Archive/File: holocaust/usa/codoh vicksell.0594
Last-Modified: 1994/06/01

Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: Goebbels (was Re: IHR???)
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
References:  <2pflng$nd0@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>   <1994May1.180325.25131@miavx1>
Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 04:50:21 GMT
Lines: 13

bpharmon@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Svidrigailov) writes:

>        What evidence do you have that Goebbles murdered his children?  Do you
>have an autopsy report?  A confession from Goebbles? A detailed account of
>exactly how he murdered them?

>        If not, then why do you believe he killed his children?  is this some
>awful propaganda fabricated so you can discredit Goebbles?

Hey, maybe you've got something there.
Could be they're all alive and well and hanging out in Argentina.

               Ross Vicksell

Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: Goebbels (was Re: IHR???)
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
References:  <2pflng$nd0@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>   <1994May3.214845.25273@miavx1>
Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 03:05:02 GMT
Lines: 10

bpharmon@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Svidrigailov) writes:

>        You say quite glibly that Goebbels murdered his children.  I'm asking
>you why you believe this, and yet turn around and deny the holocaust occurred. 
>How do you differentiate between the evidence that Goebbels murdered his 
>children vs. that the holocaust happened with anything other than hypocrisy?

I find six about a million times more believable than six million.

               Ross Vicksell

Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: Goebbels (was Re: IHR???)
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
References:  <2pflng$nd0@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>   <1994May1.180325.25131@miavx1>
Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 04:50:21 GMT
Lines: 13

bpharmon@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Svidrigailov) writes:

>        What evidence do you have that Goebbles murdered his children?  Do you
>have an autopsy report?  A confession from Goebbles? A detailed account of
>exactly how he murdered them?

>        If not, then why do you believe he killed his children?  is this some
>awful propaganda fabricated so you can discredit Goebbles?

Hey, maybe you've got something there.
Could be they're all alive and well and hanging out in Argentina.

               Ross Vicksell


Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: Goebbels (was Re: IHR???)
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
References:  <2pflng$nd0@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>   <1994May3.214845.25273@miavx1>
Date: Thu, 5 May 1994 03:05:02 GMT
Lines: 10

bpharmon@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (Svidrigailov) writes:

>        You say quite glibly that Goebbels murdered his children.  I'm asking
>you why you believe this, and yet turn around and deny the holocaust occurred. 
>How do you differentiate between the evidence that Goebbels murdered his 
>children vs. that the holocaust happened with anything other than hypocrisy?

I find six about a million times more believable than six million.

               Ross Vicksell


Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: New German gag law
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 21:20:27 GMT
Lines: 16

Here's something for our exterminationist friends to applaud.  According
to a feature story last Saturday's Toronto Globe and Mail, "German
parliamentarians yesterday passes a law making it illegal to deny the
murder of more than six million Jews by the Nazis.  
... 

Says Frankfurt lawyer Michael Friedman, a board member of the Jewish
Communities of Germany: 'The law has two functions: one is to strengthen
an old law, making it much more difficult to continue openly saying these
things. [And] it has an educational input.  Is is necessary in a
democratic country to know that the denying of Auschwitz offends the
spirit of the state and the society.' " 

Das ist die Demokratie?

Ross Vicksell

Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: SCHINDLER'S LIST EXPOSED AS LIES AND HATE!
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <9405240037.A2934wk@banished.com> 
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 02:10:58 GMT
Lines: 42

lra0322@mcdata.com (Lawrence Allen) writes:

>dgannon@banished.com wrote:

>:      "How these people have the gall to turn a film based on a novel into
>: suddenly being the basis of history is really beyond me."  --Ernst Zundel

>You dolt. Yes. the Novel is, well, a novel. It is what is known as an 
>historical novel. A work of fiction, based upon events that are documented
>as having taken place. 
>The author uses the novel to tell the story of the event. 
>Saying the events never took place, because the novel was written, is an
>exercise in stupidity.    
>Next you will tell us that WW2 did not happen, because Woulks _Winds of War_
>was a work of fiction. 
>Slavery must not have taken place in the US, because Alex Haley's _Roots_ 
>is called a novel. 
>The Civil War did not happen, because _The Red Badge of Courage_ was a novel.

>SheesH!           

Yeah, but when you have a real historical character, Amon Goeth, in 
the movie, you expect his more memorable scenes to have some relation to 
reality.  It ain't necessarily so.  I quote from Dan Gannon's post:

     THE CAMP IN THE MOVIE, RE-BUILT FROM DESCRIPTIONS OF ALLEGED
EYE-WITNESSES, is surrounded by a steep hill so it is not visible from
outside, where inmates are shot by Commander Goeth from the front balcony of
his house on a hill above the barracks.  The movie version is surrounded by
a steep hillside that prevented outsiders from seeing inmates.  Commander
Goeth, on his front balcony, is seen shooting working and relaxing inmates
beside the barracks in the inmates' camp.  [See file 1.GIF]

