women and children?" and explains that they had to die as well. But that's different from the October 4th speech. And it's the October 4th speech that I'm quoting: "'The Jewish people will be exterminated,' says every Party member, 'this is very obvious, it is in our program -- elimination of the Jews, extermination, will do.'" Different versions of the October 6th speech will provide insight as to nuances of meaning in _that_ speech, of course, but will have no impact on the October 4th speech. --------- (2)(c)(2) --------- The snippet you posted from December 1943 was of Himmler talking about his actions in villages, against what he referred to as "partisans or Jewish commissars." He stated that, in these villages, he was killing the partisans and Jewish commissars down to the women and children. Now, I guess your claim is that, because Himmler said in December that he was killing Jewish commissars (and others) in villages, then in October he could not possibly have been speaking of what was going on in gas chambers in Auschwitz. Do I have that right? If I do, then I really don't see how you expect anyone to buy that. It simply makes no sense. Perhaps you could try explaining it again. Part of the problem may be what you think Himmler meant by "partisans and Jewish commissars." Since Himmler explicitly said in October that they were killing every Jew, then his December speech would only be relevant if he were referring to Jews as a whole. But he was not -- he was referring to "Jewish commissars." Those being a subset of Jews as a whole. Now, I'll grant you that the Nazis were trying to exterminate Jewish commissars, because that follows directly from the fact that they were trying to exterminate Jews as a whole. But I don't see how Himmler's _affirming_ that Jewish commissars were being killed in any way _denies_ that the Jews as a whole were being killed. Is it your claim that, because the Jewish commissars (and others) were not being killed in gas chambers, that therefore no Jews were being killed in gas chambers? Again, I don't see how you could expect anyone to buy that; it makes no sense. ------ (3)(a) ------ I still don't understand exactly what you're getting at. Please be absolutely precise, Mr. Raven. I must "produce one of the gas chambers"? Does that mean I have to pick it up with a crane and drop it at your doorstep? Presumably not. And you've already made very plain that you simply will not accept any spoken or written words by anyone regarding the gas chambers, no matter who. Even the commandant of the camp, who clearly explains the gassing process over and over, is simply not acceptable to you. You don't want to see or hear anything that anyone wrote or said. Well, that limits our options, doesn't it? Will you allow me to give you a map so you can take a plane, train, and bus to Auschwitz, and see them for yourself? Will you allow me to show you pictures of how the gas chambers look today? Those won't really prove anything -- they're pretty well demolished. Will you allow me to show you blueprints of the gas chambers? Granted, the blueprints don't say "gas chamber" in German across the top; they used code words to describe them. Nevertheless, the blueprints exist. Will you allow me to show you documents produced during the war, written by Nazis for Nazis, that describe what's happening in the gas chambers? And, what would you like to see that's missing from the above list? What would it take to convince you? In short: what exactly do you mean by "produce one of the gas chambers"? ------ (3)(b) ------ Mr. Raven, you make two points.... The first is that "things that people said" are not evidence. This is rubbish and nonsense. Have you examined the long article by Chris Hoover regarding testimony and the historical process? If so, why do you reject that oral and written statements are evidence? If not, don't you think you owe it to your readers to do so? ------ (3)(b) ------ Mr. Raven still is confused about the role that testimony plays in the historical process. He still maintains that it is not evidence; at one point he asks for "evidence (not testimony, mind you)." In my earlier message, my comments on this topic were: Regarding speeches not being evidence, I have two replies. The first is that, indeed, speeches most certainly are evidence that historians use to evaluate what happened at some point in history. Christopher Hoover wrote a marvelous discussion of how historians use oral testimony, and he should know. His father, a professional historian, is [one of the authors] of the 1975 book _The Practice of Oral History_. Mr. Raven's response: I will agree that "oral history" is a type of history, but it is hardly unimpeachable. Impeachment is the process of bringing to trial. All evidence is "tried" by historians, because all evidence is evaluated for its validity and reliability. Thus no sort of evidence is "unimpeachable"; it is all "impeached" as a matter of course. If Mr. Raven has a case to make against oral history, then he should make it. He continued: I would be more inclined to accept an oral history about something of little import, or of something that could not possibly have any evidence. However, the construction and use of multiple homicidal gas chambers for the destruction of hundreds of thousands of human beings cannot be said to be such a trivial matter that no physical evidence exists. He here provides two criteria, one of which must be met before he will accept testimony. Why has he chosen these two? What's his reasoning? He doesn't offer any. Perhaps he should read the book co-authored by Chris Hoover's father, to determine whether real historians use similar criteria. Mr. Raven has no degree in history, and yet he offers only his unsupported opinion. Why should that count more than that of a historian, let alone four historians, who have years of study, research, and work in the trenches under their collective belts? His first criterion for acceptance of oral evidence -- matters of little import -- is bizarrely interesting. Why should historians play by one set of rules for small matters and another for large? Odd. It is worth noting the life of Huey Long is hardly of "little import" to any historian of 20th Century American politics. And yet, one of the most significant works on his life, T. Harry Williams' biography, is based entirely on oral accounts. In this particular instance, oral history is the "type of history" that wins Pulitzer Prizes. It is further worth noting that to the historian of Indian-White relations in the 19th century, the Minnesota Sioux War of 1862 is hardly of "little import." And yet, hardly a single significant historical work of that war exists that doesn't rely heavily on oral accounts, and rightly so. Of course, they also rely heavily on documentary records from federal officials, Indian Agents, missionaries, etc. -- but many of _them_ are based on personal impressions as well. In any event, oral and documentary evidence do not cancel each other out here -- they can be, and should be, quite complementary. Both documentary and physical evidence on the life of Huey Long exist. The same is true of the Minnesota Sioux War. By what historiographic authority would Mr. Raven presume to demand that oral testimony not be used in researching the historical record regarding these events? Or, if he would not make such demands regarding these two issues, then why is he applying a _different_ standard to the Holocaust? And his second criterion is telling. Mr. Raven is saying that he will not accept testimony unless it regards something "that could not possibly have any evidence." Now, of course, there is a fair amount of physical evidence for the gas chambers. The best of it, in my opinion, is the simple fact that the Nazis dynamited the Auschwitz gas chambers as the Russians approached. Why would they blow them up if they had nothing to hide? Why blow up only the homicidal gas chambers, and not anything else at the camp? But that act of destruction, and the dismantling of the gas chambers prior, removed most of the physical evidence that was there before. Does he expect there could possibly be any evidence for the gas chambers, after they had been blown up? What about the Reinhard camps' gas chambers, after they were dismantled? -- Jamie McCarthy Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu AppleLink: j.mccarthy "What is wrong with admiring Adolf Hitler?" - Jack Wikoff Article 19956 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail From: mstein@access1.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Human Soap Date: 12 Dec 1994 01:21:30 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Lines: 98 Message-ID: <3cgq5a$pjk@access1.digex.net> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: access1.digex.net In article , Greg Raven wrote: >According to a Polish source quoted in a secret wartime U.S. Army military >intelligence report, for example, the Germans were operating a "human soap >factory" in 1941 at Turek, Poland. "The Germans had brought thousands of >Polish teachers, priests and Jews there and after extracting the blood >serum from their bodies, had thrown them on large pots and melted off >grease to make soap," the intelligence report added. I find it interesting to see that the first allegation appears not to have come from a Jewish source. >After the war the soap story was given important legitimacy at the main >Nuremberg trial. [...] >Smirnov quoted at length from an affidavit by Sigmund Mazur, an Institute >employee, which was accepted as Nuremberg exhibit USSR-197. It alleged >that Dr. Rudolf Spanner, the head of the Danzig Institute, had ordered the >production of soap from corpses in 1943. According to Mazur's affidavit, >Dr. Spanner's operation was of interest to high-ranking German officials. >Education Minister Bernhard Rust and Health Leader Dr. Leonardo Conti, as >well as professors from other medical institutes, came to witness >Spanner's efforts. Mazur also claimed to have used the "human soap" to >wash himself and his laundry. > >A human soap "recipe," allegedly prepared by Dr. Spanner (Nuremberg >document USSR-196), was also presented. Finally, a sample of what was >supposed to be a piece of "human soap" was submitted to the Nuremberg >Tribunal as exhibit USSR-393. Of course, Weber is either not bright enough or honest enough to recognize that the story told by Mazur is significantly different from the RIF story - above all by being an eyewitness account, but also by being a laboratory experiment in 1944 rather than mass commercial production in 1942 - and requires separate refutation. >A detailed 1981 work, Hitler's Death Camps, repeated the soap story in >lurid detail. Feig, of course, also gives enough information for an honest and intelligent person to know that there are two separate soap stories, and refuting the RIF story (for which no real evidence has only been found, only rumor) does not refute the Mazur testimony (which is first-person, not rumor). Revisionists have kept claiming that the Mazur testimony is false. I have been asking for the refutation of the Mazur testimony for a couple of months now, and nobody has provided anything. Thus I am quite interested in the following paragraph, which is the first time I have ever seen any claim of evidence related directly to the Danzig Institute story. >Shortly after the war the public prosecutor's office of Flensburg, >Germany, began legal proceedings against Dr. Rudolf Spanner for his >alleged role in producing human soap at the Danzig Institute. But after an >investigation the charge was quietly dropped. In a January 1968 letter, >the office stated that its inquiry had determined that no soap from human >corpses was made at the Danzig Institute during the war. I would be very interested in obtaining a copy of that letter. As I have always said, I have no need to believe in this; rather, in order to disbelieve sworn testimony I have a need for some actual evidence which contradicts it. I will be quite happy to acknowledge that the Danzig Institute soap story is refuted once I see the documented evidence which shows that Mazur was lying. All of the refutation of human-fat soap I have seen in the past has involved the "RIF" soap. >Gitta Sereny, another Jewish historian, noted in her book Into That >Darkness: "The universally accepted story that the corpses were used to >make soap and fertilizer is finally refuted by the generally very >reliable Ludwigsburg Central Authority for Investigation into Nazi Crimes." Again, did the Ludwigsburg Authority refute the RIF story, the Mazur story, or both? I have no problem if they did; I just want to know what their reasons were. The same goes for all other mentions of refutations of "the" soap story. Obviously the refutation of a 1941 or 1942 story about bars of soap labeled "RIF" cannot serve to refute testimony about events in 1944 and bars of soap not labeled "RIF." So presumably there must be some other testimony which refutes Mazur. I'd just like to know what it is, and also why I always have such problems getting answers when I ask for what that refutation consists of? If it really exists, why don't the revisionists show it and close the issue forever, rather than writing in a way which leaves them open to suspicion that they may be distorting or lying about sources? Sadly there have been too many documented examples of revisionists doing exactly that for me to take this claim of a letter at face value. Surely Greg Raven can see the reasonableness of this request. -- Mike Stein The above represents the Absolute Truth. POB 10420 Therefore it cannot possibly be the official Arlington, VA 22210 position of my employer. Article 20185 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!news.unb.ca!UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA From: Keith Morrison Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: From IHR WWW Site: Was Encampment Justified Date: 19 DEC 94 06:29:10 AST Organization: The University of New Brunswick Lines: 26 Sender: usenet@UNB.CA Message-ID: <19DEC94.07005256.0046@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> References: <3cl5j8$one@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <3cm7e6$ed9@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3cn62f$f73@agate.berkeley.edu> <3cnf8g$e4k@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3cnfhf$1299@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: unbvm1.csd.unb.ca In article greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes: > > The file in question is one that someone gave me a couple years ba ck, >and I thought that it, while flawed, does make one stop and think. About what? That article was located on your homepage (sorry about the mixup but to most people here Greg Raven=IHR is a valid equality) with some other material that you apparently endorse, therefore, without too much of a leap of logic, it would seem that you endorse it too. Now, what does it say about you that you *admit you knew it was flawed* and left it without _any_ sort comment, even a "the information might be inaccurate in places". My god, the whole thing was a piece of drek. Flawed? Try idiotic, baseless, even gawdawful-what-a-moron-roll-on-the-floor-laughing ridiculous. The only thinking that article promotes is thinking about Greg Raven's agenda. -- Keith Morrison t08o@unb.ca Why do they attack Mighty Morphin Power Rangers and leave Barney alone? Article 20190 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!news.unb.ca!UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA From: Keith Morrison Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Greg's Back! (was Re: Seven Questions) Date: 19 DEC 94 08:17:48 AST Organization: The University of New Brunswick Lines: 16 Sender: usenet@UNB.CA Message-ID: <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: unbvm1.csd.unb.ca In article greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes: I am so honoured you have answered me. I would, however, rather you answer to questions put to you repeatedly since May the 4th, 1994, in a post that I've seen repeated multiple times since September but which you seem inevitably to fail answering. Since you obviously have the time to answer me, surely you can spare the but few moments it will take for your vast knowledge and historiographic skills to reply. -- Keith Morrison Winner, Worst Redundant Movie Title: t08o@unb.ca "I Was a 16 Year Old Teenage Alien from Outer Space" Article 20197 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!casaba.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!rutgers!dziuxsolim.rutgers.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail From: mstein@access4.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: From IHR WWW Site: Was Encampment Justified Date: 19 Dec 1994 09:26:36 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Lines: 27 Message-ID: <3d456s$j9l@access4.digex.net> References: <3cl5j8$one@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <3cnfhf$1299@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> <15DEC94.15132694.0206@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> NNTP-Posting-Host: access4.digex.net In article , Greg Raven wrote: >In article <15DEC94.15132694.0206@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA>, Keith Morrison > wrote: >[text deleted] >> Second, it is really from the IHR Web site. > >Utterly wrong. The IHR has no Web site. Period. As someone else pointed out, the fact that you have 'greg.ihr' as your ^^^ logon name, plus your constant ads for IHR materials in your .signature file, do give the impression that you speak for the IHR when you post. In the Usenet community, there is a tradition of putting a disclaimer in one's .signature file to make clear that the views expressed are those of the poster personally, not the organization. Perhaps you should place in your .signature file something like the following: "The above represents the views of Greg Raven, and is not endorsed by the Institute for Historical Review. All facts contained herein are strictly accidental." -- Mike Stein The above represents the Absolute Truth. POB 10420 Therefore it cannot possibly be the official Arlington, VA 22210 position of my employer. Article 20200 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!kmcvay From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay) Subject: Re: Greg's Back! (was Re: Seven Questions) References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac Message-ID: <1994Dec21.195757.20767@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> Date: Wed, 21 Dec 94 19:57:57 GMT In article <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA>, Keith Morrison comments to Mr. Raven: >I am so honoured you have answered me. I would, however, rather you >answer to questions put to you repeatedly since May the 4th, 1994, >in a post that I've seen repeated multiple times since September but >which you seem inevitably to fail answering. The problem, it would seem, lies with Mr. Raven's myopia. No matter how often the article (May 4th, 1994) has been published here (at least a dozen times), or how often it has been emailed to Mr. Raven (at least twice, with confirmation of receipt), Mr. Raven simply cannot "find" the article. I have thought of approaching the CNIB, in the hope that they might be able to produce a Braille version of the article for us. Even the LARGE PRINT version seems to be beyond Mr. Raven's visual ability, but perhaps Braille would do the trick. (Perhaps we should produce a Talking Book version, and deliver it to Mr. Raven in person, along with a cassette recorder, so he could address it without having to strain his eyes.) By the way, the article in question will be published again, on the 4th. of January - the eighth anniversary, so to speak, of its original appearance. Watch for it, Mr. Raven. -- "However, it is sophistry to proclaim that something must have happened a certain way because your `reason' demands it." (Greg Raven, Institute for Historical Review) Article 20230 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!news.cs.indiana.edu!mozo.cc.purdue.edu!cidmac.ecn.purdue.edu!smullins From: smullins@cidmac.ecn.purdue.edu (Scott H Mullins) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: From IHR WWW Site: Was Encampment Justified Date: 19 Dec 1994 16:07:32 GMT Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network Lines: 25 Distribution: world,local Message-ID: <3d4b44$cor@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> References: <3cnf8g$e4k@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3cnfhf$1299@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: cidmac.ecn.purdue.edu In article greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes: [del] >Well, I don't know who Keith Morrison is, but I can assure you that this >item did not come from the IHR. In case you haven't contacted my home page >yourself, you should know that my home page is MY home page, not the >IHR's. Then you should remove "IHR" from the user id. Otherwise, it seems fair to assume that either "ihr" is your last name or is the acronym of a group to which you belong and which authorizes your use of their name in conjunction with your own. > They do not pay for it, monitor it, condone it, contribute to it, >etc. The file in question is one that someone gave me a couple years back, >and I thought that it, while flawed, does make one stop and think. About the degree of mental instability of anyone who can take it seriously for more than a nanosecond? -- Scott smullins@ecn.purdue.edu Article 20234 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: From IHR WWW Site: Was Encampment Justified Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 22:10:47 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: <3cl5j8$one@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <3cm7e6$ed9@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3cn62f$f73@agate.berkeley.edu> <3cnf8g$e4k@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3cnfhf$1299@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article <3cnfhf$1299@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca>, jmorris@gpu2.srv.ualberta.ca (John Morris) wrote: > Well, I checked; it came from Keith's account. So unless Keith is > pulling our legs, this is a real article from IHR. Well, I don't know who Keith Morrison is, but I can assure you that this item did not come from the IHR. In case you haven't contacted my home page yourself, you should know that my home page is MY home page, not the IHR's. They do not pay for it, monitor it, condone it, contribute to it, etc. The file in question is one that someone gave me a couple years back, and I thought that it, while flawed, does make one stop and think. -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20235 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: From IHR WWW Site: Was Encampment Justified Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 22:12:09 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 16 Message-ID: References: <3cl5j8$one@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <3cm7e6$ed9@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3cn62f$f73@agate.berkeley.edu> <3cnf8g$e4k@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3cnfhf$1299@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> <15DEC94.15132694.0206@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article <15DEC94.15132694.0206@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA>, Keith Morrison wrote: [text deleted] > Second, it is really from the IHR Web site. Utterly wrong. The IHR has no Web site. Period. -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20236 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Seven Questions for a Revisionist that we'd love to see answered Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 22:22:38 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 70 Message-ID: References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca>, t08o@leda.sun.csd.unb.ca (Keith Morrison) wrote: > Seven Questions for a Revisionist > > > 1. Do you believe that the Nazi government of Germany was responsibe > for the deaths of several million people through the use of, but > not restricted to, starvation, shooting, lethal injection and gas > chambers? No. > 2. Do you believe that the Soviet government was responsible for the > deaths of an undetermined number of civilians within its own borders > through the use of, but not restricted to, starvation and shooting? Yes. > 3. Do you believe that the government of China was responsible for the > deaths of an undetermined number of civilians within its own borders > through the use of, but not restricted to, starvation and shooting? Yes. > 4. If you answered "yes" to any or all of questions 1, 2 and 3, would it > be fair to say that you believe that governments are capable of such > crimes? Yes. > 5. If you answered "no" to all of questions 1, 2 and 3, why do you believe > that _all_ of these events did not happen? n/a > 6. If you answered "no" to question 4, how do you explain your belief in > the existance of such events with your conviction such events are not > possible? n/a > 7. If you answered "no" to question 1 and "yes" to question 4 and either > or both of questions 2 and 3, why do you disagree with established > history that says the events in question took place _and_ your belief > that other, similar, crimes are possible and have happened? This question conflates different topics. First, historiography is not fact. Historiography is what we humans say about what has happened in the past. We can be wrong, and when we determine that we have been wrong, we must correct those wrongs. Sometimes, political and other pressures stand between more accurate accounts of the past and the commonly accepted ones. These pressures do not change what happened, only what is commonly said. Revisionists have investigated many "Holocaust" claims and found them to be exaggerated or just plain false. It may not be polite to point out these errors, but that does not make the errors somehow truthful. Second, the wording of your first question is substantively different from the wording of questions two and three. Your question seven implies equivalence where there is none. -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20237 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: address for www site? where? Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 22:25:41 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 19 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article , jwatson@jill.reno.nv.us (Jerry Watson) wrote: > What is the address for the IHR WWW site? There is no IHR Web site, but you will find some IHR materials at my Web site, which is: http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20238 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Auschwitz Myths and Facts Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 22:28:13 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 417 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com Auschwitz: Myths and Facts by Mark Weber Nearly everyone has heard of Auschwitz, the German concentration camp where great numbers of Jews and others were reportedly exterminated in gas chambers during the Second World War. Auschwitz is widely regarded as the most terrible Nazi extermination center. This image, however, cannot be reconciled with the facts. Scholars challenge Holocaust story Astonishing as it may seem, more and more historians and engineers have been challenging the widely accepted Auschwitz story. These "revisionist" scholars do not dispute the fact that large numbers of Jews were deported to the camp, or that many died there, particularly of typhus and other diseases. But the compelling evidence they present shows that Auschwitz was not an extermination center and that the story of mass killings in "gas chambers" is a myth. The Auschwitz camps The Auschwitz camp complex was set up in 1940 in what is now south-central Poland. Large numbers of Jews were deported there between 1942 and mid-1944. The main camp was known as Auschwitz I. Birkenau, or Auschwitz II, was supposedly the main extermination center, and Monowitz, or Auschwitz III, was a large industrial center where gasoline was produced from coal. In addition there were dozens of smaller satellite camps devoted to the war economy. Four Million Victims? At the postwar Nuremberg Tribunal, the Allies charged that the Germans exterminated four million people at Auschwitz. This figure, which was invented by the Soviets, was uncritically accepted for many years. It often appeared in major American newspapers and magazines, for example. (note 1) Today no reputable historian, not even those who generally accept the extermination story, believes this figure. Israeli Holocaust historian Yehuda Bauer said in 1989 that it is time to finally acknowledge the familiar four million figure is a deliberate myth. In July 1990 the Auschwitz State Museum in Poland, along with Israel's Yad Vashem Holocaust Center, suddenly announced that altogether perhaps one million people (both Jews and non-Jews) died there. Neither institution would say how many of these people were killed, nor were any estimates given of the numbers of those supposedly gassed. (note 2) One prominent Holocaust historian, Gerald Reitlinger, has estimated that perhaps 700,000 or so Jews perished at Auschwitz. While even these lower figures are incorrect, they show how the Auschwitz story has changed drastically over the years. Bizarre Tales At one time it was seriously claimed that Jews were systematically electrocuted at Auschwitz. American newspapers, citing a Soviet eyewitness report from liberated Auschwitz, told readers in February 1945 that the methodical Germans had killed Jews there using an "electric conveyor belt on which hundreds of persons could be electrocuted simultaneously [and] then moved on into furnaces. They were burned almost instantly, producing fertilizer for nearby cabbage fields." (note 3) And at the Nuremberg Tribunal, chief U.S. prosecutor Robert Jackson charged that the Germans used a "newly invented" device to instantaneously "vaporize" 20,000 Jews near Auschwitz "in such a way that there was no trace left of them." (note 4) No reputable historian now accepts either of these fanciful tales. The Hoess "Confession" A key Holocaust document is the "confession" of former Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Hoess of April 5, 1946, which was submitted by the U.S. prosecution at the main Nuremberg trial. (note 5) Although it is still widely cited as solid proof for the Auschwitz extermination story, it is actually a false statement that was obtained by torture. Many years after the war, British military intelligence sergeant Bernard Clarke described how he and five other British soldiers tortured the former commandant to obtain his "confession." Hoess himself privately explained his ordeal in these words: "Certainly, I signed a statement that I killed two and half million Jews. I could just as well have said that it was five million Jews. There are certain methods by which any confession can be obtained, whether it is true or not." (note 6) Even historians who generally accept the Holocaust extermination story now acknowledge that many of the specific statements made in the Hoess "affidavit" are simply not true. For one thing, no serious scholar now claims that anything like two and a half or three million people perished in Auschwitz. The Hoess "affidavit" further alleges that Jews were already being exterminated by gas in the summer of 1941 at three other camps: Belzec, Treblinka and Wolzek. The "Wolzek" camp mentioned by Hoess is a total invention. No such camp existed, and the name is no longer mentioned in Holocaust literature. Moreover, the story these days by those who believe in the Holocaust legend is that gassings of Jews did not begin at Auschwitz, Treblinka, or Belzec until sometime in 1942. No Documentary Evidence Many thousands of secret German documents dealing with Auschwitz were confiscated after the war by the Allies. Not a single one refers to a policy or program of extermination. In fact, the extermination story cannot be reconciled with the documentary evidence. Many Jewish Inmates Unable to Work For example, it is often claimed that all Jews at Auschwitz who were unable to work were immediately killed. Jews who were too old, young, sick, or weak were supposedly gassed on arrival, and only those who could be worked to death were temporarily kept alive. But the evidence shows that, in fact, a very high percentage of the Jewish inmates were not able to work, and were nevertheless not killed. For example, an internal German telex message dated Sept. 4, 1943, from the chief of the Labor Allocation department of the SS Economic and Administrative Main Office (WVHA), reported that of 25,000 Jewish inmates in Auschwitz, only 3,581 were able to work, and that all of the remaining Jewish inmates -- some 21,500, or about 86 percent -- were unable to work. (note 7) This is also confirmed in a secret report dated April 5, 1944, on "security measures in Auschwitz" by Oswald Pohl, head of the SS concentration camp system, to SS chief Heinrich Himmler. Pohl reported that there was a total of 67,000 inmates in the entire Auschwitz camp complex, of whom 18,000 were hospitalized or disabled. In the Auschwitz II camp (Birkenau), supposedly the main extermination center, there were 36,000 inmates, mostly female, of whom "approximately 15,000 are unable to work." (note 8) These two documents simply cannot be reconciled with the Auschwitz extermination story. The evidence shows that Auschwitz-Birkenau was established primarily as a camp for Jews who were not able to work, including the sick and elderly, as well as for those who were temporarily awaiting assignment to other camps. That's the considered view of Dr. Arthur Butz of Northwestern University, who also says that this was the reason for the unusually high death rate there. (note 9) Princeton University history professor Arno Mayer, who is Jewish, acknowledges in a recent book about the "final solution" that more Jews perished at Auschwitz as a result of typhus and other "natural" causes than were executed. (note 10) Anne Frank Perhaps the best known Auschwitz inmate was Anne Frank, who is known around the world for her famous diary. But few people know that thousands of Jews, including Anne and her father, Otto Frank, "survived" Auschwitz. The 15-year-old girl and her father were deported from the Netherlands to Auschwitz in September 1944. Several weeks later, in the face of the advancing Soviet army, Anne was evacuated along with many other Jews to the Bergen-Belsen camp, where she died of typhus in March 1945. Her father came down with typhus in Auschwitz and was sent to the camp hospital to recover. He was one of thousands of sick and feeble Jews who were left behind when the Germans abandoned the camp in January 1945, shortly before it was overrun by the Soviets. He died in Switzerland in 1980. If the German policy had been to kill Anne Frank and her father, they would not have survived Auschwitz. Their fate, tragic though it was, cannot be reconciled with the extermination story. Allied Propaganda The Auschwitz gassing story is based in large part on the hearsay statements of former Jewish inmates who did not personally see any evidence of extermination. Their beliefs are understandable, because rumors about gassings at Auschwitz were widespread. Allied planes dropped large numbers of leaflets, written in Polish and German, on Auschwitz and the surrounding areas which claimed that people were being gassed in the camp. The Auschwitz gassing story, which was an important part of the Allied wartime propaganda effort, was also broadcast to Europe by Allied radio stations. (note 11) Survivor Testimony Former inmates have confirmed that they saw no evidence of extermination at Auschwitz. An Austrian woman, Maria Vanherwaarden, testified about her camp experiences in a Toronto District Court in March 1988. She was interned in Auschwitz-Birkenau in 1942 for having sexual relations with a Polish forced laborer. On the train trip to the camp, a Gypsy woman told her and the others that they would all be gassed at Auschwitz. Upon arrival, Maria and the other women were ordered to undress and go into a large concrete room without windows to take a shower. The terrified women were sure that they were about to die. But then, instead of gas, water came out of the shower heads. Auschwitz was no vacation center, Maria confirmed. She witnessed the death of many fellow inmates by disease, particularly typhus, and quite a few committed suicide. But she saw no evidence at all of mass killings, gassings, or of any extermination program. (note 12) A Jewish woman named Marika Frank arrived at Auschwitz-Birkenau from Hungary in July 1944, when 25,000 Jews were supposedly gassed and cremated daily. She likewise testified after the war that she heard and saw nothing of "gas chambers" during the time she was interned there. She heard the gassing stories only later. (note 13) Inmates Released Auschwitz internees who had served their sentences were released and returned to their home countries. If Auschwitz had actually been a top secret extermination center, the Germans would certainly not have released inmates who "knew" what was happening in the camp. (note 14) Himmler Orders Death Rate Reduced In response to the deaths of many inmates due to disease, especially typhus, the German authorities responsible for the camps ordered firm counter-measures. The head of the SS camp administration office sent a directive dated Dec. 28, 1942, to Auschwitz and the other concentration camps. It sharply criticized the high death rate of inmates due to disease, and ordered that "camp physicians must use all means at their disposal to significantly reduce the death rate in the various camps." Furthermore, it ordered: The camp doctors must supervise more often than in the past the nutrition of the prisoners and, in cooperation with the administration, submit improvement recommendations to the camp commandants... The camp doctors are to see to it that the working conditions at the various labor places are improved as much as possible. Finally, the directive stressed that "the Reichsfuehrer SS [Heinrich Himmler] has ordered that the death rate absolutely must be reduced." (note 15) German Camp Regulations Official German camp regulations make clear that Auschwitz was not an extermination center. They ordered: The new arrivals in the camp have to be examined carefully. Those suspected should immediately be put into the camp hospital and kept there for observation. Prisoners asking for medical treatment should be brought before the camp doctor that same day to be examined. The camp doctor should regularly check how the food is prepared and its quality. Any shortcomings should immediately be brought to the attention of the camp commandant. Special care should be given to the treatment of accidents, so as to avoid impairment of the prisoners' ability to earn their living. Prisoners who are to be set free or transferred from the camp should be brought before the camp physician for medical examination. (note 16) Telltale Aerial Photos Detailed aerial reconnaissance photographs taken of Auschwitz-Birkenau on several random days in 1944 (during the height of the alleged extermination period there) were made public by the CIA in 1979. They show no trace of the piles of corpses, smoking crematory chimneys or masses of Jews awaiting death which have been alleged and which would have been clearly visible if Auschwitz had indeed been an extermination center. (note 17) Absurd Cremation Claims Cremation specialists have confirmed that thousands of corpses could not possibly have been cremated every day throughout the spring and summer of 1944 at Auschwitz, as commonly alleged. For example, Mr. Ivan Lagace, manager of a large crematory in Calgary, Canada, testified in court in April 1988 that the Auschwitz cremation story is technically impossible. The allegation that 10,000 or even 20,000 corpses were burned every day at Auschwitz in the summer of 1944 in crematories and open pits is simply "preposterous" and "beyond the realm of reality," he declared under oath. (note 18) Gassing Expert Refutes Extermination Story America's leading gas chamber expert, Boston engineer Fred A. Leuchter, carefully examined the supposed "gas chambers" in Poland and concluded that the Auschwitz gassing story is absurd and technically impossible. Leuchter is the foremost specialist on the design and installation of gas chambers used in the United States to execute convicted criminals. For example, he designed a gas chamber facility for the Missouri state penitentiary. In February 1988 he carried out a detailed on-site examination of the "gas chambers" at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek in Poland, which are either still standing or only partially in ruins. In sworn testimony to a Toronto court and in a technical report, Leuchter described every aspect of his investigation. He concluded by emphatically declaring that the alleged gassing facilities could not possibly have been used to kill people. Among other things, he pointed out that the so-called "gas chambers" were not properly sealed or vented to kill human beings without also killing German camp personnel. (note 19) Dr. William B. Lindsey, a research chemist employed for 33 years by the Dupont Corporation, likewise testified in a 1985 court case that the Auschwitz gassing story is technically impossible. Based on a careful on-site examination of the "gas chambers" at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek, and on his years of experience, he declared: "I have come to the conclusion that no one was willfully or purposefully killed with Zyklon B [hydrocyanic acid gas] in this manner. I consider it absolutely impossible." (note 20) Conclusion The Auschwitz extermination story originated as wartime propaganda. Now, more than 40 years after the end of the Second World War, it's time to take another, more objective look at this highly polemicized chapter of history. The Auschwitz legend is the core of the Holocaust story. If hundreds of thousands of Jews were not systematically killed there, as alleged, one of the great myths of our time collapses. Artificially maintaining the hatreds and passions of the past prevents genuine reconciliation and lasting peace. Revisionism promotes historical awareness and international understanding. That's why the work of the Institute for Historical Review is so important and deserves your support. Notes 1. Nuremberg document 008-USSR. IMT blue series, Vol. 39, pp. 241, 261.; NC&A red series, vol. 1, p. 35; C.L. Sulzberger, "Oswiecim Killings Placed at 4,000,000," New York Times, May 8, 1945, and, New York Times, Jan. 31, 1986, p. A4. 2. Y. Bauer, "Fighting the Distortions," Jerusalem Post (Israel), Sept. 22, 1989; "Auschwitz Deaths Reduced to a Million,," Daily Telegraph (London), July 17, 1990; "Poland Reduces Auschwitz Death Toll Estimate to 1 Million," The Washington Times, July 17, 1990. 3. Washington (DC) Daily News, Feb. 2, 1945, pp. 2, 35. (United Press dispatch from Moscow). 4. IMT blue series, Vol. 16, p. 529-530. (June 21, 1946). 5. Nuremberg document 3868-PS (USA-819). IMT blue series, Vol. 33, pp. 275-279. 6. Rupert Butler, Legions of Death (England: 1983), pp. 235; R. Faurisson, Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1986-87, pp. 389-403. 7. Archives of the Jewish Historical Institute of Warsaw, German document No. 128, in: H. Eschwege, ed., Kennzeichen J (East Berlin: 1966), p. 264. 8. Nuremberg document NO-021. NMT green series, Vol. 5. pp. 384-385. 9. Arthur Butz, Hoax of the Twentieth Century (Costa Mesa, Calif.), p. 124. 10. Arno Mayer, Why Did the Heavens Not Darken?: The "Final Solution" in History (Pantheon, 1989), p. 365. 11. Nuremberg document NI-11696. NMT green series, Vol. 8, p. 606. 12. Testimony in Toronto District Court, March 28, 1988. Toronto Star, March 29, 1988, p. A2. 13. Sylvia Rothchild, ed., Voices from the Holocaust (New York: 1981), pp. 188-191. 14. Walter Laqueur, The Terrible Secret (Boston: 1981), p. 169. 15. Nuremberg document PS-2171, Annex 2. NC&A red series, Vol. 4, pp. 833-834. 16. "Lagerordnung fur die Konzentrationslager." Made public in 1962 by former Auschwitz-Birkenau inmate Prof. Jan Olbrycht. English translation published in Anthology, Inhuman Medicine, Vol. 1, Part 1, Warsaw: International Auschwitz Committee, 1970, pp. 149-151. 17. Dino A. Brugioni and Robert C. Poirier, The Holocaust Revisited, Washington, DC: Central Intelligence Agency, 1979. 18. Canadian Jewish News (Toronto), April 14, 1988, p. 6. 19. The Leuchter Report: An Engineering Report on the Alleged Execution Gas Chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek. Toronto: 1988. Available for $17.00, postpaid, from the IHR. 20. The Globe and Mail (Toronto), Feb. 12, 1985, p. M3. MARK WEBER is editor of the Journal of Historical Review, published by the Institute for Historical Review. He studied history at the University of Illinois (Chicago), the University of Munich, Portland State University, and Indiana University (M.A., 1977). For five days in March 1988, he testified as an expert witness on the "final solution" and the Holocaust issue in a Toronto District Court case. His many articles, reviews and essays on modern European history have appeared in various scholarly journals and other periodicals. Send $2.00 for a packet of literature and a full listing of books. Or, order more copies of this leaflet, postpaid, at the following prices: 10 copies: $2 -- 50 copies: $5 100 copies or more: 8 cents each INSTITUTE FOR HISTORICAL REVIEW Post Office Box 2739 Newport Beach, California 92659 -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20246 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Auschwitz Myths and Facts Date: 19 Dec 1994 07:11:24 GMT Organization: Brown University Lines: 78 Message-ID: <3d3bms$1v5@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu Greg Raven wrote: Perhaps, before we go into this, IHR employee and Hitler admirer Greg Raven can tell us why Auschwitz had 5 large crematoriums, with 52 cremation furnaces? Why does a "work camp" have 52 large cremation furnaces? The "revisionists" don't deny this fact. Can they explain it? # Astonishing as it may seem, more and more historians and engineers have # been challenging the widely accepted Auschwitz story. "Engineers" like Fred Leuchter, who has a BA in the humanities. It's hard to believe that Raven continues to make a fool of himself by posting this old garbage. Leuchter was exposed as a liar, his incredibly stupid "report" completely demolished, and Raven goes on posting this tired old crap. Incredible, just incredible. # more and more historians "Historians" like Dietlib Felderer, who writes at length about the "anal complex of the Jews", and various other crackpots who have no credentials and no reputation as historians. # A key Holocaust document is the "confession" of former Auschwitz # commandant Rudolf Hoess of April 5, 1946, which was submitted by the U.S. # prosecution at the main Nuremberg trial. (note 5) As noted here a thousand times, a much more important source is Hoess' detailed autobiography. # Many thousands of secret German documents dealing with Auschwitz were # confiscated after the war by the Allies. Not a single one refers to a # policy or program of extermination. Numerous such documents are posted here, including some detailing the gassing process. # For example, an internal German telex message dated Sept. 4, 1943, from # the chief of the Labor Allocation department of the SS Economic and # Administrative Main Office (WVHA), reported that of 25,000 Jewish inmates # in Auschwitz, only 3,581 were able to work, and that all of the remaining # Jewish inmates -- some 21,500, or about 86 percent -- were unable to work. What happened to them? # The head of the SS camp administration office sent a directive dated Dec. # 28, 1942, to Auschwitz and the other concentration camps. It sharply # criticized the high death rate of inmates due to disease, and ordered that # "camp physicians must use all means at their disposal to significantly # reduce the death rate in the various camps." Meant specifically for work camps, not extermination camps. There are other such documents, in which leading Nazis complain that too many Jews who can be used for work are being murdered: Order by Reichskommissar Lohse to halt the killing of Jewish skilled workers, December 2 1941 [Documents on the Holocaust - Edited by Y. Arad, Y. Gutman, A. Margaliot, NY, Ktav Pub. House in Association with Yad-Vashem, 1981, p. 396] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Reichskommissar for Ostland Riga, December 2 1941 IIa diary No. 220/41g The Chief Quartermaster (Chiefintendant) of the Wehrmacht Command in Ostland has lodged a complaint that armament plants and repair workshops have been deprived of Jewish skilled workers through their liquidation, and that they cannot be replaced there at the present time. I request most emphatically that the liquidation of Jews employed as skilled workers in armament plants and repair workshops of the Wehrmacht who cannot be replaced by local personnel be prevented. -Danny Keren. Article 20247 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Auschwitz Myths and Facts Date: 19 Dec 1994 07:11:51 GMT Organization: Brown University Lines: 19 Message-ID: <3d3bnn$1vd@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu From the statement of Hans Stark, registrar of new arrivals, Auschwitz: [Quoted in "'The Good Old Days'" - E. Klee, W. Dressen, V. Riess, The Free Press, NY, 1988, p. 255]. -------------------------------------------------------------- At another, later gassing -- also in autumn 1941 -- Grabner* ordered me to pour Zyklon B into the opening because only one medical orderly had shown up. During a gassing Zyklon B had to be poured through both openings of the gas-chamber room at the same time. This gassing was also a transport of 200-250 Jews, once again men, women and children. As the Zyklon B -- as already mentioned -- was in granular form, it trickled down over the people as it was being poured in. They then started to cry out terribly for they now knew what was happening to them. I did not look through the opening because it had to be closed as soon as the Zyklon B had been poured in. After a few minutes there was silence. After some time had passed, it may have been ten to fifteen minutes, the gas chamber was opened. The dead lay higgledy-piggedly all over the place. It was a dreadful sight. * Maximillian Grabner, Head of Political Department, Auschwitz Article 20248 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Auschwitz Myths and Facts Date: 19 Dec 1994 07:13:14 GMT Organization: Brown University Lines: 35 Message-ID: <3d3bqa$20a@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu Testimony of SS private Boeck: [Extracted from "Der Auschwitz Prozess", by Hermann Langbein, Vol. I, quoted in "Auschwitz: Technique and operation of the gas chambers - J.C Pressac, the Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, NY, 1989, p. 181]. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Q: were you present at a gassing operation one day? A: Yes, it was one evening. I accompanied the driver Hoeblinger. A transport had arrived from Holland and the prisoners had to jump from the wagons. They were well-off Jews. There were women with Persian furs. They arrived by express train. The trucks were already there, with wooden steps before them, and the people climbed aboard. Then they all started off. In the place Birkenau once stood, there was only a long farmhouse (Bunker 2) and beside it four or five big huts. Inside, the people were standing on clothes which were building up on the floor. The block leader and the sergeant, carrying a cane, were there. Hoeblinger said to me 'lets go over there now'. There was a sign 'to disinfection'. He said 'you see, they are bringing children now'. They opened the door, threw the children in and closed the door. There was a terrible cry. A member of the SS climbed on the roof. The people went on crying for about ten minutes. Then the prisoners opened the doors. Everything was in disorder and contorted. Heat was given off. the bodies were loaded on a rough wagon and taken to a ditch. The next batch were already undressing in the huts. After that I didn't look at my wife for four weeks. -Danny Keren. Article 20249 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Auschwitz Myths and Facts Date: 19 Dec 1994 07:13:32 GMT Organization: Brown University Lines: 21 Message-ID: <3d3bqs$20q@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu SS-Doctor Kremer about his days at Auschwitz: [Quoted in 'The Good Old Days' - E. Klee, W. Dressen, V. Riess, The Free Press, NY, 1988, p. 258]. ------------------------------------------------------------------- I remember I once took part in the gassing of one of these groups of women [from the women's camp in Auschwitz]. I cannot say how big the group was. when I got close to the bunker I saw them sitting on the ground. They were still clothed. As they were wearing worn-out camp clothing they were not left in the undressing hut but made to undress in the open air. I concluded from the behavior of these women that they had no doubt what fate awaited them, as they begged and sobbed to the SS men to spare them their lives. However, they were herded into the gas chambers and gassed. As an anatomist I have seen a lot of terrible things: I had had a lot of experience with dead bodies, and yet what I saw that day was like nothing I had ever seen before. Still completely shocked by what I had seen I wrote on my diary on 5 September 1942: "The most dreadful of horrors. Hauptscharfuehrer Thilo was right when he said to me today that this is the 'anus mundi', the anal orifice of the world". I used this image because I could not imagine anything more disgusting and horrific. Article 20250 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Auschwitz Myths and Facts Date: 19 Dec 1994 07:14:06 GMT Organization: Brown University Lines: 94 Message-ID: <3d3bru$20s@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu Testimony of Dr. Hans W. Muench [Quoted in "Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals" - Washington, U.S Govt. Print. Off., 1949-1953, Vol. VIII, p. 313-321] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Q. What was your first impression of Auschwitz when you arrived? A. I had already heard about extermination camps, and particularly extermination camps for Jews, through reports over the Swiss radio that I listened to regularly in the preceding years, but since I considered this news to be propaganda, I did not believe it at the time, because the facts that were being described seemed too terribly outrageous to me. When I arrived in Auschwitz, and had to convince myself personally that these reports were not exaggerated, I was very much shaken emotionally. . . . Q. Mr. witness, you were informed about the fact that human beings were gassed at Auschwitz? A. Yes. . . . Q. Mr. witness, for what reason did you not spread the fact that human beings were being gassed and exterminated? A. I was asked this very often and also before the Supreme Court of Cracow, and I can say in answer to it that that would have been a completely useless undertaking which would have very shortly caused me and my family to be liquidated very quickly, because the Gestapo was so well organized and the threats for nonobservance of the secrecy that surrounded the Auschwitz exterminations were so clearly worded for members of the SS that everybody avoided telling even his closest friend about it, because experience taught us that anybody who talked about it in any way was very quickly found because the Gestapo sniffed out every rumor very consistently that spread about Auschwitz. . . . Q. Mr. witness, what would you say if someone visited a plant in Auschwitz twice or three times a year for a period of one or two days? Would he then have to gain knowledge about these things? A. I repeatedly witnessed guided tours of civilians and also of commissions of the Red Cross and other parties within the camp, and I was able to ascertain that the camp leadership arranged it masterfully to conduct these guided tours in such a way that the people being guided around did not see anything about inhuman treatment. The main camp was shown only and in this main camp there were so-called show blocks, particularly block 13, that were especially prepared for such guided tours and that were equipped like a normal soldier's barracks with beds that had sheets on them, and well-functioning washrooms. . . . Q. Mr. witness, did you personally ever witness the gassing of human beings? A. Yes, I saw one gassing at one time. . . . Q. Mr. witness, you testified a little earlier that those who were sick in the camps, like in concentration camp Monowitz, would be sent to Auschwitz-Birkenau, but I wasn't quite clear as to why they were sent to Auschwitz-Birkenau. I'd like to put just a question or two to you on that. Mr. witness, those people who were in the hospital at Monowitz and were shipped to Auschwitz-Birkenau because of an edema or phlegmon, for what purpose were they shipped to Birkenau? A. As far as these people were Jews, I must state that most of them were gassed. Q. And, Mr. witness, if they were sent from the hospital in Monowitz to Auschwitz-Birkenau, and they were Jews; and they were sent because of weakness and collapse, why were they sent to Birkenau? A. Also to be gassed. Article 20260 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!casaba.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.intercon.com!uhog.mit.edu!sgiblab!spool.mu.edu!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: From IHR WWW Site: Was Encampment Justified Date: 20 Dec 1994 12:42:00 GMT Organization: Philosophers of the Dangerous Maybe Lines: 15 Message-ID: <3d6jeo$n4p@agate.berkeley.edu> References: <3cl5j8$one@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <15DEC94.15132694.0206@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> <3d456s$j9l@access4.digex.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu In article <3d456s$j9l@access4.digex.net>, Michael P. Stein wrote: >Perhaps you should place in your .signature file something like the following: > > "The above represents the views of Greg Raven, and is not endorsed by >the Institute for Historical Review. All facts contained herein are >strictly accidental." Yes, but wouldn't that then imply that things endorsed by the IHR contain facts that were put there on purpose? -- Richard Schultz "I seem to smell a peculiar and a fishlike smell." Article 20268 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!alberta!quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca!gpu2!jmorris From: jmorris@gpu2.srv.ualberta.ca (John Morris) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: From IHR WWW Site: Was Encampment Justified Date: 19 Dec 1994 09:23:14 GMT Organization: University of Alberta Lines: 29 Message-ID: <3d3je2$1bg1@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> References: <3cl5j8$one@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <3cm7e6$ed9@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3cn62f$f73@agate.berkeley.edu> <3cnf8g$e4k@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3cnfhf$1299@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: gpu2.srv.ualberta.ca X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com) wrote: ^^^ : In article <3cnfhf$1299@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca>, : jmorris@gpu2.srv.ualberta.ca (John Morris) wrote: : > Well, I checked; it came from Keith's account. So unless Keith is : > pulling our legs, this is a real article from IHR. : Well, I don't know who Keith Morrison is, but I can assure you that this : item did not come from the IHR. In case you haven't contacted my home page : yourself, you should know that my home page is MY home page, not the : IHR's. They do not pay for it, monitor it, condone it, contribute to it, : etc. The file in question is one that someone gave me a couple years back, : and I thought that it, while flawed, does make one stop and think. Ah, if only it did, "make one stop and think," that is. : -- : Greg Raven : mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com ^^^ : http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ^^^ Anyway, a thousand apologies for my egregious error. The highlighted bits of your userid might explain how I was led astray. -- John Morris at University of Alberta Article 20270 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail From: mstein@access4.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: From IHR WWW Site: Was Encampment Justified Date: 20 Dec 1994 08:49:47 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Lines: 12 Message-ID: <3d6ndr$9cl@access4.digex.net> References: <3cl5j8$one@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <3cnf8g$e4k@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3cnfhf$1299@quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: access4.digex.net In article , Greg Raven wrote: >The file in question ["Was the Encampment of the Jews Justified?"] is one >that someone gave me a couple years back, and I thought that it, while >flawed, does make one stop and think. Perhaps, Mr. Raven, you would care to tell us where you find it flawed and disagree with it? -- Mike Stein The above represents the Absolute Truth. POB 10420 Therefore it cannot possibly be the official Arlington, VA 22210 position of my employer. Article 20277 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!kmcvay From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay) Subject: Re: Auschwitz Myths and Facts References: Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac Message-ID: <1994Dec23.235243.1062@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> Date: Fri, 23 Dec 94 23:52:43 GMT In article Greg Raven regurgitates Mark Weber's shopworn Auchwitz piece... >Auschwitz: Myths and Facts >by Mark Weber 'The Four Million Variant' is yet another example of how Holocaust deniers take a fact and twist it for their own designs to deceive an otherwise naive reader. The fact is that the Auschwitz State Museum claimed for decades that four million died at Auschwitz. In 1990, this figure was officially lowered to 1.1 million. Deniers then manipulated both the long standing four million figure and the lowering of the number to implicate all mainstream historians and the general public in some kind of conspiracy. They claim that everyone was taught since grade school that four million died at Auschwitz, and anyone who dared to say that the number might be less was labeled an anti-semite, as this quote from _The Spotlight_ attests: Previous to 1992, anyone who publicly doubted the 4.1 million "gassing" deaths at Auschwitz was labeled an anti-Semite, neo-nazi skinhead (at the very least). Quietly, because of revisionist findings, the official figure was lowered to 1.1 million. No mention of that missing 3 million. (Foner, Spotlight, Jan '93) The April 12, 1993 _Spotlight_ (as well as other 'revisionist' writings, see below) also claim that all or most mainstream historians supported the State Museum's figure of four million: The Establishment numbers on the holocaust [sic] are suspect, according to revisionist historians. For instance, deaths at Auschwitz were reported for decades to be 4.1 million gassing victims. However, since revisionist scholars began focusing on the numbers, the figure was officially lowered to 1.1 million. Several of the denier cadre have written at length on the four million figure, including Bradley Smith. The following letter appears in the current issue of the magazine _Anarchy._ It's a response from Bradley Smith to a letter from journalist Bill Weinberg in a previous issue. In Weinberg's letter, he scolded the editors of _Anarchy_ for not being critical enough of "holocaust revisionism" in a review of Smith's book _Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist._ (For those of you not familiar with the magazine, they have made it clear that they think the "revisionists" are Nazis and hardly worth wasting time or ink on. _Anarchy_ is generally an excellent magazine.) Example: we were told for half a century that Auschwitz claimed four million murdered victims (mostly Jews). In 1990 the Auschwitz State Museum lowered the figure to 1.1 million. Revisionists believe there are a few questions that need to be asked about this development. The short list include these: where are the documents that "proved" the original 4-million figure? Where are the documents that in 1990 "disprove" the 4-million figure? Where is the scholarly paper that addresses the judicial process through which the Nuremberg Court accepted the 4-million figure as historically accurate? How did the court go wrong? How many Germans were the victims of judicial murder because of the Court's lack of professionalism, or its political bias? Where is the paper that reveals to us the scholarly, half-century long road our valiant historians traveled to come to the conclusion that the 4-million figure was wrong? How were revisionist investigators able to figure it out 40 years earlier (see the writings of Paul Rassinier and others in the 1950s)? The short answers? 1) None of these papers or documents exist or ever did exist. 2) Revisionists were able to figure out the scam in the 1950s because they took a run at it. (Smith, Anarchy) Smith's claim about the "loss" of three million victims was also included within his CODOH campus advertisement, which appeared in the IHR Newsletter in April of 1992, and which includes the following paragraphs: The Auschwitz State Museum has recently revised its half-century- old claim that 4 million humans were murdered there. The Museum now says maybe it was 1 million. But what proof does the Museum provide to document the 1 million figure? None! The communist propagandists who manage the museum have put on display piles of hair, boots and eyeglasses, etc. While such displays are effective propaganda devices, they are worthless as historical documentation for "gassings" or a program of "extermination." Meanwhile, Revisionists want to know where those 3 million souls have been the last 45 years. Were they part of the fabled Six Million? (Smith, Campus) In _The Journal of Historical Review_, Walter Luftl repeated the Four Million Variant when answering the question "What is the Holocaust?" In the view of those who believe--or cause others to believe--in the [Holocaust], mass gassings, especially of Jews, were carried out in the concentration camps of the Third Reich. Above all in Auschwitz (hence the term "Auschwitz Myth"), four million Jews were gassed. [The Nuremberg Tribunal "established" that four million PEOPLE (Jews and non-Jews) had been KILLED (by all means) at Auschwitz.] Currently, though, unimpeachable sources are seeking to reduce this [sic] figure to 1.5 million. On mathematical grounds alone, the "symbolic figure of Six Million" should be reduced by 3.5 million. Of course, such a reduction does not lessen the [gravity of the] crime in any way, because even one victim is one too many. (Luftl) Another magazine, _The Spotlight_, carried an article about David Cole, another Holocaust "revisionist" in January of 1993. This article sums up the denier's claims about the "Four Million Variant" quite well: Like most Americans, since his youth Cole had been instructed in the "irrefutable fact" that homicidal gassings had taken place at Auschwitz. The number of those so executed - also declared irrefutable - was 4.1 million. Then came the Leuchter Report in 1988. This was followed by a "re-evaluation" of the total deaths at Auschwitz (down to 1.1 million). As a budding historian - and a Jew - Cole was intrigued. In short, deniers assert that the four million figure from the Auschwitz State Museum was a widely accepted figure, and that the lowering of the number to 1.1 million was largely through the efforts of "revisionists", including the Leuchter Report. Second, deniers now say that the total dead from the Holocaust should be about three million rather than six. Despite how things may appear, this is clearly not the case. Let's look at each aspect of the denier's "Four Million Variant": 1) The Auschwitz State Museum claimed for almost forty years that the total dead at Auschwitz was four million victims until lowering the number to 1.1 million in 1990. This much is true. On May 12th, 1945 a Soviet State Commission had visited Auschwitz and reported that not less than four million people died there (Reitlinger, p 499). This number was displayed at the Auschwitz State Museum until 1990, when it was lowered to 1.1 million. 2) The belief that four million people were killed at Auschwitz was a widely held notion, both in the minds of the general public and in "Establishment" historians. This is plainly false. Few historians ever believed the four million figure, and even Nazis involved in the extermination gave different numbers. Eichmann set the Auschwitz death toll at 2.5 million, as did Ho"ss when he was interrogated. In his memoirs a few years later, Ho"ss said that figure was given to him by Eichmann, and that Ho"ss himself felt that the actual number was about 1.13 million. Did mainstream historians believe the figure? A quick survey of historical books on the Holocaust and Auschwitz shows quite plainly that few historians believed the figure of four million. The sources listed below include the publishing date, and all were published before 1990. In an English translation of Ho"ss memoirs, entitled _Death Dealer: The Memoirs of the SS Kommandant of Auschwitz_, Ho"ss lists the total Auschwitz dead at 1.1 million (p 39). His memoirs were written in 1947. Martin Gilbert's _Atlas of the Holocaust_ (c. 1988) lists the total dead in all of Poland as three million, below the state museum's claim for Auschwitz alone. Raul Hilberg's _The Destruction of the European Jews_ (c. 1961) lists the total dead at Auschwitz at about 1 million (p 572). Gerald Reitlinger's _The Final Solution: The Attempt to Exterminate the Jews of Europe, 1939-1945_ (c. 1968) lists the total Auschwitz dead as between 800,000 and 900,000 (p 500). Yehuda Bauer's _A History of the Holocaust_ (c. 1982) lists the Auschwitz death toll as between 1.5 and 3.5 million (p 215). The World Book Encyclopedia (1980 ed.) lists the total dead at Auschwitz as 2.5 million, based upon Ho"ss's trial testimony. Poliakov's _Harvest of Hate_ (c. 1956) lists the total Auschwitz dead at about 2.3 million (p 202). Clearly, the four million figure was never widely believed, as none of the five historians listed above use it. Furthermore, both Auschwitz Commandant Ho"ss and Adolf Eichmann, the person in charge of carrying out the 'Final Solution,' claimed it was lower, about 1.1 and 2.5 million, respectively. If the general public believed that four million died at Auschwitz, one must wonder where they got the notion. Clearly not from historians like Hilberg, and not from common reference materials like the World Book Encyclopedia. To take this point even further, Reitlinger's _The Final Solution_ discusses both the source of the four million number and why few historians believe it (p. 499). Comments and typos are mine: ...The Red Army did not arrive [at Auschwitz] till January 26th. They found 2,819 invalids in the three camps, whom they spared no pains to nurse back to health. In due course a Soviet State Commission arrived and on May 12th the world was presented with its findings. 'However, using rectified coefficients for the part time employment of the crematorium ovens and for the periods when they stood empty, the technical expert commission has ascertained that during the time that the Auschwitz camp existed, the German butchers [sic] exterminated in this camp not less than four million citizens of the U.S.S.R., Poland, France, Jugoslavia [sic], Czechoslovakia, Rumania, Hungary, Holland, Belgium, and other countries.' The world has grown mistrustful of 'rectified coefficients' and the figure of four million has become ridiculous. Unfortunately, Russian arithmetic has blurred the stark and inescapable fact that 800,000 to 900,000 human beings perished in Auschwitz, its gas chambers and its camps. There are probably too many incalculable factors to make a closer estimate of the number of Auschwitz victims possible... Reitlinger's book was published in 1968, well before the deniers claim that the four million figure fell into disfavor. Had the figure been as popular as deniers assert, one must wonder why Reitlinger would have called it ridiculous! Poliakov's _Harvest of Hate_ explains where his own 2.3 million number came from, and also discusses Eichmann's and Ho"ss's 2.5 million figure: "After some thirty months of intense activity, the Auschwitz balance sheet showed close to two million immediate exterminations (this figure can never be fixed exactly), (8) to which one must add the deaths of some 300,000 registered prisoners - Jews for the most part, but not entirely - for whom the gas chamber was only one of any number of ways by which they might have perished." (Poliakov, 202) Poliakov also shed light upon the Ho"ss testimony in this note appended to the citation above: "(8) In his affidavits, Ho"ss spoke of two and a half million, 'a figure set officially,' he wrote, under the signature of [Eichmann], in a report to Himmler. This figure has been accepted by several authors, and it appears in the verdict at the trial of the major war criminals. However, there is no reason for accepting without question the statistics attributed to Eichmann, which may err on either side. Adding the number of victims to those deported from different countries gives a lower figure, although we have little data, for example, on the number of Polish Jews sent to Auschwitz. An approximate figure in the neighborhood of two million seems closer to the truth." (Ibid.) Poliakov raises an interesting point -- if the four million figure was so widely believed, then why was the Eichmann figure of 2.5 million used in the verdict of major war criminals? Simply because no one but the Auschwitz State Museum and the Soviet State Commission ever believed the four million figure. The notion that historians or the general public believed the Soviet Commission's four million figure is a complete fabrication. 3) Holocaust 'revisionists' are largely to credit for the lowering of the four million figure. This particular claim is an example of Holocaust deniers overstating their influence on the world. The lowering of the figure had nothing to do with 'revisionist historians' at all, rather it was based on a study released by a panel of historians appointed by the Polish Government. As Alfred Cattani wrote in the magazine _News Weekly_ (5/11/91, p19): Some time ago, at the monument on the grounds of the former Auschwitz concentration camp, the memorial tablet dedicated to the victims of this death factory was removed. The action was prompted by the results of a study conducted by an official historians' committee established by Poland's Ministry of Culture. The study concluded that the number of Auschwitz victims had not been four million, as stated on the tablet, but the much smaller figure of about one million. A similar conclusion was expressed by Franciszek Piper, head of the Historical Department at the Auschwitz Museum. [ed. note: 'News Weekly' is published in Melbourne by the National Civic Council, a conservative Catholic public affairs organisation in Australia.] Which brings us to claim number four: 4) Since the Museum's four million has now been reduced to one million, the total number of Holocaust victims should be reduced by about three million. Again, (surprise!) this is false. Since few historians ever believed that so many died at Auschwitz, why should they then recalculate their own estimates to account for three million that they never counted in the first place? Many of these historians had calculated a total dead from the Holocaust of 4.5 million or more, including an Auschwitz death toll of only a million or so. For example,Reitlinger's _The Final Solution_ estimated about 4.2 to 4.9 million Jewish dead from the Holocaust, and Hilberg estimated that more than five million Jews died. If the Auschwitz Four Million Variant was never apart of the around six million dead, there is no reason to lower the figure. In short, the Four Million Variant is a specious attempt to envelope unwary readers into the denial web of deceit, and can be safely discarded after the most rudimentary examination of published histories. Work Cited: Foner, Samuel P. "Major Historical Fact Uncovered" SPOTLIGHT Vol. XIX, Number 2, January 11, 1993) Luftl, Walter. "The Luftl Report: An Austrian Engineer's Report on the 'Gas Chambers' of Auschwitz and Mauthausen," _The Journal of Historical Review_, Vol. 12, Number 4 (Winter 1992-93) Poliakov, Leon. Harvest of Hate: The Nazi Program for the Destruction of the Jews of Europe. Syracuse University Press., 1956. Smith, Bradley. "Campus Ad Campaign Goes Forward," Institute for Historical Review (IHR) Newsletter, April, 1992, No. 86 Smith, Bradley. Letter to Editor, Anarchy Magazine -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Nizkor Project ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "However, it is sophistry to proclaim that something must have happened a certain way because your `reason' demands it." (Greg Raven, Institute for Historical Review) Article 20299 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Himmler, Poznan, and Raven Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 22:20:31 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 37 Message-ID: References: <1994Dec20.171420.21862@hobbes.kzoo.edu> <3d7dph$f4m@amhux3.amherst.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article <3d7dph$f4m@amhux3.amherst.edu>, jaklein@unix.amherst.edu (Josh Klein) wrote: > Jamie R. McCarthy (k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu) wrote: > > Greg Raven sent me the following email a week ago tomorrow and asked > > that I post it. I apologize for it taking so long for me to get around > > to -- I'm looking into starting my own business, and it's taking most of > > my free time. (Next time, Mr. Raven, please post it yourself or Cc it > > to alt-revisionism@cs.utexas.edu, which will post it for you.) > > [A PORTION OF Mr. RAVEN'S MESSAGE FOLLOWS] > > > This is so simple: in a murder trial, the prosecution must produce the > > murder weapon. This murder weapon must be analyzed to determine if it was > > the actual murder weapon, etc. But in the case of the gas chambers, we are > > asked to accept that millions were murdered using a weapon that still has > > not been seen, tested, examined, etc. This is outrageous. > > This is patently untrue. The actual weapon is NOT required evidence in a > murder trial. Quite frequently, murderers are convicted without this > physical evidence, purely on the strength of eyewitness testimony. So you are saying, then, that there are no gas chambers for us to look at, to examine? If there are, simply produce them. I find it difficult to believe that anything approaching a fair legal system could convict an entire peoples of millions of death by gassing without producing even one little gas chamber. -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20305 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 22:16:09 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 428 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com The "Liberation of the Camps": FACTS vs. LIES By Theodore J. O'Keefe Nothing has been more effective in establishing the authenticity of the Holocaust in the minds of Americans than the terrible scenes U.S. GIs discovered when they entered the German concentration camps at the close of World War II. At Dachau, Buchenwald, Dora, Mauthausen, and other work and detention camps, horrified American infantrymen encountered heaps of dead and dying inmates, emaciated and diseased. Survivors told them hair-raising stories of torture and slaughter, and backed up their claims by showing the GI's crematory ovens, alleged gas chambers, supposed implements of torture, even shrunken heads and lampshades, gloves, and handbags purportedly made from skin flayed from dead inmates. U.S. government authorities, mindful that most Americans, who remembered the atrocity stories fed them during World War I, still doubted the Allied propaganda directed against the Hitler regime, resolved to "document" what the GI's had found in the camps. Prominent newsmen and politicians were flown in to see the harrowing evidence, while the U.S. Army Signal Corps filmed and photographed the scenes for posterity. The famous journalist Edward R. Murrow reported, in tones of horror, but no longer of disbelief, what he had been told and shown, and Dachau and Buchenwald were branded on the hearts and minds of the American populace as names of infamy unmatched in the sad and bloody history of this planet. For Americans, what was "discovered" at the camps -- the dead and the diseased, the terrible stories of the inmates, all the props of torture and terror -- became the basis not simply of a transitory propaganda campaign but of the conviction that yes, it was true: the Germans did exterminate six million Jews, most of them in lethal gas chambers. What the GI's found was used, by way of films which were mandatory viewing for the vanquished populace of Germany, to "re-educate" the German people by destroying their national pride and their will to a united, independent national state, imposing in their place overwhelming feelings of collective guilt and political impotence. And when the testimony, and the verdict, at Nuremberg incorporated most, if not all, of the horror stories Americans were told about Dachau, Buchenwald, and other places captured by the U.S. Army, the Holocaust could pass for one of the most documented, one of the most authenticated, one of the most proven historical episodes in the human record. A Different Reality But it is known today that, very soon after the liberation of the camps, American authorities were aware that the real story of the camps was quite different from the one in which they were coaching military public information officers, government spokesmen, politicians, journalists, and other mouthpieces. When American and British forces overran western and central Germany in the spring of 1945, they were followed by troops charged with discovering and securing any evidence of German war crimes. Among them was Dr. Charles Larson, one of America's leading forensic pathologists, who was assigned to the Judge Advocate General's Department. Dr. Larson performed autopsies at Dachau and some twenty other German camps, examining on some days more than 100 