     1994 AIR PHOTOS SHOW the camp was visible through wire fences from 3
villages.  Goeth could not have shot inmates from his house balcony, as the
house was at the bottom of a hill and he COULD NOT SEE OVER OR AROUND THE
HILL INTO THE INMATES' CAMP.  The camp was located next to Cracow city,
beside a major roadway, and was visible from hundreds of houses in 3
surrounding villages.  [See file 2.GIF]


               Ross Vicksell


Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: the ADL
Message-ID: 
Keywords: ADL
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 02:32:49 GMT
Lines: 24

I have plucked a paragraph from one of Ken Mcvay's lengthy posts:

>   "The Strange Story of Willis Carto - his fronts, his friends, his
>                philosophy, his 'Lobby for Patriotism'

>                           C.H. Simonds
> ...
>   At this stage, Carto appears - from the public record, at least -
>   as a conservative of the free-enterprise, libertarian variety.  The
>   Congress of Freedom was the child of an ardent libertarian, Robert
>   LeFevre, and the two other groups Carto was associated with were at
>   least ostensably libertarian-oriented - although Liberty and
>   Property has been characterized by the Anti-Defamation League of
>   B'nai B'rith (which is occasionally accurate) as 'an outlet for
>   anti-Semitic propaganda and a clearing house of information about
>   the activities of Anti-Semites and Anti-Semitic organizations.'
> ...


"which is occasionally accurate" -
Nice to know that at least somebody on your side is wise to the ADL.

               Ross Vicksell


Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: An out-loud musing
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <1994May24.220619.16166@hobbes.kzoo.edu>
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 19:09:56 GMT
Lines: 37

k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie R. McCarthy) writes:

>...
>Instead, he might turn his attention to the question which I and others
>have been asking for literally years:  what are the one or two strongest
>points that the Holocaust-deniers have?
...
>So the Holocaust-deniers' entire argument rests on them being able to
>fire an artillery shell damaging enough to make the whole established
>body of Holocaust knowledge come crashing down, as it were.

>Very well - let them do their worst.

>I would suggest that Mr. Raven pick the artillery shell that he feels is
>the _most_ damaging of them all.  Out of the thousands of arguments that
>his organization has fired over the years, which does he feel is the
>most effective?

>Of course, Mr. Raven will probably not want to do this, because picking
>a single one of them allows us to focus our efforts and demonstrate that
>his strongest argument, and thus the whole Holocaust-denial phenomenon,
>is a load of bull.

>Still, I make the request.  Pick the topic, Mr. Raven.
>-- 
> Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
> If your email is related to my job, please send it to mccarthy@lpi.com.
> I speak for no one but myself.

Let me butt in. Why was NO effort made at the end of the war to prove the 
ridiculous claims about Auschwitz?  WHY did we take the word of the 
Russians, the champion mass-murderers of all times, who would as soon lie 
as look at you?  Instead, the western allies attempted, as it were, to 
climb on the band wagon by claiming that Dachau, Buchenwald, et. al. were 
also extermination camps.

            Ross Vicksell


Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: New German gag law
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References:  
Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 19:16:47 GMT
Lines: 9

bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:

> (Various items about alleged acts of violence by skinheads and 
> "neo-Nazis.")

How about the acts of violence by Turks against Germans, which go largely 
unreported?

          Ross Vicksell


Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: New German gag law
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References:   	 
Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 15:56:13 GMT
Lines: 25

bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:


>>bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:
>>
>>> (Various items about alleged acts of violence by skinheads and 
>>> "neo-Nazis.")
>>
>>How about the acts of violence by Turks against Germans, which go largely 
>>unreported?
>>
>>          Ross Vicksell

>How about the acts of violence by Vicksells against small children
>which go largely unreported?

>I mean, c'mon, you're not giving anyone much to work with here other
>than yet another obscurantist conspiracy theory.

I admit what I've heard is largely word-of-mouth, but I've also been told 
that some of these crimes perpetrated by foreigners, mainly Turks and 
Kurds, against Germans and against each other, have actually made the 
papers. I'll see what I can dig up.

           Ross Vicksell


Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: An out-loud musing
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <1994May24.220619.16166@hobbes.kzoo.edu>  
Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 16:19:18 GMT
Lines: 80

bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:


>From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
>>Let me butt in. Why was NO effort made at the end of the war to prove the 
>>ridiculous claims about Auschwitz?

>Who said there was no effort? Eisenhower, for one, insisted on
>travelling with witnesses and photographers etc. I realize you just
>claim all those results are forgeries and lies but I suppose it goes
>'round in circles pretty quickly once someone asserts that.

Huh? What's that got to do with Auschwitz.?

>>WHY did we take the word of the 
>>Russians, the champion mass-murderers of all times, who would as soon lie 
>>as look at you?

>There was a lot of confirming evidence.
As Fred Leuchter has pointed out, why was no effort made to conduct 
forensic examinations of these facilities, while the corpse was still 
warm, as it were.

>There were thousands of people who corroborated the claims. 
Thousands? Hundreds? Would you believe a dozen?

>Unless one is a deranged revisionist it is impossible to imagine how
>all those people independently made up the same story with the same
>details.
Who says independently? They largely copied and embellished each others 
stories.