corpses. After his grim work at Dachau, he was questioned for three days by U.S. Army prosecutors. (note 1) Dr. Larson's findings? According to an interview he gave to an American journalist in 1980, "What we've heard is that six million Jews were exterminated. Part of that is a hoax." (note 2) And what part was the hoax? Dr. Larson, who told his biographer that to his knowledge he "was the only forensic pathologist on duty in the entire European Theater," (note 3) informed Wichita Eagle reporter Jan Floerchinger that "never was a case of poison gas uncovered." (note 4) Neither Dr. Larson nor any other forensic specialist has ever been cited by any Holocaust historian to substantiate a single case of death by poison gas, whether Zyklon-B or any other variety. Typhus, Not Poison Gas If not by gassing, how did the unfortunate victims at Dachau, Buchenwald, and Bergen- Belsen perish? Were they tortured to death? Deliberately starved? The answers to these questions are known as well. As Dr. Larson and other Allied medical men discovered, the chief cause of death at Dachau, Belsen, and the other camps was disease, above all typhus, an old and terrible scourge of mankind which until recently flourished in places where populations were crowded together in circumstances where public health measures were unknown or had broken down. Such was the case in the overcrowded internment camps in Germany at war's end, where, despite such measures as systematic delousing, quarantine of the sick, and cremation of the dead, the virtual collapse of Germany's food, transport, and public health systems led to catastrophe. Perhaps the most authoritative statement of the facts as to typhus and mortality in the camps has been made by Dr. John E. Gordon, M.D., Ph.D., a professor of preventive medicine and epidemiology at the Harvard University School of Public Health, who was with U.S. forces in Germany in 1945. Dr. Gordon reported in 1948 that "The outbreaks in concentration camps and prisons made up the great bulk of typhus infection encountered in Germany." Dr. Gordon summarized the causes for the outbreaks as follows: Germany was in chaos. The destruction of whole cities and the path left by advancing armies produced a disruption of living conditions contributing to the spread of the disease. Sanitation was low grade, public utilities were seriously disrupted, food supply and food distribution was poor, housing was inadequate and order and discipline were everywhere lacking. Still more important, a shifting of populations was occurring such as few countries and few times have experienced. (note 5) Dr. Gordon's findings are corroborated by Dr. Russell Barton, today a psychiatrist of international repute, who entered Bergen-Belsen with British forces as a young medical student in 1945. Barton, who volunteered to care for the diseased survivors, testified under sworn oath in a Toronto courtroom in 1985 that "Thousands of prisoners who died at the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp during World War II weren't deliberately starved to death but died from a rash of diseases." (note 6) Dr. Barton further testified that on entering the camp he had credited stories of deliberate starvations but had decided such stories were untrue after inspecting the wellequipped kitchens and the meticulously maintained ledgers, dating back to 1942, of food cooked and dispensed each day. Despite noisily publicized claims and widespread popular notions to the contrary, no researcher has been able to document a German policy of extermination through starvation in the German camps. No Lampshades, No Handbags, Etc. What of the ghoulish stories of concentration camp inmates skinned for their tattoos, flayed to make lampshades and handbags, or other artifacts? What of the innumerable "torture racks," "meathooks," whipping posts, gallows, and other tools of torment and death that are reported to have abounded at every German camp? These allegations, and even more grotesque ones profferred by Soviet prosecutors, found their way into the record at Nuremberg. The lampshade and tattooed-skin charges were made against Ilse Koch, dubbed by journalists the "Bitch of Buchenwald," who was reported to have furnished her house with objects manufactured from the tanned hides of luckless inmates. But General Lucius Clay, military governor of the U.S. zone of occupied Germany, who reviewed her case in 1948, told his superiors in Washington: "There is no convincing evidence that she [Ilse Koch] selected inmates for extermination in order to secure tattooed skins or that she possessed any articles made of human skin." (note 7) In an interview General Clay gave years later, he stated about the material for the infamous lampshades: "Well, it turned out actually that is was goat flesh. But at the trial it was still human flesh. It was almost impossible for her to have gotten a fair trial." (note 8) Ilse Koch hanged herself in a West German jail in 1967. It would be tedious to itemize and refute the thousands of bizarre claims as to Nazi atrocities. That there were instances of German cruelty, however, is clear from the testimony of Dr. Konrad Morgen, a legal investigator attached to the Reich Criminal Police, whose statements on the witness stand at Nuremberg have never been challenged by believers in the Jewish Holocaust. Dr. Morgen informed the court that he had been given full authority by Heinrich Himmler, commander of Hitler's SS and the dread Gestapo, to enter any German concentration camp and investigate instances of cruelty and corruption on the part of the camp staffs. According to Dr. Morgen's sworn testimony at Nuremberg, he investigated 800 such cases, in which over 200 convictions resulted. (note 9) Punishments included the death penalty for the worst offenders, including Hermann Florstedt, commandant of Lublin (Majdanek), and Karl Koch, Ilse's husband, commandant of Buchenwald. In reality, while camp commandants in certain cases did inflict physical punishment, such acts had to be approved by authorities in Berlin, and it was required that a camp physician first certify the good health of the prisoner to be disciplined, and then be on hand at the actual beating. (note 10) After all, the camps were throughout most of the war important centers of industrial activity. The good health and morale of the prisoners was critical to the German war effort, as is evidenced by a 1942 order issued by SS-Brigadefuehrer Richard Gluecks, chief of the office which controlled the concentration camps, which held camp commanders "personally responsible for exhausting every possibility to preserve the physical strength of the detainees." (note 11) Concentration Camp Survivors Merely Victims? U.S. Army investigators, working at Buchenwald and other camps, quickly ascertained what was common knowledge among veteran inmates: that the worst offenders, the cruelest denizens of the camps were not the guards but the prisoners themselves. Common criminals of the same stripe as those who populate U.S. prisons today committed many villainies, particularly when they held positions of authority, and fanatical Communists, highly organized to combat their many political enemies among the inmates, eliminated their foes with Stalinist ruthlessness. Two U.S. Army investigators at Buchenwald, Egon W. Fleck and Edward A. Tenenbaum, carefully investigated circumstances in the camp before its liberation. In a detailed report submitted to their superiors, they revealed, in the words of Alfred Toombs, their commander, who wrote a preface to the report, "how the prisoners themselves organized a deadly terror within the Nazi terror." (note 12) Fleck and Tenenbaum described the power exercised by criminals and Communists as follows: ...The trusties, who in time became almost exclusively Communist Germans, had the power of life and death over all other inmates. They could sentence a man or a group to almost certain death ... The Communist trusties were directly responsible for a large part of the brutalities at Buchenwald. Colonel Donald B. Robinson, chief historian of the American military government in Germany, summarized the Fleck-Tenenbaum report in an article which appeared in The American Mercury shortly after the war. Colonel Robinson wrote succinctly of the American investigators' findings: "It appeared that the prisoners who agreed with the Communists ate; those who didn't starved to death." (note 13) Additional corroboration of inmate brutality has been provided by Ellis E. Spackman, who, as Chief of Counter-Intelligence Arrests and Detentions for the Seventh U.S. Army, was involved in the liberation of Dachau. Spackman, later a professor of history at San Bernardino Valley College in California, wrote in 1966 that at Dachau "the prisoners were the actual instruments that inflicted the barbarities on their fellow prisoners." (note 14) "Gas Chambers" On December 9, 1944 Col. Paul Kirk and Lt. Col. Edward J. Gully inspected the German concentration camp at Natzweiler in Alsace. They reported their findings to their superiors at the headquarters of the U.S. 6th Army Group, which subsequently forwarded Kirk and Gully's report to the War Crimes Division. While, significantly, the full text of their report has never been published, it has been revealed, by an author supportive of Holocaust claims, that the two investigators were careful to characterize equipment exhibited to them by French informants as a "so-called lethal gas chamber," and claim it was "allegedly used as a lethal gas chamber". (note 15) Both the careful phraseology of the Natzweiler report, and its effective suppression, stand in stark contrast to the credulity, the confusion, and the blaring publicity which accompanied official reports of alleged gas chambers at Dachau. At first, a U.S. Army photo depicting a GI gazing mournfully at a steel door marked with a skull and crossbones and the German words for: "Caution! Gas! Mortal danger! Don't open!" was identified as showing the murder weapon. Later, however, it was evidently decided that the apparatus in question was merely a standard delousing chamber for clothing, and another alleged gas chamber, this one cunningly disguised as a shower room, was exhibited to American congressmen and journalists as the site where thousands breathed their last. While there exist numerous reports in the press as to the operation of this second "gas chamber," no official report by trained Army investigators has yet surfaced to reconcile such problems as the function of the shower heads: Were they "dummies," or did lethal cyanide gas stream through them? (Each theory has appreciable support in journalistic and historiographical literature.) As with Dachau, so with Buchenwald, Bergen- Belsen, and the other camps captured by the Allies. There was no end of propaganda about "gas chambers," "gas ovens," and the like, but so far not a single detailed description of the murder weapon and its function, not a single report of the kind that is mandatory for the successful prosecution of any assault or murder case in America at that time and today, has come to light. Furthermore, a number of Holocaust authorities have now publicly decreed that there were no gassings, no extermination camps in Germany after all! All these things, we are told, were located in what is now Poland, in areas captured by the Soviet Red Army and off-limits to Western investigators. In 1960 Dr. Martin Broszat, who is now director of the Munich-based Institute for Contemporary History, which is funded by the West German government to support the Holocaust story, wrote a letter to the German weekly Die Zeit in which he stated categorically: "Neither in Dachau nor in Bergen-Belsen nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other prisoners gassed." (note 16) Professional Nazi-hunter Simon Wiesenthal wrote in 1975 that "there were no extermination camps on German soil." (note 17) And Dachau "gas chamber" No. 2, which was once presented to a stunned and grieving world as a weapon which claimed hundreds of thousands of lives, is now described in the brochure issued to tourists at the modern Dachau "memorial site" in these words: "This gas chamber, camouflaged as a shower room, was not used." (note 18) The Propaganda Intensifies More than forty years after American troops entered Dachau, Buchenwald, and the other German camps, and trained American investigators established the facts as to what had gone on in them, the government in Washington, the entertainment media in Hollywood, and the print media in New York continue to churn out millions of words and images annually on the horrors of the camps and the infamy of the Holocaust. Despite the fact that, with the exception of the defeated Confederacy, no enemy of America has ever so suffered so complete and devastating defeat as did Germany in 1945, the mass media and the politicians and bureaucrats behave as if Hitler, his troops, and his concentration camps continue to exist in an eternal present, and our opinion makers continue to distort, through ignorance or malice, the facts about the camps. Time for the Truth It is time that the government and the professional historians revealed the facts about Dachau, Buchenwald, and the other camps. It is time that they let the American public know how the inmates died, and how they didn't die. It is time that the claims as to mass murder by gassing were clarified and investigated in the same manner as any other claims of murder are dealt with. It is time that the free ride certain groups have enjoyed as the result of unchallenged Holocaust claims be terminated, just as it is time that other groups, including Germans, eastern Europeans, the Roman Catholic hierarchy, and the wartime leadership of America and Britain stop being scapegoated, either for their alleged role in the Holocaust or their supposed failure to stop it. Above all, it is time that the citizens of this great democratic Republic have the facts about the camps, facts which they possess a right to know, a right that is fundamental to the exercise of their authority and their will in the governance of their country. As citizens and as taxpayers, Americans of all ethnic backgrounds, of all faiths, have a basic right and an overriding interest in determining the facts of incidents which are deemed by those in positions of power to be determinative in America's foreign policy, in its educational policy, in its selection of past events to be memorialized in our civic life. The alleged facts of the Holocaust are today at issue all over the civilized world: in Germany, in France, in Italy, in Britain, in the Low Countries and Scandinavia, in Japan, across our border in Canada and in the United States of America itself. The truth will be decided only by recourse to the facts, in the public forum: not by concealing the facts, denying the truth, stonewalling reality. The truth will out, and it is time the government of this country, and governments and international bodies throughout the world, made public and patent the evidence of what actually transpired in the German concentration camps in the years 1933-1945, so that we may put paid to the lies, without fear or favor, and carry out the work of reconciliation and renewal that is and must be the granite foundation of mutual tolerance between peoples and of a peace based on justice, rather than on guns, barbed wire, prisons, and lies. NOTES 1. Crime Doctor, a biography of Larson by John D. McCallum, Mercer, Washington & Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, 1979, p. 69. 2. Wichita Eagle, April 1, 1980, p. 4C. 3. Crime Doctor, p. 46. 4. Wichita Eagle, April 1, 1980, 4G. 5. John E. Gordon, "Louse-Borne Typhus Fever in the European Theater of Operations, U.S. Army, 1945," in Forest Ray Moulton, Ed., Rickettsial Diseases of Man, Am. Acad. for the Advancement of Science, Washington D.C. 1948. 6. Toronto Star, February 8, 1985, p. A2. 7. New York Times, 24 September 1948, p. 3. 8. Interview with Lucius Clay, Official Proceeding of the George C. Marshall Research Foundation, cited in "Buchenwald: Legend and Reality," Mark Weber, The Journal of Historical Review, Vol. 7, no. 4. 9. International Military Tribunal, Vol. XVII, p. 556; IMT, Vol. XX, pp. 489, 438. 10. Cited in The Theory and Practice of Hell, Eugen Kogon, Berkley Books, New York, pp. 108-109. 11. Nuremberg document NO-1523. 12. Buchenwald: A Preliminary Report, Egon W. Fleck and Edward A. Tenenbaum, U.S. Army, 12th Army Group, 24 April 1945. National Archives, Record Group 331, SHAEF, G-5, 17.11, Jacket 10, Box 151 (8929/163-8929/180). 13. "Communist Atrocities at Buchenwald," Donald B. Robinson, in American Mercury, October 1946. 14. San Bernardino Sun-Telegram, March 13, 1966 (cited in The Man Who Invented "Genocide," James J. Martin, Institute for Historical Review, IHR, 1984, pp. 110-111. 15. "Concentration Camp at Natzwiller [sic]," RG 331, Records of Allied Operations and Occupation, Army Headquarters WW2, SHAEF/G-5/2717, Modern Military, National Archives, Washington, D.C., cited in Robert H. Abzug, Inside the Vicious Heart, Oxford University Press, New York, 1985, p. 10, p. 181. 16. Die Zeit, Hamburg, Germany, August 26, 1960. 17. Books & Bookmen, April 1975, Vol. 7, p. 5. 18. Leaflet, Memorial Site Concentration Camp Dachau, The International Dachau-Committee, Dachau, Germany, n.d. The conclusions of the early U.S. Army investigations as to the truth about the wartime German concentration camps have since been corroborated by all subsequent investigators and can be summarized: 1. The harrowing scenes of dead and dying inmates were not the result of a German policy of "extermination," but rather the result of epidemics of typhus and other disease brought about largely by the effects of Allied aerial attacks. 2. Stories of Nazi supercriminals and sadists who turned Jews and others into handbags and lampshades for their private profit or amusement were sick lies or diseased fantasies; indeed, the German authorities consistently punished corruption and cruelty on the part of camp commanders and guards. 3. On the other hand, the representations of the newly liberated inmates to have been saints and martyrs of Hitlerism were quite often very far from the truth; indeed, most of the brutalities inflicted on camp detainees were the work of their fellow prisoners, in contravention of German policy and German orders. 4. The alleged homicidal showers and gas chambers had been used either for bathing camp inmates or delousing their clothes; the claim that they had been used to murder Jews or other human beings is a contemptible fabrication. Orthodox, Establishment historians and professional "Natzi-hunters" have quietly dropped claims that inmates were gassed at Dachau, Buchenwald, and other camps in Germany. They continue, however, to keep silent regarding the lies about Dachau and Buchenwald, as well as to evade an open discussion of the evidence for homicidal gassing at Auschwitz and the other camps captured by the Soviets. The IHR publishes numerous revisionist books, tapes and other materials, as well as the bimonthly Journal of Historical Review. Send $2 for a packet of literature and full listing of books. Or, order more copies of this leaflet, postpaid, at the following prices: 10 copies: $2.00 -- 50 copies: $5.00 100 copies or more 8 cents each INSTITUTE FOR HISTORICAL REVIEW Post Office Box 2739 Newport Beach, California 92659, U.S.A. -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20306 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Revisionist answers Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 22:17:07 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 78 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article <3d3bms$1v5@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) wrote: > Greg Raven wrote: > > Perhaps, before we go into this, IHR employee and Hitler admirer > Greg Raven can tell us why Auschwitz had 5 large crematoriums, > with 52 cremation furnaces? > > Why does a "work camp" have 52 large cremation furnaces? The > "revisionists" don't deny this fact. Can they explain it? Easily. When you look at the population of Auschwitz-Birkenau, and you look at the number of crematories the Germans usually supplied per capita, you see that there is nothing out of the ordinary about the number of crematories at Auschwitz-Birkenau, especially given the deaths from typhus outbreaks. Check Mattogno's new book for all the details. Butz also gave a speech at the 1992 IHR Conference about this very issue. > # Astonishing as it may seem, more and more historians and engineers have > # been challenging the widely accepted Auschwitz story. > > "Engineers" like Fred Leuchter, who has a BA in the humanities. It's > hard to believe that Raven continues to make a fool of himself by > posting this old garbage. Leuchter was exposed as a liar, his > incredibly stupid "report" completely demolished, and Raven goes > on posting this tired old crap. Incredible, just incredible. Not only has Leuchter worked for years as an engineer, not only does he have patents in his name and numerous designs, but he has NOT been exposed as a liar. Every forensic test at Auschwitz or Birkenau since the Leuchter Report verifies his findings. > # A key Holocaust document is the "confession" of former Auschwitz > # commandant Rudolf Hoess of April 5, 1946, which was submitted by the U.S. > # prosecution at the main Nuremberg trial. (note 5) > > As noted here a thousand times, a much more important source is > Hoess' detailed autobiography. Ah, the often-quoted Hoess testimony, which is even quoted at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum, is now inconveniently shown to be FALSE, so you switch to something else. Hoess simply did not witness (nor order) any gassings. > # Many thousands of secret German documents dealing with Auschwitz were > # confiscated after the war by the Allies. Not a single one refers to a > # policy or program of extermination. > > Numerous such documents are posted here, including some detailing > the gassing process. FALSE. You post and repost and repost yet again testimonies and other irrelevant effluvia. If millions were gassed, there MUST be more evidence than post-war "testimonies" from people who cannot even lie straight. > # The head of the SS camp administration office sent a directive dated Dec. > # 28, 1942, to Auschwitz and the other concentration camps. It sharply > # criticized the high death rate of inmates due to disease, and ordered that > # "camp physicians must use all means at their disposal to significantly > # reduce the death rate in the various camps." > > Meant specifically for work camps, not extermination camps. There > are other such documents, in which leading Nazis complain that too > many Jews who can be used for work are being murdered: This order went to all camps, as clearly stated in the pamphlet ... or are you saying that all the known camps were merely concentration camps, and there were "secret" extermination camps that have not yet come to light? -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20307 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Himmler, Poznan, and Raven Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 22:25:08 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 67 Message-ID: References: <1994Dec20.171420.21862@hobbes.kzoo.edu> <3d7dph$f4m@amhux3.amherst.edu> <3d7okk$atl@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article <3d7okk$atl@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) wrote: > Greg Raven writes: > > # This is so simple: in a murder trial, the prosecution must > # produce the murder weapon. This murder weapon must be analyzed > # to determine if it was the actual murder weapon, etc. But in > # the case of the gas chambers, we are asked to accept that > # millions were murdered using a weapon that still has not been > # seen, tested, examined, etc. This is outrageous. > > To add to Josh Klein's article: > > 1) The prosecution, especially when historical events of such > magnitude are considered, does not have to "produce the > murder weapon". No one asks that the A-bomb dropped on > Hiroshima, for instance, be produced. No one asks that a > bomb dropped on Dresden, or on Coventry, be produced, or > that the weapons used by the NKVD to kill people in the > ex-USSR be produced. Raven's "argument" is ridiculous. Nonsense. Forensics testing could easily determine what had happened at the drop sites (grounds zero?) in Japan. There is no comparable evidence or site with regards the gas chambers. > 2) The gas chambers have, of course, been seen, and some can > be seen today. FALSE. If you think otherwise, show me a Nazi gas chamber. > 3) Some of the gas chambers have been examined, right after > the war. Pressac's book mentions the forensic tests that > chemists conducted on the ventilation grills of some of the > gas chambers, in which cyanic compounds were found. Cyanide traces on a grill do not a gas chamber make. The grills had been removed from the chambers, as had all the other pieces "tested." Where is this "gas chamber" today? > 4) One can only speculate on what Raven means by "tested". Does > he want people to be gassed in the gas chambers of Auschwitz > and Dachau, to prove that they were used for murder? Does > he want replicas to be built and people gassed in them? As > we all know, gassing with cyanide gas is no big deal. It > was done before WW2 in US jails. The Nazis were obviously > capable of doing this, especially since they had so much > experience with Zyklon-B and cyanide gas. No need for replicas, because above in point 2 you claim that Nazi gas chambers still exist today ... or are you not talking about Nazi gas chambers, but some other, meaningless gas chamber? As for the Nazi experience with Zyklon B, they had plenty of experience with other, faster acting gasses as well. Why would they chose a slow-action pesticide when there are so many other better gasses? First, however, I want you to show me that gas chamber! -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20308 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Greg's Back! (was Re: Seven Questions) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 22:27:19 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 32 Message-ID: References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA>, Keith Morrison wrote: > In article greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes: > > I am so honoured you have answered me. I would, however, rather you > answer to questions put to you repeatedly since May the 4th, 1994, > in a post that I've seen repeated multiple times since September but > which you seem inevitably to fail answering. Since you obviously > have the time to answer me, surely you can spare the but few moments > it will take for your vast knowledge and historiographic skills to > reply. I would so much rather that you and others, instead of saying "May the 4th," as if that has any meaning whatsoever, simply post the item(s) again. It's no secret that I have perhaps the worst Internet provider on the planet, but eventually, if you keep reposting this under some name I can recognize, I will respond. And please, make sure there are no "testimonies" or other specious garbage in this "May the 4th" post you are so eager for me to respond to. -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20325 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!scipio.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!news.unb.ca!UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA From: Keith Morrison Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Himmler, Poznan, and Raven Date: 21 DEC 94 06:58:42 AST Organization: The University of New Brunswick Lines: 44 Sender: usenet@UNB.CA Message-ID: <21DEC94.07536739.0048@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> References: <1994Dec20.171420.21862@hobbes.kzoo.edu> <3d7dph$f4m@amhux3.amherst.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: unbvm1.csd.unb.ca In article greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes: >> > >> > This is so simple: in a murder trial, the prosecution must produce the >> > murder weapon. This murder weapon must be analyzed to determine if it was >> > the actual murder weapon, etc. But in the case of the gas chambers, we are >> > asked to accept that millions were murdered using a weapon that still has >> > not been seen, tested, examined, etc. This is outrageous. >> >> This is patently untrue. The actual weapon is NOT required evidence in a >> murder trial. Quite frequently, murderers are convicted without this >> physical evidence, purely on the strength of eyewitness testimony. > >So you are saying, then, that there are no gas chambers for us to look at, >to examine? If there are, simply produce them. I find it difficult to >believe that anything approaching a fair legal system could convict an >entire peoples of millions of death by gassing without producing even one >little gas chamber. 1. The point was made that you made a clearly untrue statement that the murder weapon is required to convict a criminal. You should not change the subject when proven wrong. 2. The remains of the gas chambers exist, or did Freddy Leuchter look at charcoal briquettes at K-Mart? By the way, you _still_ have not answered the question about why the SS dynamited the buildings before retreating. Why, if they were simple delousing chambers/air raid shelters/morgues? 3. Since when have the Nazis and/or SS made up an "entire peoples"? Anyone new to a.r. take note of his implication that all Germans were condemned of gassing. They were not. Only a few were. The ones responsible, ie the Nazi leadership and camp operators. Revisionists will continually try to say "they say all the Germans were guilty" when we do not, have not and will not because we have no interest in creative editing of history to try and gain new disciples (or suckers, as the case may be). -- Keith Morrison t08o@unb.ca Murphy's Law of Combat #4 The diversion you're ignoring is the main attack. Article 20326 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Himmler, Poznan, and Raven Date: 21 Dec 1994 12:37:42 GMT Organization: Philosophers of the Dangerous Maybe Lines: 21 Message-ID: <3d97im$phb@agate.berkeley.edu> References: <1994Dec20.171420.21862@hobbes.kzoo.edu> <3d7dph$f4m@amhux3.amherst.edu> <3d7okk$atl@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu In article , Greg Raven wrote: >As for the Nazi experience with Zyklon B, they had plenty of experience >with other, faster acting gasses as well. Why would they chose a >slow-action pesticide when there are so many other better gasses? Could you be more precise? Which "faster acting gasses" might the Nazis have used instead of cyanide? If there were "so many other better gasses" then you shouldn't have any problem naming them. And remember, they have to be gasses with which the Nazis had plenty of experience, so their nerve gasses (which, btw, would have been much more difficult to use than cyanide) don't count. If, on the other hand, you did mean nerve gas, and you do think that the Nazis had plenty of experience with them, perhaps you could document this experience. -- Richard Schultz "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" Article 20328 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!scipio.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Revisionist answers Date: 21 Dec 1994 13:40:36 GMT Organization: Philosophers of the Dangerous Maybe Lines: 36 Message-ID: <3d9b8k$rkt@agate.berkeley.edu> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu In article , Greg Raven wrote: >Not only has Leuchter worked for years as an engineer, not only does he >have patents in his name and numerous designs, but he has NOT been exposed >as a liar. Every forensic test at Auschwitz or Birkenau since the Leuchter >Report verifies his findings. Leuchter claimed that he had been a consultant to various prisons regarding their technoloy for executions. The management of those prisons denied that he had ever been a consultant for them. That means that he was lying. What part of this do you not understand? In Massachusetts, in order to call yourself an engineer, you need a certificate that says you are an engineer. Leuchter claimed that he was an engineer, but had no certificate. That makes him a liar. What part of this do you not understand? That you do not understand is clear, because you continue to post the same lies over and over as if you haven't seen the refutations. Clearly, you are operating under some definition of "lie" with which I am unfamiliar. >FALSE. You post and repost and repost yet again testimonies and other >irrelevant effluvia. If millions were gassed, there MUST be more evidence >than post-war "testimonies" from people who cannot even lie straight. You have been asked this question numerous times, although I have not seen an answer. The claim is frequently made that Hoess's testimony was obtained under duress. What evidence do you have that Hoess was tortured? -- Richard Schultz "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" Article 20332 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!jabba.cybernetics.net!cybernetics.net!chip From: chip@cybernetics.net (Chip Salzenberg) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies Date: 21 Dec 1994 15:02:11 GMT Organization: Creative Cybernetics, Inc. Lines: 10 Message-ID: <3d9g1j$3fh@jabba.cybernetics.net> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: server0.cybernetics.net According to greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven): >Dr. Larson [...] informed Wichita Eagle reporter Jan Floerchinger that >"never was a case of poison gas uncovered." Of course not. Those gassed were cremated. -- Chip Salzenberg, aka "Don't move!" *BANG* "You have the right to remain silent!" *BANG!* "Anything you say can and will be used against you!" *SPLASH* -- Tom Servo, MST3K: "High School Bigshot" Article 20333 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!pm005-08.dialip.mich.net!user From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Revisionist answers Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 10:14:21 -0500 Organization: University of Michigan Lines: 108 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: pm005-08.dialip.mich.net This is one of the more amazing series of outright lies we've seen. But I'd expect no less from Mr. Raven. greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote: > dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) wrote: > > > Why does a "work camp" have 52 large cremation furnaces? The > > "revisionists" don't deny this fact. Can they explain it? > > Easily. When you look at the population of Auschwitz-Birkenau, and you > look at the number of crematories the Germans usually supplied per capita, > you see that there is nothing out of the ordinary about the number of > crematories at Auschwitz-Birkenau, especially given the deaths from typhus > outbreaks. Check Mattogno's new book for all the details. Butz also gave a > speech at the 1992 IHR Conference about this very issue. Proof by assertion. They say there's nothing out of the ordinary about the enormous capacity of the Auschwitz cremation furnaces, so therefore it's OK. Sorry, it doesn't work that way, Mr. Raven. Present an argument from this book of Mattogno's (published by whom, please?), or summarize Butz's position for us. Meantime, I might suggest a source for interested readers: the essays "The Machinery of Mass Murder at Auschwitz," by Pressac and van Pelt, and "A Site in Search of a Mission," by van Pelt, in the book _Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp_, Gutman and Berenbaum, eds., 1994. The former goes into great detail of which oven was ordered and built when, by whom, for how much money, right down to the kickbacks the engineers got. I believe the latter is the essay that compares the ratio of cremation capacity to inmate population of the various camps, quite interesting in a macabre way. > Not only has Leuchter worked for years as an engineer, not only does he > have patents in his name and numerous designs, Yes, he has two patents from the early 70s for, what, an electronic sextant and something else totally unrelated to this field? Please explain how those patents qualify him to judge chemical traces at Auschwitz, Mr. Raven. > but he has NOT been exposed > as a liar. Every forensic test at Auschwitz or Birkenau since the Leuchter > Report verifies his findings. Untrue. The Polish government did their own studies and rebutted Leuchter's conclusions re chemical analysis quite effectively. And the vast majority of the rest of his "Leuchter Report" is simply recycled old denier trash that is easily dismissable. Leuchter proves, for instance, that no one could have died at Auschwitz because to have killed six million Jews there would have taken something like forty-two years. As everyone knows, the claim is never made that six millions were killed at Auschwitz; more like 1.1 million Jews were gassed. And so on; the rest of the "Leuchter Report" is about that quality. > > # A key Holocaust document is the "confession" of former Auschwitz > > # commandant Rudolf Hoess of April 5, 1946, which was submitted by the U.S. > > # prosecution at the main Nuremberg trial. (note 5) > > > > As noted here a thousand times, a much more important source is > > Hoess' detailed autobiography. > > Ah, the often-quoted Hoess testimony, which is even quoted at the US > Holocaust Memorial Museum, is now inconveniently shown to be FALSE, so you > switch to something else. Hoess simply did not witness (nor order) any > gassings. This is unbelievable. Hoess' testimony regarding the number of victims, and _only_ regarding the number of victims, was based on figures he was given by Eichmann -- as Hoess himself explained in his testimony! When he totaled up more reliable figures, he got a total very close to modern historians' (about 1.3 million gassed, I believe). To jump from number-confusion to "Hoess did not witness any gassings" is simply laughable. The man wrote many accounts of the gassings he witnessed (and ordered) -- about the faces of the men and women going into the chambers, about the pleas of an old woman, the curse hissed at him by a young woman taking her beautiful child into the gas chambers, the way he had to act strong in front of his men to keep morale high... > > # Many thousands of secret German documents dealing with Auschwitz were > > # confiscated after the war by the Allies. Not a single one refers to a > > # policy or program of extermination. > > > > Numerous such documents are posted here, including some detailing > > the gassing process. > > FALSE. You post and repost and repost yet again testimonies and other > irrelevant effluvia. Another blatant lie. Himmler's Poznan speech is the one that jumps most quickly to mind, obviously, because we've been discussing it endlessly. That was indeed a secret German document; it was indeed confiscated after the war; it indeed refers to a policy of extermination. Mr. Raven has in fact been discussing it (in a manner of speaking) for the last few months; for him to say the above is almost unbelievable. Raven is engaging in what Hitler referred to as the "Big Lie," I suppose. -- Jamie McCarthy Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu AppleLink: j.mccarthy "The Jewish people will be exterminated...it's in our program." - Himmler "Until you find a reference to gas chambers, you can forget about long, drawn-out discussions of Himmler's speeches." - Raven Article 20338 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!spool.mu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.kei.com!ddsw1!golux.pr.mcs.net!user From: golux@mcs.com (The only Golux in the World, and not a mere Device) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Himmler, Poznan, and Raven Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 21:02:25 -0600 Organization: MCSNet Services Lines: 50 Message-ID: References: <1994Dec20.171420.21862@hobbes.kzoo.edu> <3d7dph$f4m@amhux3.amherst.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: golux.pr.mcs.net In article , greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote: > In article <3d7dph$f4m@amhux3.amherst.edu>, jaklein@unix.amherst.edu (Josh > Klein) wrote: > > [A PORTION OF Mr. RAVEN'S MESSAGE FOLLOWS] > > > > > This is so simple: in a murder trial, the prosecution must produce the > > > murder weapon. This murder weapon must be analyzed to determine if it was > > > the actual murder weapon, etc. But in the case of the gas chambers, we are > > > asked to accept that millions were murdered using a weapon that still has > > > not been seen, tested, examined, etc. This is outrageous. > > > > This is patently untrue. The actual weapon is NOT required evidence in a > > murder trial. Quite frequently, murderers are convicted without this > > physical evidence, purely on the strength of eyewitness testimony. > > So you are saying, then, that there are no gas chambers for us to look at, > to examine? If there are, simply produce them. I find it difficult to > believe that anything approaching a fair legal system could convict an > entire peoples of millions of death by gassing without producing even one > little gas chamber. Greg, are you suggesting that if I can't show you the actual gun with which John Wilkes Booth shot Abraham Lincoln that means that Lincoln wasn't assassinated? And what "entire people" has been convicted of millions of deaths? As far as I can tell, the Nazis were merely a subset of an "entire people," a government composed of bigoted thugs, and they committed mass murder. We can't produce every rifle with which the Einsatzgruppen killed hundreds of thousands, but it happened. We can't produce an actual working gas chamber for your edification, but they existed. For the final time (unless you persist in not comprehending), eyewitness testimony is as valid a way of determining what happened as any physical evidence. When thousands of eyewitnesses corroborate each other, it lends a great degree of credibility to their stories. When the perpetrators of a horrible crime admit in memoranda and confessions that they are guilty, that carries a great deal of evidentiary weight. The lack of a weapon, destroyed by the criminals to cover their tracks, does not -- repeat NOT -- disprove the crime. Please explain what in the foregoing paragraph you have trouble with. -- D. J. Schaeffer | The Todal looks like a blob of glup. golux@mcs.com | It makes a sound like rabbits screaming, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ and smells of old, unopened rooms. -- Thurber, _The 13 Clocks_ Article 20339 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!spool.mu.edu!mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!nyx10.cs.du.edu!not-for-mail From: choover@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Christopher Hoover) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Greg's Back! (was Re: Seven Questions) Date: 21 Dec 1994 08:35:11 -0700 Organization: University of Denver, Math/CS Dept. Lines: 80 Message-ID: <3d9hvf$jo5@nyx10.cs.du.edu> References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> NNTP-Posting-Host: nyx10.cs.du.edu X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #3 (NOV) greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes: >In article <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA>, Keith Morrison > wrote: >> In article >greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes: >> >> I am so honoured you have answered me. I would, however, rather you >> answer to questions put to you repeatedly since May the 4th, 1994, >> in a post that I've seen repeated multiple times since September but >> which you seem inevitably to fail answering. Since you obviously >> have the time to answer me, surely you can spare the but few moments >> it will take for your vast knowledge and historiographic skills to >> reply. >I would so much rather that you and others, instead of saying "May the >4th," as if that has any meaning whatsoever, simply post the item(s) >again. It's no secret that I have perhaps the worst Internet provider on >the planet, but eventually, if you keep reposting this under some name I >can recognize, I will respond. I might suggest to Mr. Raven that this particular disingenuous veneer wore thin several months ago. Anyone who has given this newsgroup even the most sporadic attention in the last several months by now is well aware that Mr. Raven has seen the post in question repeatedly. It has been reposted to this newsgroup any number of times. It has been e-mailed to Mr. Raven. He has, I believe, even acknowledged receipt of the May 4th material in e-mail (correct me if I'm wrong here, Jamie). The entire labyrinthine tale of Mr. Raven's egregious claims to have never seen the May 4th article is spelled out in one of Jamie McCarthy's WWW pages: http://www.kzoo.edu/~k044477/RUE3-RavenError07.html Bear in mind that this page is under construction, but when completed, it will include a link to a copy of the May 4th article. Then, Mr. Raven will be able to point his WWW browser at it any time, day or night, and have unfettered access to the article. And I'd be willing to bet that he _still_ won't respond to it. I don't know what's left to prove that Mr. Raven has seen the article. Registered mail? Surely, if most of the antirevisionists are anything like me, none of us can really afford to fly a courier and a notary public out to Mr. Raven's office to deliver the material in person so that they can personally attest that he has received it.... >And please, make sure there are no "testimonies" or other specious garbage >in this "May the 4th" post you are so eager for me to respond to. Here, we see a pathetic attempt by Mr. Raven to hedge his bets: once the I've-never-seen-the-article gambit wears too thin, he'll start in on his curious (and erroneous) rant about how testimony isn't evidence. Mr. Raven has repeatedly put forward this peculiar historiographic notion, but never once has he done so with references to any reputable, contemporary historiographers who agree with him. He just wants us to take it on faith because he says so. In September, I posted a lengthy discussion of this very issue, and referred to reputable historiographers to demonstrate that testimony is, indeed, evidence. The same article was reposted recently under the title "Greg Raven's False Historiography Redux." So far, Mr. Raven has been unwilling to respond to this article, or to engage me in any discussion of the issue whatsoever. Instead, he continues to cling to his false theory, repeating it like a mantra whenever necessary: "testimony is not evidence." Testimony _is_ evidence, Mr. Raven. Either address the historiographic issues concomitant to that statement, or concede the point. Or, better yet, continue to play the fool on this issue; it makes our job that much easier. Chris -- Christopher J. Hoover choover@nyx.cs.du.edu Kibo flavor: Unlisted Disclaimer: standard "Truth in Advertising" quote of the week: "Obviously, I don't have the intellectual brain-power of you guys." --Les Griswold Article 20344 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!world!bzs From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Subject: Re: Raven Wrong Again In-Reply-To: mstein@access4.digex.net's message of 21 Dec 1994 18:53:41 -0500 Message-ID: Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Organization: The World References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> <3daf65$31p@access4.digex.net> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 00:24:08 GMT Lines: 23 From: mstein@access4.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) >In article , >Greg Raven wrote: >>It's no secret that I have perhaps the worst Internet provider on >>the planet, > > Greg, don't you ever stop giving out misinformation? It is a >well-known fact that _everyone's_ Internet provider is the worst on the >planet. Not mine, mine's the best on the planet. Hell, it *is* the planet. (Warning: I have massive personal financial interests in expressing that opinion, but it happens to be true :-) -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | bzs@world.std.com | uunet!world!bzs Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD Article 20345 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!nyx10.cs.du.edu!not-for-mail From: choover@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Christopher Hoover) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Greg's Back! (was Re: Seven Questions) Date: 22 Dec 1994 14:26:54 -0700 Organization: University of Denver, Math/CS Dept. Lines: 96 Message-ID: <3dcquu$983@nyx10.cs.du.edu> References: <3d9hvf$jo5@nyx10.cs.du.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: nyx10.cs.du.edu X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #3 (NOV) greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes: >In article <3d9hvf$jo5@nyx10.cs.du.edu>, choover@nyx10.cs.du.edu >(Christopher Hoover) wrote: >> greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes: >> >I would so much rather that you and others, instead of saying "May the >> >4th," as if that has any meaning whatsoever, simply post the item(s) >> >again. It's no secret that I have perhaps the worst Internet provider on >> >the planet, but eventually, if you keep reposting this under some name I >> >can recognize, I will respond. >> >> I might suggest to Mr. Raven that this particular disingenuous veneer >> wore thin several months ago. Anyone who has given this newsgroup even >> the most sporadic attention in the last several months by now is well >> aware that Mr. Raven has seen the post in question repeatedly. It has >> been reposted to this newsgroup any number of times. It has been >> e-mailed to Mr. Raven. He has, I believe, even acknowledged receipt of >> the May 4th material in e-mail (correct me if I'm wrong here, Jamie). >You see what I mean? I ask for the material to be reposted, and this is >what I get! You get...what, exactly, Mr. Raven? Do you mean that you get it pointed out to you that the May 4th article has been reposted (which is what you seem to be asking for) _repeatedly_, with you ignoring it _every single time_? Or perhaps you mean that you get a golden opportunity in the form of an invitation to discuss with me the substantial historiographic issue of whether testimony is evidence, but instead you snip that part of my message from your reply and ignore it. Are you willing to address this issue, Mr. Raven, or do you have nothing to contribute here but your own peculiar and unsupported opinions regarding historiography? Or perhaps you mean that you get a URL to a WWW page that will soon provide a copy of the May 4th article to which you can have access, morning, noon, and night? To give credit where due, Mr. Raven, your WWW pages are fairly nicely-designed, so I'm assuming that you possess sufficient acumen to know how to point your Web browser at Mr. McCarthy's RUE pages as well. Or perhaps you are implying that instead of pointing out your obvious disingenuity on this issue, I should, at _your_ whim, have _reposted_ the May 4th article for you, only to have you ignore it again? I would point out to you that I am _not_ one of the authors of the article, Mr. Raven. With the actual authors of the piece active on this newsgroup, I hardly see that it would be my place to go reposting their words for them when they can, and should, do so when they please (which, of course, they have done at least a dozen times since May 4th). Given the number of times this message has been reposted and sent for you, Mr. Raven, you're hardly in a position to demand that everyone else jump through your silly little hoops before you'll deign to reply. Your evasiveness wears thin. If anyone reading this doubts that Mr. Raven's reply to me here is wholly evasive, I invite you to go back and read the message to which Mr. Raven is replying. Take note of how much of my message he conveniently snipped and ignored, and ask yourself whether he has addressed even _one_ of the issues I raised. >It might also be said that anyone who even casually visits this newsgroup >knows that I routinely discard all e-mailed forwards from alt.revisionism. Let's see. The article in question has been posted and reposted to this newsgroup _repeatedly_, and been wholly ignored by Mr. Raven. It has been e-mailed to him, and he has acknowledged its receipt, and then, it would seem, immediately discarded it unread. How, then, are we to make sure Mr. Raven has seen this article? Mr. Raven seems unable to receive the message in the two most immediate and convenient forms, e-mail and news. What method of transport, then, would Mr. Raven prefer? These questions are not rhetorical, Mr. Raven. Have you read any of the posted copies of this message? Have you read any of the e-mailed copies of this message? Yes or No answers on these questions, as well, would be hepful. >I'll say it again: I think this "evidence" that they have that they call >the "May 4th" post is actually nothing more than a bunch of disjointed >testimonies and other non-sequitors. Oh, good. You've chosen to continue playing the fool on the historiographic (non-)issue of whether testimony is evidence. Thanks--that's less work for me.... Chris -- Christopher J. Hoover choover@nyx.cs.du.edu Kibo flavor: Unlisted Disclaimer: standard "Truth in Advertising" quote of the week: "Obviously, I don't have the intellectual brain-power of you guys." --Les Griswold Article 20347 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!spool.mu.edu!mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!nyx10.cs.du.edu!not-for-mail From: choover@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Christopher Hoover) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Greg's Back! (was Re: Seven Questions) Date: 22 Dec 1994 14:40:08 -0700 Organization: University of Denver, Math/CS Dept. Lines: 33 Message-ID: <3dcrno$bis@nyx10.cs.du.edu> References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> <1994Dec21.195757.20767@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: nyx10.cs.du.edu X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #3 (NOV) greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes: >In article <1994Dec21.195757.20767@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>, >kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay) wrote: >> By the way, the article in question will be published again, on the >> 4th. of January - the eighth anniversary, so to speak, of its >> original appearance. >I thought anniversaries came yearly. >Nevermind. I certainly wouldn't ask you to produce that post now, while my >Internet connection seems to (sort of) work and I sort of have time to >respond. No, no. Much better to way a couple of weeks or so. Well, Mr. Raven, during this period when you "sort of have time to respond," I have, in fact, reposted my lengthy analysis of your views regarding historiography and testimony as evidence. Surely you noticed it, under the title "Greg Raven's False Historiography Redux." In the mean time, while you're waiting for January 4th to roll around, perhaps you might find the time to reply to it, and let us know just who the reputable, contemporary historiographers are who agree with you on this issue. You _have_ based your opinion on legitimate historiography, haven't you, Mr. Raven? Chris -- Christopher J. Hoover choover@nyx.cs.du.edu Kibo flavor: Unlisted Disclaimer: standard "Truth in Advertising" quote of the week: "Obviously, I don't have the intellectual brain-power of you guys." --Les Griswold Article 20349 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!sparky!kwiudl.kwi.com!netcomsv!netcomsv!netcom.com!codfish From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell) Subject: Re: Greg's Back! (was Re: Seven Questions) Message-ID: Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1] References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> <3d9hvf$jo5@nyx10.cs.du.edu> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 05:13:13 GMT Lines: 5 I thought this was supposed to be a joint search for Historical Truth. Instead it seems to be some kind of private feud between you and Greg Raven. Why don't you fill us in on what you're talking about? Ross Vicksell Article 20352 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!swiss.ans.net!jabba.cybernetics.net!cybernetics.net!chip From: chip@cybernetics.net (Chip Salzenberg) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies Date: 22 Dec 1994 22:01:41 GMT Organization: Creative Cybernetics, Inc. Lines: 23 Message-ID: <3dct05$d00@jabba.cybernetics.net> References: <3d9g1j$3fh@jabba.cybernetics.