>>Instead, the western allies attempted, as it were, to 
>>climb on the band wagon by claiming that Dachau, Buchenwald, et. al. were 
>>also extermination camps.

>No, they were country clubs...
Right up until 1945, when the camps in German became woefully 
overcrowded, Buchenwald was a safer place to be than some German 
cities.

>This is just more semantic claptrap.

>Your only point is that the only meaning of "extermination camps" you
>wish to accept is "mass gassing facility", working from that personal
>definition you assert that the use of the term "extermination camp" is
>a lie because they weren't mass gassing facilities.

>Of course, all they would have meant by the phrase is that thousands
>upon thousands of people died cruelly while they were incarcerated by
>starvation, illness, overwork, bizarre medical experimentation, and
>various on the spot camp punishments for "hideous" crimes like
>stealing a crust of moldy bread or looking wrong at a guard or worst
>of all collapsing of exhaustion (hangings, shootings, being held down
>and beat to death, attacked by the guards' dogs, etc.)

>Are you, and Raven who we caught repeatedly doing this, really that
>deluded that you believe you have a point to make based solely on a
>semantic quibble like asserting that "extermination camp" should only
>mean (by your definition) "gassing facility" thus any use of the term
>gives you a chance to say that it wasn't an extermination camp, but oh
>so conveniently leave open the question as to whether it was a death
>camp or whatever else you might allow?

>It's a silly game.

>How many people died at Dachau, Buchenwald, etc? Who were they? How
>did they die?  How off-the-mark is it to refer to same as
>"extermination camps"?

>Not very. Actually, not at all.

I can't help but notice how you guys are shifting the emphasis from gas 
chambers to the other fiendish ways you say the Germans had of killing 
people.  I wonder why?

 >-- >        -Barry Shein

>Software Tool & Die    | bzs@world.std.com          | uunet!world!bzs
>Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD


Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: Nazi-Boy Advocates Censorship (Was: Re: "SCHINDLER'S LIST..)
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <2s1dpk$jq5@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 19:00:44 GMT
Lines: 25

dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:

>Gannon does not even try to camouflage his agenda any more - now, 
>he is advertising for Ernst Zundel, one of the major distributors 
>of Nazi propaganda both in North-America and Germany.

>Those who saw the "60 Minutes" program which exposed the twisted
>little world of Nazi Holocaust deniers, might recall the interviewer
>telling Zundel that he sells neo-Nazi propaganda, to which Zundel
>angrily exclaims "NOT neo-Nazi! NAZI propaganda!" (sounds like a
>joke, I know, but this is what he said).

Actually he said "not neo-Nazi, Nazi stuff.  There's a big difference." He
sells the Nazi stuff more to make money than for its propaganda value. 
seeing no reason why he shouldn't get a piece of the Nazi memorabilia
business, which is largely run by Jews, as documented in a recent article
in the NY Times Magazine. 

As for the distinction between "neo-Nazi" and "Nazi", Zuendel finds the
neo-Nazi youths in Germany who adopt the trappings of a bygone era rather
silly.  He has a similar attitude toward to KKK. 

                    Ross Vicksell

              
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: New German gag law
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References:     <2s2srk$bre@mits.mdata.fi>
Date: Thu, 26 May 1994 22:25:42 GMT
Lines: 27

kauhunen@mits.mdata.fi (Kari Nenonen) writes:

>In article ,
>Ross Vicksell  wrote:

>>I admit what I've heard is largely word-of-mouth, but I've also been told 
>>that some of these crimes perpetrated by foreigners, mainly Turks and 
>>Kurds, against Germans and against each other, have actually made the 
>>papers. I'll see what I can dig up.
>>

>I don't really want to see or smell what you can dig up, old man, but
So bury your head in the sand, see if I care.

>please, answer one question: why would a small minority like Turks
>(or Kurds) want to make themselves a target of hate by rendering
>themselves guilty of violence angainst the people amongst whom they
>are living?

Minorities do it all the time.



>-- 
>kauhunen@mits.mdata.fi         Kari Nenonen
>Maavallintie 4,                In the Baszars of Quazars
>00430 Helsinki FINLAND         there is no love for sale   


Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: Nazi-Boy Advocates Censorship (Was: Re: "SCHINDLER'S LIST..)
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <2s1dpk$jq5@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
Date: Fri, 27 May 1994 00:33:54 GMT
Lines: 56

dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:

>...
>Zundel sells, for instance, cassettes with songs of the "Hitler
>Youth", speeches of leading Nazis, etc. He hails Hitler like a
>God and is the coauthor of "The Hitler We Loved and Why". 

In Michael Hoffman's book, "The Great Holocaust Trial", Institute for
Historical Review, 1985, about Zundel's trial in Toronto in that year on
the charge of knowingly spreading false news, Hoffman writes about the
matter of the book, "The Hitler We Loved and Why".  On page 72 Hoffman
explained how at a certain stage of that trial the prosecuting attorney,
Griffiths, turned to the book we are discussing. Griffiths wanted to
establish that Zundel's politics as revealed in the book in question show
him to be a neo-Nazi. Griffiths also wanted to show Zundel used