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: server0.cybernetics.net According to greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven): >In article <3d9g1j$3fh@jabba.cybernetics.net>, chip@cybernetics.net (Chip >Salzenberg) wrote: >> According to greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven): >> >Dr. Larson [...] informed Wichita Eagle reporter Jan Floerchinger that >> >"never was a case of poison gas uncovered." >> >> Of course not. Those gassed were cremated. > >Very glib. Now, can you support that statement with any evidence? Not that would satisfy you, apparently. I based my statement on the evidence already posted to alt.revisionism by Keren, Shein, and McVay, among others, and backed up by an Auschwitz survivor whom I know. You archivists: Thank you. Keep up the good work. You deniers: -- Chip Salzenberg, aka "Don't move!" *BANG* "You have the right to remain silent!" *BANG!* "Anything you say can and will be used against you!" *SPLASH* -- Tom Servo, MST3K: "High School Bigshot" Article 20353 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail From: mstein@access4.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Raven refuted by Leuchter Report! Date: 23 Dec 1994 14:19:15 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Lines: 40 Message-ID: <3df7rj$t5@access4.digex.net> References: <1994Dec20.171420.21862@hobbes.kzoo.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: access4.digex.net In article , Greg Raven wrote: >In article , >k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote: > >> This is sophistry, of course -- there are seven Nazi gas chambers in >> varying states of preservation in Auschwitz/Birkenau. The Reinhard >> camps' gas chambers, of course, did not survive, being dismantled over >> a year before the war's end. I don't know much about Majdanek but I >> gather its gas chamber was dismantled as well (corrections welcome). > >FALSE. There are buildings and rooms that are presented as having been gas >chambers, but none of them could have operated as such. Every test and >examination of these facilities confirms this. Just to give Greg an additional chance at seeing this information: FALSE. Even Fred Leuchter admitted in the Leuchter Report that his examination of Majdanek Bath and Delousing No. 1, Chamber 1, confirms it _could_ have operated as an execution chamber using bottled carbon monoxide, and in fact it has piping to a steel cylinder (contained in the control booth) consistent with that use and inconsistent with delousing use. (And although he declared that it was unsuitable for use as a delousing or HCN execution chamber because it lacked sealant and had dangerous "trap" areas, he admitted that it had prussian blue staining - which proves it _was_ used for delousing at the very least.) The original commission of investigation at Majdanek reported finding cylinders of carbon monoxide, a substance whose use in a concentration camp is (to me) unfathomable. Do you have an explanation of what innocent use it could possibly have, Greg? Physical evidence consistent with homicide and inconsistent with anything I can think of. Technically feasible system of delivery as admitted to by your own "expert," Greg. Didn't you read the Leuchter Report carefully? Too bad. -- Mike Stein The above represents the Absolute Truth. POB 10420 Therefore it cannot possibly be the official Arlington, VA 22210 position of my employer. Article 20354 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Himmler, Poznan, and Raven Date: 21 Dec 1994 20:37:53 GMT Organization: Brown University Lines: 32 Message-ID: <3da3n1$el8@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> References: <1994Dec20.171420.21862@hobbes.kzoo.edu> <3d7dph$f4m@amhux3.amherst.edu> <3d7okk$atl@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu Greg Raven wrote: # Nonsense. Forensics testing could easily determine what had happened at # the drop sites (grounds zero?) in Japan. There is no comparable evidence # or site with regards the gas chambers. There is - the traces of cyanic compounds. I'm still waiting for Raven's forensic evidence that WW2 happened, or that one person in Europe was killed by Allied bombers. Where is the proof? # FALSE. If you think otherwise, show me a Nazi gas chamber. In Auschwitz, Maidanek, and Dachau. # Cyanide traces on a grill do not a gas chamber make. Yes they do, as they prove cyanide gas was used in it. # As for the Nazi experience with Zyklon B, they had plenty of experience # with other, faster acting gasses as well. Why would they chose a # slow-action pesticide when there are so many other better gasses? "Slow-action"? So it took, say, 20 minutes for the people in the gas chamber to die. That was fast enough. It was much easier and cheaper to use Zyklon-B than nerve gas, etc. -Danny Keren. Article 20356 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail From: mstein@access4.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Revisionist answers Date: 23 Dec 1994 14:27:09 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Lines: 26 Message-ID: <3df8ad$14o@access4.digex.net> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: access4.digex.net In article , Greg Raven wrote: >In article , >k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote: > >> Proof by assertion. They say there's nothing out of the ordinary about >> the enormous capacity of the Auschwitz cremation furnaces, so therefore >> it's OK. > >My Iway connection is too flakey to get into all of this, so I'll stop >here at the first error. My "assertion" includes references to two >scholarly works on EXACTLY THIS TOPIC. Please read the material referred >to before continuing. Why don't you post some of it, Greg, so that everyone can see these gems of scholarship? Or are you afraid of exactly that thing? If they're anything like Mark Weber's "scholarship" about the size of graves at Treblinka, I could certainly understand why. Which reminds me - you never answered my question as to whether you showed my demolition of his argument to Weber. Another attack of ARMS? You guessed it - posted and emailed. -- Mike Stein The above represents the Absolute Truth. POB 10420 Therefore it cannot possibly be the official Arlington, VA 22210 position of my employer. Article 20358 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!scipio.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!prime.mdata.fi!mits.mdata.fi!kauhunen From: kauhunen@mits.mdata.fi (Kari Nenonen) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies Date: 22 Dec 1994 17:28:02 GMT Organization: Mits BBS, Helsinki, Finland (40+ Nodes +358-0-4582066) Lines: 29 Message-ID: <3dccv2$293@prime.mdata.fi> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: mits.mdata.fi In article , Barry Shein wrote: >I hope this little exercise in Raven's and the IHR's cheap and tawdry >lying and half-truths has been enlightening. Yes, Barry, enlightening and quite funny, thank you. What would you expect from a professional liar like Raven? He is following the good advice of his Master's, Dr. Goebbels: "If you repeat the lie many enough times, it becomes the truth". I'd like to wish all of my friends here a merry Xmas and a happy New Year. The Wars are over, if we want it! > > >-- > -Barry Shein > >Software Tool & Die | bzs@world.std.com | uunet!world!bzs >Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD -- Kari Nenonen # WANHOJEN HERROJEN TIETEISKIRJALLISUUDEN NAUTISKELUHUONE Maavallintie 4 # "Parempi katon reunalla kuin 00430 Helsinki # toraisan vaimon huonetoverina" Finland # Raamattu Article 20360 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!hudson.lm.com!netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news1.digex.net!news.iac.net!ip041220.iac.net!user From: jeff_brown@pol.com (Jeffrey G. Brown) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Revisionist answers Date: 23 Dec 1994 04:21:21 GMT Organization: Internet Access Cincinnati 513-887-8877 Lines: 24 Message-ID: References: <3d9b8k$rkt@agate.berkeley.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: ip041220.iac.net In article , greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote: > In article <3d9b8k$rkt@agate.berkeley.edu>, schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu > (Richard Schultz) wrote: > > > > Leuchter claimed that he had been a consultant to various prisons > > regarding their technoloy for executions. The management of those > > prisons denied that he had ever been a consultant for them. That > > means that he was lying. What part of this do you not understand? > > It was not Leuchter who lied, but the prison managements. Perhaps now you > understand. Raven, present your _SINGLE_ best piece of evidence that the prison management lied. Posted and emailed. JGB ===================================================================== Jeffrey G. Brown jeff_brown@pol.com "What's going to happen?" "Something wonderful..." -- '2010' Article 20361 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!sparky!kwiudl.kwi.com!netcomsv!netcomsv!netcom.com!codfish From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell) Subject: Re: Revisionist answers Message-ID: Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1] References: <3d9b8k$rkt@agate.berkeley.edu> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 05:31:55 GMT Lines: 37 Richard Schultz (schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu) wrote: : In article , : Greg Raven wrote: : >Not only has Leuchter worked for years as an engineer, not only does he : >have patents in his name and numerous designs, but he has NOT been exposed : >as a liar. Every forensic test at Auschwitz or Birkenau since the Leuchter : >Report verifies his findings. : Leuchter claimed that he had been a consultant to various prisons : regarding their technoloy for executions. The management of those : prisons denied that he had ever been a consultant for them. That : means that he was lying. What part of this do you not understand? : In Massachusetts, in order to call yourself an engineer, you need a : certificate that says you are an engineer. Leuchter claimed that : he was an engineer, but had no certificate. That makes him a liar. : What part of this do you not understand? : That you do not understand is clear, because you continue to post : the same lies over and over as if you haven't seen the refutations. : Clearly, you are operating under some definition of "lie" with : which I am unfamiliar. : >FALSE. You post and repost and repost yet again testimonies and other : >irrelevant effluvia. If millions were gassed, there MUST be more evidence : >than post-war "testimonies" from people who cannot even lie straight. : You have been asked this question numerous times, although I have : not seen an answer. The claim is frequently made that Hoess's : testimony was obtained under duress. What evidence do you have that : Hoess was tortured? : -- : Richard Schultz : "It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean. Do you have to salt your : truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?" Article 20365 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail From: mstein@access4.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Where to find a Nazi gas chamber - no problem Date: 22 Dec 1994 12:21:04 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Lines: 42 Message-ID: <3dcci0$6oo@access4.digex.net> References: <1994Dec20.171420.21862@hobbes.kzoo.edu> <3d7dph$f4m@amhux3.amherst.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: access4.digex.net In article , Greg Raven wrote: >So you are saying, then, that there are no gas chambers for us to look at, >to examine? If there are, simply produce them. Obviously Greg Raven is not up on the latest "revisionist" scholarship. I refer him to Majdanek Bath and Delousing Building #1, Chamber #1. Unlike the Auschwitz Kremas, these buildings were not dynamited. The chamber contains Prussian Blue staining, proving that HCN was used there. Impossibly, Fred Leuchter says it could have been used to kill lice with HCN but not people - even though lice are actually harder to kill with HCN. This alone proves that Leuchter has no idea what he is talking about. If it can kill lice, it can kill people - far more easily, in fact. If it takes a week to vent when used to kill people, it takes a week to vent when used to kill lice, and therefore would seem to be equally unsuitable for use as an HCN delousing chamber. Yet it has the heater and circulation system characteristic of such use, and the Prussian Blue staining proves that it was used for that purpose at the very least. However, there are also pipes running from steel cylinders into the chamber, consistent with the reported use of bottled CO and inconsistent with any delousing function. Even Fred Leuchter was forced to admit that this chamber would be functional for CO execution. Please refer to pp. 17-18 of the Leuchter Report. Since it is the one he always refers to, the laughable Leuchter Report is presumably Raven's BEST EVIDENCE that forensic analysis proves there could have been no homicidal gas chambers. Yet even this document, when read carefully, admits finding a structure which would be fully functional as a homicidal gas chamber consistent with eyewitness testimony of such usage. Since even his own best evidence proves him wrong, I trust that Greg Raven will now stop saying that no such structure exists. Posted/emailed. -- Mike Stein The above represents the Absolute Truth. POB 10420 Therefore it cannot possibly be the official Arlington, VA 22210 position of my employer. Article 20367 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!pm005-08.dialip.mich.net!user From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Circular reasoning and "faster acting gasses" Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 11:22:47 -0500 Organization: University of Michigan Lines: 64 Message-ID: References: <1994Dec20.171420.21862@hobbes.kzoo.edu> <3d7dph$f4m@amhux3.amherst.edu> <3d7okk$atl@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> NNTP-Posting-Host: pm005-08.dialip.mich.net greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote: > > 2) The gas chambers have, of course, been seen, and some can > > be seen today. > > FALSE. If you think otherwise, show me a Nazi gas chamber. This is sophistry, of course -- there are seven Nazi gas chambers in varying states of preservation in Auschwitz/Birkenau. The Reinhard camps' gas chambers, of course, did not survive, being dismantled over a year before the war's end. I don't know much about Majdanek but I gather its gas chamber was dismantled as well (corrections welcome). Mr. Raven, of course, says that none of the seven in the Auschwitz camp is a real gas chamber. His argument thus runs as follows: * There are no Nazi gas chambers, because * No one can show me a Nazi gas chamber, because * There are no Nazi gas chambers. > As for the Nazi experience with Zyklon B, they had plenty of experience > with other, faster acting gasses as well. Why would they chose a > slow-action pesticide when there are so many other better gasses? Oh, now this is a good one. Mr. Raven, please name one other "better" or "faster acting" gas. I doubt you'll be able to do so. HCN is incredibly fast-acting. Cyanide is so toxic it's used today in American gas chambers for convicted criminals. 300 parts per _million_ will kill a human being in just a few minutes. And while "better" is a subjective term, I doubt a "better" gas could be found. It was available in quantity already, because it was being used for delousing. It is not inflammable at the concentrations used for homicidal gassing. I'm reminded of Friedrich Berg's claim that the Nazis could have come up with much better, faster-acting means of killing at the Reinhard camps besides diesel engines. His suggestion was the CO-producer engines, which, he proudly stated, gave off a concentration of carbon monoxide in excess of twenty percent. Well, Mr. Berg failed to mention that that gas is highly flammable at that concentration; in fact, the output of those engines was used as fuel for other engines. Had the Nazis used that "better" means of killing Jews, the entire gas chamber building would have gone up like a torch. Shortly after I pointed that out, Mr. Berg left the net, never having addressed my point. I'll make a bold prediction here: I'll predict that Mr. Raven will never offer us a "better, faster acting gas" than the HCN produced by Zyklon-B. We can probably put this into a "questions Greg Raven won't answer" file right now: Mr. Raven, you have stated that Zyklon-B was a "slow-action pesticide," and that there were "many other better, faster acting gasses" from which they could have chosen. Would you please name one? -- Jamie McCarthy Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu AppleLink: j.mccarthy "The Jewish people will be exterminated...it's in our program." - Himmler "Until you find a reference to gas chambers, you can forget about long, drawn-out discussions of Himmler's speeches." - Raven Article 20368 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies Date: 21 Dec 1994 21:01:09 GMT Organization: Brown University Lines: 40 Message-ID: <3da52l$gig@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu Vicksell posted this old nonsense a few months ago. Comments were made, and of course he didn't respond. Now, Raven posts it again. A few short comments: 1) It is simply a lie to state that Holocaust historians say that no gassing took place in the camps inside the "Old Reich" (Germany proper). I've quoted here the summary published two years ago by the "Institute for Contemporary History" in Munich, naming seven camps inside the "Old Reich" in which gassing took place. It is true that the gassing was on a smaller scale than the gassing in the death camps the SS built in Nazi-occupied Poland. 2) The "revisionist" claim that people died in the camps inside the "Old Reich" mostly towards the end of the war, because lack of supplies etc, is another outright lie. In the very same letter of Dr. Broszat which is mentioned in the article posted, the following appears: in just the 12 months from July 1942 through June 1943, 110,812 people died according to official SS statistics in all of the concentration camps of the Reich from disease and hunger. Note! "Of the Reich" does not, of course, include the death camps in Poland. 3) The article mentions the testimony of Dr. Konrad Morgen. Of course, our "revisionist scholars" somehow "forgot" that Morgen also testified, at great length, about mass murder by gas in Nazi camps. -Danny Keren. Article 20369 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!kmcvay From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay) Subject: Re: Revisionist evasion References: <3d9b8k$rkt@agate.berkeley.edu> Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac Message-ID: <1994Dec26.002256.15017@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> Date: Mon, 26 Dec 94 00:22:56 GMT Jeff Brown responds to Greg-I'm-Not-The-IHR-.ihr: >> It was not Leuchter who lied, but the prison managements. Perhaps now you >> understand. >Raven, present your _SINGLE_ best piece of evidence that the prison >management lied. You GOTTA hand it to greg.ihr <--- NOT IHR, just ihr - no matter how devastating or irrefutable a piece of evidence might be (in this case, multiple pieces of evidence, from multiple prisons), he has a stock answer. There is no proof, there is no reality. There is only Raven's myopic insistence upon whoppers the size of the Washington Monument and then some. Raven seems to have a singularly pointed sort of malady: he just can't see the forest for the trees. No matter what you do, no matter what you say; No matter how strong the evidence, or how unimpeachible the source; No matter how valid the method, how numerous the documented proofs.. Mr. Raven will simply not see it. He won't see your article. He won't see any similar replies. You can email it to him - he will acknowledge receipt, and then claim not to have received it. You can post it here, again and again, and Mr. Raven will not see it. You can, in fact, post the same article here, month after month, but Mr. Raven will not see it. Mr. Raven _does_ see some articles, but he is too busy to respond. Mr. Raven actually _reads_ some articles, but he is still too busy to respond. Mr. Raven, we are given to understand, is a very busy man. But Mr. Raven has all the time he needs to build his Non-IHR IHR WEB page. Mr. Raven has all the time he needs to publish Weber's tired claptrap. Mr. Raven has all the time he needs to publish that idiot O'Keefe. But Mr. Raven does _not_ have time to deal with your post... just as well, since he won't "see" it, anyway. What you have not, and will not, see from Mr. Raven, are _facts_. You might telephone the relevant officials, and interview them. You might receive the same information from the United States Justice Department, or the United States Bureau of Prisons, or whatever it's called. Mr. Raven would not be impressed. He has, you see, forgotten to take his own advice: "However, it is sophistry to proclaim that something must have happened a certain way because your `reason' demands it." And there, in a nutshell, you have Mr. Raven. He demands proof, and rejects it; his "reason" demands it. He proclaims his racist vitriol as "something that must have happened that way," and deomonstrates that "reason" demands it. Sophistry, indeed. -- "Mr XXXXXXX is obviously Jewish and a living example of why the Nazis tried to remove Jews from Europe and short of that, into concentration camps for the duration of the war." (Fritz Berg, June 26, 1994) ============================ Nizkor ================================ Article 20372 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news2.near.net!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Revisionist answers Date: 21 Dec 1994 21:26:06 GMT Organization: Brown University Lines: 103 Message-ID: <3da6he$i2f@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu Greg Raven wrote: # Easily. When you look at the population of Auschwitz-Birkenau, # and you look at the number of crematories the Germans usually # supplied per capita, you see that there is nothing out of the # ordinary about the number of crematories at Auschwitz-Birkenau, # especially given the deaths from typhus outbreaks. This is, possibly, the most stupid statement ever posted here by a "revisionist scholar" (well, with "Doyal" excluded). Let's see what Raven himself gave as the number of prisoners at Auschwitz: # For example, an internal German telex message dated Sept. 4, 1943, # from the chief of the Labor Allocation department of the SS # Economic and Administrative Main Office (WVHA), reported that of # 25,000 Jewish inmates in Auschwitz and # This is also confirmed in a secret report dated April 5, 1944, on # "security measures in Auschwitz" by Oswald Pohl, head of the SS # concentration camp system, to SS chief Heinrich Himmler. Pohl reported # that there was a total of 67,000 inmates in the entire Auschwitz camp So, Raven is claiming that five crematoriums and 52 (!!) cremation furnaces were needed for a few tens-of-thousands of people! A little calculation, assuming 15 cremations per furnace per day (although a much higher figure was obtained; also, assuming 70,000 prisoners): Let's compute mortality rate per month: (52*15*30*100)/70000 = 33.4 So, we're talking about a "work camp" in which about a third of the "workers" die every month! Raven is simply insane. Taking the average between the number of people in the camp in the two dates he gave gives 46,000 and a mortality rate of (52*15*30*100)/46000 = 50.8 So, here we have a "work camp" with about 51 percent of its "workers" dying every month... Raven may claim typhus caused all these deaths, but that's nearly irrelevant. If typhus was killing half of the population every month, why did they keep sending people there? That's just plain murder, right? This incredible cremation power was not for those who died in the camp. It was mostly for those murdered upon arrival - about 85 percent of the deportees. It's also important to emphasize that building these crematoriums was a long process. They were not constructed in a week or so. This is something that one does only if he knows he'll have to dispose of a great many corpses for a length of time. Otherwise, if one just expects peaks in the "death curve" here and there, he can store the corpses in morgues and cremate them over some length of time. One cannot do this if he's expecting a thousand or so corpses per day - he'll run out of morgue space and will not be able to dispose of all the corpses unless he has enough cremation power to prevent accumulation of corpses. # Not only has Leuchter worked for years as an engineer, So, he lied about his credentials. Big deal. # Every forensic test at Auschwitz or Birkenau since the Leuchter # Report verifies his findings. The error is, of course, in the interpretation of the forensic tests. Leuchter "forgot" that it takes a far longer exposure to kill lice than people, hence the higher concentration of cyanide compounds in the delousing chambers than in the gas chambers. Really, we've been through this before. # Hoess simply did not witness (nor order) any gassings. Strange, the SS-men who were at Auschwitz, and Hoess himself, hold a rather different opinion. Was Raven at Auschwitz during WW2? If not, why does he claim all these people are wrong and he is right? # FALSE. You post and repost and repost yet again testimonies and other # irrelevant effluvia. Testimonies are relevant, and documents about gassing and mass shootings are also relevant. Re the letter about "lowering the death rate": I included a similar letter, which asked that some Jews fit for work will no longer be executed because the German army needs them for forced labor. Raven, of course, edited it out. I'll post more on this soon. -Danny Keren. Article 20373 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Greg's Back! Date: 22 Dec 1994 12:17:22 GMT Organization: Philosophers of the Dangerous Maybe Lines: 11 Message-ID: <3dbqoi$r7n@agate.berkeley.edu> References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <19DEC94.08960465.0073@unbvm1.csd.unb.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu And isn't it an *amazing* "coincidence" that Wayne McGuire announced that he was no longer reading alt.revisionism just days before Raven showed up again? And that after a long absence, "landpost" makes a cameo appearance? I would really love to see those guys try to disprove my theory that "Wayne McGuire" has no existence except as a fictional creation of the two of them. -- Richard Schultz "I seem to smell a peculiar and a fishlike smell." Article 20376 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Revisionist answers Date: 22 Dec 1994 12:24:15 GMT Organization: Philosophers of the Dangerous Maybe Lines: 17 Message-ID: <3dbr5f$r92@agate.berkeley.edu> References: <3d9b8k$rkt@agate.berkeley.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu In article , Greg Raven wrote: >It was not Leuchter who lied, but the prison managements. Perhaps now you >understand. Yes, I understand that you are a complete lunatic. If the prison managements lied (i.e. perjured themselves in a court of law), why didn't Leuchter at least sue them for libel (their public statements are on record); why did he not sue them for his loss of business; why did his lawyer not at least try to cross-examine the managements into revealing their perjury; why did not Leuchter try to lobby the authorities to have these prison managements taken to court for their perjury? -- Richard Schultz "You don't even have a clue as to which clue you're missing." -- Miss Manners Article 20377 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Greg's Back! (was Re: Seven Questions) Date: 22 Dec 1994 12:25:59 GMT Organization: Philosophers of the Dangerous Maybe Lines: 17 Message-ID: <3dbr8n$r99@agate.berkeley.edu> References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <19DEC94.08960465.0073@unbvm1.csd.unb.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu In article , Greg Raven wrote: >Why not produce one? Remember, my original, still unanswered challenge is >for you or anyone else to produce the BEST evidence that the Nazis had a >plan or policy to gas the Jews during WWII. If you have that evidence, >produce it. Remember, my original, still unsatisfied challenge is for you or anyone else to produce the BEST evidence that World War II even happened. Kleim tried, and failed miserably. Go ahead, Raven, if you're such a hotshot historian, it shouldn't be too tough. Just provide me with the one or two BEST pieces of evidence that World War II ever occurred. -- Richard Schultz "I seem to smell a peculiar and a fishlike smell." Article 20378 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Revisionist answers Date: 22 Dec 1994 12:29:00 GMT Organization: Philosophers of the Dangerous Maybe Lines: 14 Message-ID: <3dbrec$r9n@agate.berkeley.edu> References: <3da6he$i2f@cat.cis.brown.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu In article <3da6he$i2f@cat.cis.brown.edu>, Danny Keren wrote: >This is, possibly, the most stupid statement ever posted here >by a "revisionist scholar" (well, with "Doyal" excluded). With all due respect to Dr. Keren, I find this statement tremendously unfair to Tim "landpost" McCarthy. He regularly posted comments of a stupidity level that Doyal, Raven, Vicksell, Smith, Kleim, et al. can only dream of. -- Richard Schultz "A fool always finds a greater fool to admire him." -- Nicolas Boileau Article 20381 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!darkstar.UCSC.EDU!news.hal.COM!olivea!uunet!world!bzs From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Subject: Re: Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Wed, 21 Dec 1994 21:14:01 -0800 Message-ID: Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Organization: The World References: <3d9g1j$3fh@jabba.cybernetics.net> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 06:43:09 GMT Lines: 25 From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) >> >Dr. Larson [...] informed Wichita Eagle reporter Jan Floerchinger that >> >"never was a case of poison gas uncovered." >> >> Of course not. Those gassed were cremated. > >Very glib. Now, can you support that statement with any evidence? Sure! Hoss himself: During my visit to Kumhof I also saw the extermination installation, with the lorry which had been set up for killing by means of motor exhaust fumes. The head of the Kommando told me that this method, however, was very unreliable, as the gas build-up was very irregular and was often insufficient for killing. Rudolf Hoss, Commandant of Auschwitz, on a visit to Chelmno on 16 September 1942 -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | bzs@world.std.com | uunet!world!bzs Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD Article 20383 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!world!bzs From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Subject: Re: Liberation of the camps In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Wed, 21 Dec 1994 21:22:15 -0800 Message-ID: Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Organization: The World References: Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 06:48:36 GMT Lines: 54 From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) >It is true that "Holocaust" historians are now backtracking on earlier >statements regarding the location of the "gas chambers." However, they >have no evidence of ANY gas chambers ANYWHERE. If this statement is in >error SHOW ME A NAZI GAS CHAMBER. If the only evidence you will accept is a Nazi gas chamber then clearly you are not to be taken seriously. What's your problem with, for examples, memos written between Nazi officers during the regular course of their duties describing the gassings etc? I know I know, forgeries all forgeries. Well, then how would you know that a gas chamber wasn't some sort of forgery? Who do you think you're kidding? You're just raving. Why do you suppose Hitler boasted about exterminating the Jews of Central and Eastern Europe in his Last Will & Testament? I know, more forgeries, so fucking convenient Raven...a pat answer for everything. Truth be told if you were shown a working gas chamber you wouldn't be satisfied in the slightest, you'd just claim it was a phony (so easy to speak those words) and be off and running (at the mouth) again... =//= "Since December 1941, for example, 97,000 were processed using three vans, without any faults occuring in the vehicles." Dr August Becker on 5 June 1942 to SS-Obersturmbannfuhrer Rauff "Apart from that I gave orders that all men should stand as far away as possible from van during the gassings, so that their health would not be damaged by any escaping gases. I would like to take this opportunity to draw your attention to the following: Some of the Kommandos are using their own men to unload the vans after the gassing. I have made commanders of the Sonderkommandos in question aware of the enormous psychological and physical damage this work can do to the men, if not immediately then at a later stage." Dr August Becker on 16 May 1942 to SS-Obersturmbannfuherer Rauff -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | bzs@world.std.com | uunet!world!bzs Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD Article 20384 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!world!bzs From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Subject: Re: Revisionist answers In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Wed, 21 Dec 1994 21:24:19 -0800 Message-ID: Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Organization: The World References: <3d9b8k$rkt@agate.berkeley.edu> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 06:52:45 GMT Lines: 30 From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) >> Leuchter claimed that he had been a consultant to various prisons >> regarding their technoloy for executions. The management of those >> prisons denied that he had ever been a consultant for them. That >> means that he was lying. What part of this do you not understand? > >It was not Leuchter who lied, but the prison managements. Perhaps now you >understand. Oh, so nice that you know all this better than the courts. And why exactly would these prison managements want to lie about a thing like this to a court of law? That's a serious charge, Raven, tho I realize you don't even take yourself seriously so spout any nonsense that suits your point of view. So why hasn't Leuchter successfully dragged them into court? I mean, they destroyed his career and seemed to have forced him into becoming a professional Nazi apologist for a living. Cah-mahn, even you revisionists seem to have been convinced that the Leuchter Report is severely flawed. Doesn't stop y'all from selling it to the rubes tho. -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | bzs@world.std.com | uunet!world!bzs Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD Article 20388 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!uhog.mit.edu!news.mtholyoke.edu!world!bzs From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Subject: Re: Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Tue, 20 Dec 1994 22:16:09 -0800 Message-ID: Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Organization: The World References: Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 22:01:14 GMT Lines: 265 Ah, revisionism at its "best"...follow the bouncing lies, a textbook example to work with: From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) > And when the testimony, and the >verdict, at Nuremberg incorporated most, if not all, of the horror stories >Americans were told about Dachau, Buchenwald, and other places captured by ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (note 1) ^^^^^^^^^^^ >the U.S. Army, the Holocaust could pass for one of the most documented, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (note 2) >one of the most authenticated, one of the most proven historical episodes >in the human record. Note the set-up here for the gullible: 1. Dachau and Buchenwald were in Germany proper (what the Nazis called the Altreich or Old Reich.) There were no *mass* gassing facilities in Germany proper. 2. The *US Army* did not capture the worst extermination facilities which were primarily in Poland (Auschwitz, Birkenau.) The Russian Army did. Raven and the revisionists know that most people won't know things like this, or won't have such counter-facts readily at hand. So watch as the truth is slowly twisted out of shape as Raven works the crowd... >But it is known today that, very soon after the liberation of the camps, >American authorities were aware that the real story of the camps was quite ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (note 3) >different from the one in which they were coaching military public >information officers, government spokesmen, politicians, journalists, and >other mouthpieces. 3. Who? Name names. Surely such a massive conspiracy to fabricate the truth, as Raven claims, must after 50 years be identifiable with someone?! No doubt hundreds of "someones". Who are these people? Why the vague appeal to "American authorities"? Why? Because the IHR and Raven tend to fish for people who are just knee-jerk anti-authoritarian and this sort of language appeals to such people (and gets them to send in their $$$ to Raven et al.) >Dr. Larson performed autopsies >at Dachau and some twenty other German camps, examining on some days more >than 100 corpses. After his grim work at Dachau, he was questioned for >three days by U.S. Army prosecutors. (note 1) NOTE: *German* camps, in the Altreich (ie, not Poland etc.) There were no mass gassing facilities in this Altreich. And now the one-two punch: >"never was >a case of poison gas uncovered." Certainly not in the Altreich, which is where Larson's observations were limited to. Even this is a stretch, certainly the T4 Euthanasia programs, the ones where the Nazis were killing their own mentally handicapped children, occurred in the Altreich. And apparently some of these were killed by poison gas (carbon monoxide.) But there's no reason why Larson would have discovered any evidence of this since that program stopped several years before at the protest of people influential within the Nazi govt itself (eg, clergy who were understandably horrified when they began to find out that the Nazis were killing their own children.) Basically, T4 was conducted in secret, and when the secret got out the Nazis stopped. >Neither Dr. Larson nor any other >forensic specialist has ever been cited by any Holocaust historian to >substantiate a single case of death by poison gas, whether Zyklon-B or any >other variety. We've already disposed of Larson, he wasn't at the sites where poison gas was used. I'm sure you can also get forensic specialists who have never left Brooklyn to agree that they never personally witnessed a case of poison gas being used by the Nazis. So what? Stop people you meet on the street and ask them if they would affirm that they have never personally witnessed such a thing. I'm sure you would get plenty of people to agree they never have. Then quote them. Is that an argument? That's all Raven et al are saying above, they've found someone who did not look at evidence of poison gassing. Whoop-dee-doo. >If not by gassing, how did the unfortunate victims at Dachau, Buchenwald, >and Bergen- Belsen perish? Again this interesting list. Where is Auschwitz in this list, where most of the mass extermination went on? Where is Sobibor and Treblinka? That is, the camps in Poland where mass gassing facilities were being used? See the half-truths? The twisting and bending?! >The answers to these questions are known as well. As Dr. Larson >and other Allied medical men discovered, the chief cause of death at >Dachau, Belsen, and the other camps was disease, above all typhus And no one has particularly claimed otherwise, AT THOSE PARTICULAR CAMPS. >Such was the case in the >overcrowded internment camps in Germany at war's end, where, despite such >measures as systematic delousing, quarantine of the sick, and cremation of >the dead, the virtual collapse of Germany's food, transport, and public >health systems led to catastrophe. But ask the hard questions: *WHEN* did this collapse occur? Why didn't typhus and starvation etc kill millions of German citizens also by the war's end? ALERT: The usual answer by revisionists is to respond that many German civilians *did* suffer from malnutrition as a result of the war. But what they're referring to in that answer is that this occurred AFTER THE WAR WAS OVER. Since the camp deaths they're discussing occurred before war's end that's irrelevant to the point, even if terribly unfortunate and capable of evoking sympathy. WATCH THE HALF-TRUTHS, make them compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges. >Dr. Gordon reported in 1948 that "The outbreaks in concentration >camps and prisons made up the great bulk of typhus infection encountered >in Germany." ^^^^^^^^^^ IN GERMANY, meaning the Altreich, meaning OTHER THAN THE EXTERMINATION CAMPS LOCATED IN POLAND. >"Thousands of prisoners who died at the >Bergen-Belsen concentration camp during World War II weren't deliberately >starved to death but died from a rash of diseases." At Bergen-Belsen perhaps thousands do fit this description. What about the other tens of thousands who also died at Bergen-Belsen? They were dying there for several years before these conditions occurred. NOTICE THE HALF-TRUTHS! >Despite noisily publicized claims and widespread popular notions to the >contrary, no researcher has been able to document a German policy of >extermination through starvation in the German camps. A. In the German camps (again.) B. When Raven says "no researcher has been able to document a GERMAN POLICY [emphasis mine]" he means: 1. Document TO HIS (RAVEN'S) PERSONAL SATISFACTION, which is often bizarre and self-serving. 2. Is very, very specifically referring to a German POLICY, a memo that says "starve the bastards", not whether or not it actually happened, a DOCUMENTED POLICY. The SS who ran most of these camps were quite secretive and the Nazi high-command in general avoided any documentation of what they were up to for obvious reasons. Hitler gave such commands verbally, only, to avoid anything that might come back to haunt him. And when the Nazis realized they were losing the war they went to great lengths to destroy what evidence might still exist. But why then, when all is said and done, does Hitler write in his Last Will & Testament: ``Eternal gratitude will be owed to National Socialism because I exterminated the Jews in Germany and Central Europe''. All Raven is saying is that you cannot produce a memo which either was never written or destroyed (it's difficult to say which.) That's quite different from saying it didn't happen! He's just saying you'd have problems finding a memo with Hitler's or one of the other Nazi high-command's signature on it ordering this. WATCH THE HALF-TRUTHS! Of course, we have hundreds (probably thousands) of eyewitness accounts. But as Raven has stated over and over: He does not admit eyewitness accounts as being of any value. He absolutely insists that these are never, ever counted as proof of anything. Why? Beats me, other than it serves the house of cards reasoning he presents in tracts like this one. >As with Dachau, so with Buchenwald, Bergen- Belsen, and the other camps >captured by the Allies. There was no end of propaganda about "gas >chambers," "gas ovens," and the like, but so far not a single detailed >description of the murder weapon and its function, not a single report of >the kind that is mandatory for the successful prosecution of any assault >or murder case in America at that time and today, has come to light. Note again the focus entirely on German (Altreich) camps and gas. But what about the GASSING FACILITIES which were located in POLAND!? Tricky? Maybe slimey is a better word. >Furthermore, a number of Holocaust authorities have now publicly decreed >that there were no gassings, no extermination camps in Germany after all! Again! >All these things, we are told, were located in what is now Poland, in >areas captured by the Soviet Red Army and off-limits to Western >investigators. Aha! >In 1960 Dr. Martin Broszat, who is now director of the >Munich-based Institute for Contemporary History, which is funded by the >West German government to support the Holocaust story, wrote a letter to >the German weekly Die Zeit in which he stated categorically: "Neither in >Dachau nor in Bergen-Belsen nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other prisoners >gassed." But these are all, again, in Germany, not Poland. So what has this to do with that sentence that immediately preceded it? Nothing. Raven is trying to work the gullible. >Professional Nazi-hunter Simon Wiesenthal wrote in 1975 >that "there were no extermination camps on German soil." Yes, so??? What about Auschwitz, Birkenau, Treblinka, Sobibor, etc? The POLISH camps? What in the world is Raven getting at? There were no gassing facilities in Los Angeles either. I'm sure Raven can prove that also. So what? I hope this little exercise in Raven's and the IHR's cheap and tawdry lying and half-truths has been enlightening. -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | bzs@world.std.com | uunet!world!bzs Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD Article 20391 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!spool.mu.edu!sgiblab!swrinde!pipex!uunet!world!bzs From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Subject: Re: Greg's Back! (was Re: Seven Questions) In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Wed, 21 Dec 1994 21:31:16 -0800 Message-ID: Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Organization: The World References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 06:59:27 GMT Lines: 49 From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) >> Including, for example, memos written between Nazi officers DURING THE >> WAR describing their dastardly duties. > >Why not produce one? Raven, you are a f*cking scum low-life liar. This is beyond belief. You've asked for this dozens of times. They've been produced for you dozens of times. You've ignored them and simply typed in this bullshit again dozens of time. WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE KIDDING? Scum. Go away, no one is fooled by you anymore. It's unbelievable how twisted you are. I don't give a shit what you believe or don't believe, you're a deluded lunatic who will claim to believe whatever suits you, you just press the keys and there it is! All I'm interested in is making sure you don't take others in with your lies. Your soul is beyond saving. >Remember, my original, still unanswered challenge is >for you or anyone else to produce the BEST evidence that the Nazis had a >plan or policy to gas the Jews during WWII. If you have that evidence, >produce it. Yes, and it's been produced over and over and over, even according to your own ridiculous standards. Never made a bit of difference to you. That's because what you really need is medical attention, not evidence. -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | bzs@world.std.com | uunet!world!bzs Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD Article 20392 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!world!bzs From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Subject: Re: Himmler, Poznan, and Raven In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Tue, 20 Dec 1994 22:25:08 -0800 Message-ID: Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Organization: The World References: <1994Dec20.171420.21862@hobbes.kzoo.edu> <3d7dph$f4m@amhux3.amherst.edu> <3d7okk$atl@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 22:08:36 GMT Lines: 40 From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) >As for the Nazi experience with Zyklon B, they had plenty of experience >with other, faster acting gasses as well. Why would they chose a >slow-action pesticide when there are so many other better gasses? What utter crap! Zyklon-B was cheap and accessible, it was made in Germany and was used by the Nazi Army (and others) for delousing and other deverminization. It was based on cyanide gas, one of the most effective poisons for killing humans there is in that it's cheap and fast and does the job. Slow-acting? What do you base this on? Exactly how long are you personally willing to sit in an enclosed room after Zyklon-B is introduced? A few good whiffs and you'd be an ex-Raven. And why in the world would they bother to set up yet another war industry to produce a mass extermination gas when they could just get truckloads of Zyklon-B cheap and "off the shelf"? You've gone off the deep-end here. Is that your argument? That the Nazis didn't kill anyone because maybe, in theory, better poisons might have been available??? Zyklon-B was cheap, it was available, it was being manufactured in Germany for other purposes (deinfestation of barracks, shipholds, etc.) What next? That the Nazis never shot anyone because better bullets might have been available? Do you ever read what you write? -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | bzs@world.std.com | uunet!world!bzs Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD Article 20393 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!world!bzs From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Subject: Re: Greg's Back! (was Re: Seven Questions) In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Tue, 20 Dec 1994 22:27:19 -0800 Message-ID: Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Organization: The World References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 22:11:20 GMT Lines: 25 From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) >And please, make sure there are no "testimonies" or other specious garbage >in this "May the 4th" post you are so eager for me to respond to. Raven claims that no US-style court could convict the Nazis of murder. And then rejects 100% eye-witness testimonies. Including, for example, memos written between Nazi officers DURING THE WAR describing their dastardly duties. Is this guy a nut-case or what? Can you imagine the judge in the OJ Simpson case insisting that the prosecution not allow any eye-witness testimony because Greg Raven believes it's remotely possible they could be lying?! Raven, give it up, you're a clown, a pathetic clown. -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | bzs@world.std.com | uunet!world!bzs Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD Article 20395 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.kei.com!ddsw1!golux.pr.mcs.net!user From: golux@mcs.com (The only Golux in the World, and not a mere Device) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Greg's Back! (was Re: Seven Questions) Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 20:14:16 -0600 Organization: MCSNet Services Lines: 40 Message-ID: References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> <1994Dec21.195757.20767@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: golux.pr.mcs.net In article , greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote: > In article <1994Dec21.195757.20767@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>, > kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay) wrote: > > > By the way, the article in question will be published again, on the > > 4th. of January - the eighth anniversary, so to speak, of its > > original appearance. > > I thought anniversaries came yearly. > > Nevermind. I certainly wouldn't ask you to produce that post now, while my > Internet connection seems to (sort of) work and I sort of have time to > respond. No, no. Much better to way a couple of weeks or so. Gee, Greg, how come your Internet connection only seems to be flaky whenever you are asked questions you don't want to answer? In fact, I believe the so-called "May 4 Article" has been posted multiple times -- once a month since at least July or August, if I recall correctly -- and emailed to you on at least one occasion. To refresh your memory, the article contained ten items, and was presented in response to your original (nonsensical) request for the "best evidence" of the Holocaust. You have yet to respond to the article, although you have danced around one or two of the items it contained. For a time, your mantra seemed to be "Is this the single best piece of evidence?" Now, of course, your mantra is "Show me a Nazi gas chamber." Perhaps you could explain how, in the world of the Internet anyone is supposed to do so. Or perhaps you will just admit that by demanding an actual Nazi gas chamber, what you are really saying is that you have no intention of addressing any evidence. Posted/emailed -- D. J. Schaeffer | The Todal looks like a blob of glup. golux@mcs.com | It makes a sound like rabbits screaming, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ and smells of old, unopened rooms. -- Thurber, _The 13 Clocks_ Article 20399 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!netnews.summit.novell.com!netnews.summit.novell.com!snowtown!mattk From: mattk@summit.novell.com (Kaufman) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Liberation of the camps Date: 23 Dec 1994 23:25:44 GMT Organization: Novell Lines: 33 Message-ID: <3dfm9o$ml7@bird.summit.novell.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: snowtown.summit.novell.com X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com) wrote: : It is true that "Holocaust" historians are now backtracking on earlier : statements regarding the location of the "gas chambers." However, they : have no evidence of ANY gas chambers ANYWHERE. If this statement is in : error SHOW ME A NAZI GAS CHAMBER. Do you get the Discovery channel wherever you are? Just this week they aired a documentary on the T4 program called 'Selling Murder,' which included some footage from Nazi anti-disabled propaganda films, and a staging of a script for some movie justifying the T4 program. In one of the films, they showed a homicidal gas chamber in use. Oddly, Mr. Hoffman's list of evil anti-nazi propaganda didn't include this film, guess that means its telling the truth. In addition, the documenters showed footage of a gas chamber in Hadamar, and had a few lucky survivors of the program (adults who had escaped the program as children through luck.) They (the adults) recounted how the gassing worked. Apparently victimes were crowded into a room, the door hermetically sealed, and carbon monoxide pumped in (from bottles.) The exhibited gas chambers are still there in Hadamar. So, go take a look. Or, contact your local cable TV provider and ask them when they'll be airing this program. You can videotape it over one of those Cole documentaries if you want to put a videotape to good use. Matt -- "Where do you find |copyright 1994, mattk@summit.novell.com. All rights these Addam's men?" |reserved. Permission for reproduction by USENET and like |free facilities explicitly allowed. No other reproduction "It has to be damp."|rights are granted or implied. Article 20403 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!world!bzs From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Subject: Re: Liberation of the camps In-Reply-To: mattk@summit.novell.com's message of 23 Dec 1994 23:25:44 GMT Message-ID: Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) Organization: The World References: <3dfm9o$ml7@bird.summit.novell.com> Date: Sat, 24 Dec 1994 02:55:51 GMT Lines: 59 See, this is it (attached below), Raven's remark and Kaufman's response are this entire lunatic holocaust-denier thing in a nutshell. Raven simply asserts there is no evidence of any Nazi gas chamber anywhere. Kaufman hands him back the simplest and and most uncontestable evidence possible. Yet Raven will merely go on to assert this again and again and will ignore Kaufman's remarks (and everyone else's, or toss them off with "forgeries all forgeries".) Why? Because Raven is a liar, and is working the crowd. Raven knows that most people have no real personal experience regarding the evidence and that if he confronts enough of them with a bold assertion that there exists absolutely no evidence for homicidal gassing some will say to themselves, well, hmm, I've never seen any really, so perhaps this Raven fellow has a point? He seems to know a lot about the subject. There has to be some center in hell, some peculiarly painful and loathsome place of God's own design, for people like Raven. From: mattk@summit.novell.com (Kaufman) >Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com) wrote: > >: It is true that "Holocaust" historians are now backtracking on earlier >: statements regarding the location of the "gas chambers." However, they >: have no evidence of ANY gas chambers ANYWHERE. If this statement is in >: error SHOW ME A NAZI GAS CHAMBER. > > >Do you get the Discovery channel wherever you are? Just this week >they aired a documentary on the T4 program called 'Selling Murder,' which >included some footage from Nazi anti-disabled propaganda films, and >a staging of a script for some movie justifying the T4 program. >In one of the films, they showed a homicidal gas chamber in use. >Oddly, Mr. Hoffman's list of evil anti-nazi propaganda didn't include >this film, guess that means its telling the truth. > >In addition, the documenters showed footage of a gas chamber in Hadamar, >and had a few lucky survivors of the program (adults who had escaped >the program as children through luck.) They (the adults) recounted how >the gassing worked. Apparently victimes were crowded into a room, >the door hermetically sealed, and carbon monoxide pumped in (from bottles.) > >The exhibited gas chambers are still there in Hadamar. So, go take >a look. Or, contact your local cable TV provider and ask them >when they'll be airing this program. You can videotape it over one >of those Cole documentaries if you want to put a videotape to good use. -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | bzs@world.std.com | uunet!world!bzs Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD Article 20409 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!pm005-09.dialip.mich.net!user From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Revisionist answers Date: Sat, 24 Dec 1994 11:37:39 -0500 Organization: University of Michigan Lines: 27 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: pm005-09.dialip.mich.net greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote: > My Iway connection is too flakey to get into all of this, so I'll stop > here at the first error. My "assertion" includes references to two > scholarly works on EXACTLY THIS TOPIC. Please read the material referred > to before continuing. I'll simply repeat the two paragraphs to which Mr. Raven is responding. (Actually, he deleted the second one.) I stand by what I wrote in the first place: it _is_ proof by assertion, and Usenet discussion _doesn't_ work that way. You want to argue a point, you quote or paraphrase your "scholarly works"; you don't simply say "person X agrees with me." I wrote: Proof by assertion. They say there's nothing out of the ordinary about the enormous capacity of the Auschwitz cremation furnaces, so therefore it's OK. Sorry, it doesn't work that way, Mr. Raven. Present an argument from this book of Mattogno's (published by whom, please?), or summarize Butz's position for us. -- Jamie McCarthy Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu AppleLink: j.mccarthy "The Jewish people will be exterminated...it's in our program." - Himmler "Until you find a reference to gas chambers, you can forget about long, drawn-out discussions of Himmler's speeches." - Raven Article 20411 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!pm005-09.dialip.mich.net!user From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Circular reasoning and "faster acting gasses" Date: Sat, 24 Dec 1994 12:08:18 -0500 Organization: University of Michigan Lines: 115 Message-ID: References: <1994Dec20.171420.21862@hobbes.kzoo.edu> <3d7dph$f4m@amhux3.amherst.edu> <3d7okk$atl@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> NNTP-Posting-Host: pm005-09.dialip.mich.net Circular reasoning at its best. Let's review. I believe Danny Keren started it by saying: > 2) The gas chambers have, of course, been seen, and some can > be seen today. Greg Raven replied: > FALSE. If you think otherwise, show me a Nazi gas chamber. In other words, "there are no Nazi gas chambers, because you can't show me a Nazi gas chamber." I wrote: > ...there are seven Nazi gas chambers in > varying states of preservation in Auschwitz/Birkenau. ... > Mr. Raven, of course, says that none of the seven in the Auschwitz > camp is a real gas chamber. His argument thus runs as follows: > > * There are no Nazi gas chambers, because > * No one can show me a Nazi gas chamber, because > * There are no Nazi gas chambers. Mr. Raven replied: > FALSE. There are buildings and rooms that are presented as having been > gas chambers, but none of them could have operated as such. In other words, "you can't show me a Nazi gas chamber, because there are no Nazi gas chambers." You've once again made my point for me, Mr. Raven. Thank you. > Every test and examination of these facilities confirms this. By "every test," Mr. Raven, did you have anything in mind other than the utterly worthless Leuchter Report? Just curious. Next we come to the question of "faster-acting gases." Mr. Raven wrote: > As for the Nazi experience with Zyklon B, they had plenty of experience > with other, faster acting gasses as well. Why would they chose a > slow-action pesticide when there are so many other better gasses? Zyklon-B is not a gas. It's the trademarked name for pellets which deliver that gas. The gas that Zyklon-B delivers is hydrogen cyanide, HCN. Note that I'm not the one who confused the issue; reread the above paragraph and you'll clearly see that Mr. Raven refers to Zyklon-B as a gas. I challenged him: > Mr. Raven, please name one other "better" or "faster acting" gas. > > I doubt you'll be able to do so. HCN is incredibly fast-acting. And he responded by confusing the issue: > Really? American gas chambers use Zyklon B? No, I didn't think so. Note the sudden switch from claiming that there are "better gasses" to claiming that there are better delivery systems than Zyklon-B. > You are > muddling matters again. Zyklon B is the tradename for a product that > contains HCN, but the REASON for using the inert carrier with the > Zyklon B is to SLOW THE RATE at which the Zyklon B gasses off. I'm not the one muddling matters, Mr. Raven. In fact I expend a fair amount of effort to educate people as to the difference between Zyklon-B and the gas it emits. You are the one who confused the two in your first article. I'm still waiting for you to provide one of those "so many other better gasses," Mr. Raven. > In an American gas chamber, they drop pellets into a mild acid solution > to achieve very fast gas-off, But the Nazis were not concerned with being humane. > and it STILL takes over 8 minutes before the > accused is dead. With Zyklon B, the gassing-off process would barely have > begun in the 10-20 minutes commonly given by "eyewitness testimony" for > the time of the Nazi gassings. I disagree. Your source for this assertion is...? > If it is technically impossible for the gassings to have taken place, then > they could not have. Absolutely, unquestionably true. Now provide me with one shred of evidence that it was "technically impossible" for the Nazis to simply drop in as much Zyklon-B as was required to get the job done. Proof by assertion, as in your "would barely have begun" quote above, is no proof at all. Provide me with one single shred of evidence, or expert opinion, or computer analysis, or technical data, or anything, that backs up your claim that the process "would barely have begun." Or admit that you have none. Emailed to Mr. Raven. -- Jamie McCarthy Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu AppleLink: j.mccarthy "The Jewish people will be exterminated...it's in our program." - Himmler "Until you find a reference to gas chambers, you can forget about long, drawn-out discussions of Himmler's speeches." - Raven Article 20423 of alt.revisionism: Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!darkstar.UCSC.EDU!news.hal.COM!decwrl!netcomsv!netcom.com!codfish From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell) Subject: Re: Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies Message-ID: Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1] References: <3d9g1j$3fh@jabba.cybernetics.net> <3dct05$d00@jabba.cybernetics.net> Date: Sun, 25 Dec 1994 07:10:37 GMT Lines: 27 Chip Salzenberg (chip@cybernetics.net) wrote: : According to greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven): : >In article <3d9g1j$3fh@jabba.cybernetics.net>, chip@cybernetics.net (Chip : >Salzenberg) wrote: : >> According to greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven): : >> >Dr. Larson [...] informed Wichita Eagle reporter Jan Floerchinger that : >> >"never was a case of poison gas uncovered." : >> : >> Of course not. Those gassed were cremated. : > : >Very glib. Now, can you support that statement with any evidence? : Not that would satisfy you, apparently. I based my statement on the : evidence already posted to alt.revisionism by Keren, Shein, and McVay, : among others, and backed up by an Auschwitz survivor whom I know. : You archivists: Thank you. Keep up the good work. : You deniers: The laugh's on you. Auschwitz is in Poland, not the Altreich. : -- : Chip Salzenberg, aka : "Don't move!" *BANG* "You have the right to remain silent!" *BANG!* : "Anything you say can and will be used against you!" *SPLASH* : -- Tom Servo, MST3K: "High School Bigshot" Article 20427 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!jabba.cybernetics.net!cybernetics.net!chip From: chip@cybernetics.net (Chip Salzenberg) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies Date: 25 Dec 1994 17:27:04 GMT Organization: Creative Cybernetics, Inc. Lines: 17 Message-ID: <3dka18$2vf@jabba.cybernetics.net> References: <3dct05$d00@jabba.cybernetics.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: server0.cybernetics.net According to codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell): >The laugh's on you. Auschwitz is in Poland, not the Altreich. Oops. Quite right. My mistake. Take two: "Never was a case of poison gas uncovered" -- because the mass gassings (as opposed to experiments and small-scale operations) took place in areas that the American army didn't reach. (I could believe that the same was true of Auschwitz, too. It's plausible that all gassed corpses were disposed of before the SS fled.) -- Chip Salzenberg, aka "Don't move!" *BANG* "You have the right to remain silent!" *BANG!* "Anything you say can and will be used against you!" *SPLASH* -- Tom Servo, MST3K: "High School Bigshot" Article 20428 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail From: mstein@access3.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies Date: 25 Dec 1994 12:33:34 -0500 Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Lines: 44 Message-ID: <3dkade$4g3@access3.digex.net> References: <3dct05$d00@jabba.cybernetics.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: access3.digex.net In article , Ross Vicksell wrote: >Chip Salzenberg (chip@cybernetics.net) wrote: >: According to greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven): >: >In article <3d9g1j$3fh@jabba.cybernetics.net>, chip@cybernetics.net (Chip >: >Salzenberg) wrote: >: >> According to [Ted O'Keefe as posted by] greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg >: >>Raven): >: >> >Dr. Larson [...] informed Wichita Eagle reporter Jan Floerchinger that >: >> >"never was a case of poison gas uncovered." >: >> >: >> Of course not. Those gassed were cremated. >: > >: >Very glib. Now, can you support that statement with any evidence? > >: Not that would satisfy you, apparently. I based my statement on the >: evidence already posted to alt.revisionism by Keren, Shein, and McVay, >: among others, and backed up by an Auschwitz survivor whom I know. > >: You archivists: Thank you. Keep up the good work. > >: You deniers: > >The laugh's on you. Auschwitz is in Poland, not the Altreich. The paragraph in question did not seem to be limited to the Altreich - or at least I think that's the impression O'Keefe wanted to convey. But while the camps were running smoothly, as far as I know, _everyone_ (even those who died of genuine natural causes) was cremated. So Dr. Larson's investigation of the corpses found at the end of the war really isn't proof that nobody was gassed earlier, and investigation of corpses at Dachau isn't proof that there were no gassings at Auschwitz. I wonder if Dr. Larson found any shooting or hanging victims? If he didn't, does this mean that nobody in any camp was ever shot or hung? Were there any credible eyewitness accounts of gassings at Dachau? Any confessions? Such a lack, compared to Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sobibor, and Belzec, is much more significant than a pathologist's report on those who died only during the final days of the war. -- Mike Stein The above represents the Absolute Truth. POB 10420 Therefore it cannot possibly be the official Arlington, VA 22210 position of my employer. Article 20438 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 21:14:01 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 20 Message-ID: References: <3d9g1j$3fh@jabba.cybernetics.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article <3d9g1j$3fh@jabba.cybernetics.net>, chip@cybernetics.net (Chip Salzenberg) wrote: > According to greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven): > >Dr. Larson [...] informed Wichita Eagle reporter Jan Floerchinger that > >"never was a case of poison gas uncovered." > > Of course not. Those gassed were cremated. Very glib. Now, can you support that statement with any evidence? -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20439 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!juno.xana.bc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!spool.mu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.kei.com!ddsw1!golux.pr.mcs.net!user From: golux@mcs.com (The only Golux in the World, and not a mere Device) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Raven Wrong Again Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 21:13:26 -0600 Organization: MCSNet Services Lines: 23 Message-ID: References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> <3daf65$31p@access4.digex.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: golux.pr.mcs.net In article , bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) wrote: > From: mstein@access4.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) > > Greg, don't you ever stop giving out misinformation? It is a > >well-known fact that _everyone's_ Internet provider is the worst on the > >planet. > > > Not mine, mine's the best on the planet. Hell, it *is* the planet. > > (Warning: I have massive personal financial interests in expressing > that opinion, but it happens to be true :-) I can vouch for the quality of Barry's Internet service provider (although I hear the guy who runs it is a whacko ;-) Unfortunately, having moved well out of its area code, I no longer use it. -- D. J. Schaeffer | The Todal looks like a blob of glup. golux@mcs.com | It makes a sound like rabbits screaming, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ and smells of old, unopened rooms. -- Thurber, _The 13 Clocks_ Article 20441 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!newstf01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: hmazal@aol.com (HMazal) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Greg's Back! (was Re: Seven Questions) Date: 25 Dec 1994 16:51:31 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 14 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <3dkph3$k98@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: Reply-To: hmazal@aol.com (HMazal) Mr. Raven states: >Remember, my original, still unanswered challenge is >for you or anyone else to produce the BEST evidence that the Nazis had a >plan or policy to gas the Jews during WWII. If you have that evidence, >produce it. The BEST (emphasis by Mr. Raven) evidence, to my mind, is that which deniers like Mr. Raven reject. Harry W. Mazal in San Antonio Article 20442 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Liberation of the camps Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 21:22:15 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 61 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article <3da52l$gig@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) wrote: > Vicksell posted this old nonsense a few months ago. Comments > were made, and of course he didn't respond. Now, Raven posts > it again. You yourself often post old nonsense. You should allow others the same courtesy. > A few short comments: > > 1) It is simply a lie to state that Holocaust historians say > that no gassing took place in the camps inside the "Old > Reich" (Germany proper). I've quoted here the summary > published two years ago by the "Institute for Contemporary > History" in Munich, naming seven camps inside the "Old > Reich" in which gassing took place. It is true that the gassing > was on a smaller scale than the gassing in the death camps > the SS built in Nazi-occupied Poland. It is true that "Holocaust" historians are now backtracking on earlier statements regarding the location of the "gas chambers." However, they have no evidence of ANY gas chambers ANYWHERE. If this statement is in error SHOW ME A NAZI GAS CHAMBER. > 2) The "revisionist" claim that people died in the camps inside > the "Old Reich" mostly towards the end of the war, because > lack of supplies etc, is another outright lie. In the very > same letter of Dr. Broszat which is mentioned in the article > posted, the following appears: > > > > in just the 12 months from July 1942 through June 1943, > 110,812 people died according to official SS statistics in all of > the concentration camps of the Reich from disease and hunger. > camps in Poland. Source, please? Anyone who maintains that casualties were not highest toward the end of the war is either lying or delusional. > 3) The article mentions the testimony of Dr. Konrad Morgen. > Of course, our "revisionist scholars" somehow "forgot" > that Morgen also testified, at great length, about mass murder > by gas in Nazi camps. Not at all. In fact, I have mentioned him before in another post. Morgen thought he could get himself out of a jam by testifying to all kinds of things. Later, when that testimony was turned against him in another trial, he changed his tune, and fast. This is but one example of why testimony is such a fragile thing. Why not just show us a Nazi gas chamber and get it over with? -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20444 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Revisionist answers Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 21:24:19 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 37 Message-ID: References: <3d9b8k$rkt@agate.berkeley.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article <3d9b8k$rkt@agate.berkeley.edu>, schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz) wrote: > In article , > Greg Raven wrote: > > >Not only has Leuchter worked for years as an engineer, not only does he > >have patents in his name and numerous designs, but he has NOT been exposed > >as a liar. Every forensic test at Auschwitz or Birkenau since the Leuchter > >Report verifies his findings. > > Leuchter claimed that he had been a consultant to various prisons > regarding their technoloy for executions. The management of those > prisons denied that he had ever been a consultant for them. That > means that he was lying. What part of this do you not understand? It was not Leuchter who lied, but the prison managements. Perhaps now you understand. > In Massachusetts, in order to call yourself an engineer, you need a > certificate that says you are an engineer. Leuchter claimed that > he was an engineer, but had no certificate. That makes him a liar. > What part of this do you not understand? FALSE. Only a small fraction of engineers must get the "certificate:" those who deal with structural matters. Leuchter, like tens of thousands of other Mass. engineers, needed no certificate. -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20445 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Revisionist answers Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 21:25:43 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 38 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article , k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote: > This is one of the more amazing series of outright lies we've seen. > But I'd expect no less from Mr. Raven. > > greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote: > > > dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) wrote: > > > > > Why does a "work camp" have 52 large cremation furnaces? The > > > "revisionists" don't deny this fact. Can they explain it? > > > > Easily. When you look at the population of Auschwitz-Birkenau, and you > > look at the number of crematories the Germans usually supplied per capita, > > you see that there is nothing out of the ordinary about the number of > > crematories at Auschwitz-Birkenau, especially given the deaths from typhus > > outbreaks. Check Mattogno's new book for all the details. Butz also gave a > > speech at the 1992 IHR Conference about this very issue. > > Proof by assertion. They say there's nothing out of the ordinary about > the enormous capacity of the Auschwitz cremation furnaces, so therefore > it's OK. My Iway connection is too flakey to get into all of this, so I'll stop here at the first error. My "assertion" includes references to two scholarly works on EXACTLY THIS TOPIC. Please read the material referred to before continuing. -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20447 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Greg's Back! (was Re: Seven Questions) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 21:29:33 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 53 Message-ID: References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca> <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA> <3d9hvf$jo5@nyx10.cs.du.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan009.kaiwan.com In article <3d9hvf$jo5@nyx10.cs.du.edu>, choover@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Christopher Hoover) wrote: > greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes: > > >In article <19DEC94.08960465.0073@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA>, Keith Morrison > > wrote: > > >> In article > >greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes: > >> > >> I am so honoured you have answered me. I would, however, rather you > >> answer to questions put to you repeatedly since May the 4th, 1994, > >> in a post that I've seen repeated multiple times since September but > >> which you seem inevitably to fail answering. Since you obviously > >> have the time to answer me, surely you can spare the but few moments > >> it will take for your vast knowledge and historiographic skills to > >> reply. > > >I would so much rather that you and others, instead of saying "May the > >4th," as if that has any meaning whatsoever, simply post the item(s) > >again. It's no secret that I have perhaps the worst Internet provider on > >the planet, but eventually, if you keep reposting this under some name I > >can recognize, I will respond. > > I might suggest to Mr. Raven that this particular disingenuous veneer > wore thin several months ago. Anyone who has given this newsgroup even > the most sporadic attention in the last several months by now is well > aware that Mr. Raven has seen the post in question repeatedly. It has > been reposted to this newsgroup any number of times. It has been > e-mailed to Mr. Raven. He has, I believe, even acknowledged receipt of > the May 4th material in e-mail (correct me if I'm wrong here, Jamie). You see what I mean? I ask for the material to be reposted, and this is what I get! It might also be said that anyone who even casually visits this newsgroup knows that I routinely discard all e-mailed forwards from alt.revisionism. I'll say it again: I think this "evidence" that they have that they call the "May 4th" post is actually nothing more than a bunch of disjointed testimonies and other non-sequitors. -- Greg Raven mailto:greg.ihr@kaiwan.com http://www.kaiwan.com/~greg.ihr ----------------------------------------------------- For free information about the IHR, write to: IHR, P.O. Box 241556, Newport Beach, CA 92659 Journal of Historical Review, $40 (6 issues per year) The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, by Dr. Arthur Butz, $10 + $2 shipping Article 20448 of alt.revisionism: Path: oneb!hakatac!news.bc.net!sunserver.insinc.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!acsc.com!kaiwan.kaiwan.com!kaiwan009.kaiwan.com!user From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Re: Greg's Back! (was Re: Seven Questions) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 1994 21:31:16 -0800 Organization: Institute for Historical Review Lines: 24 Message-ID: References: <3cqhpl$6qg@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca>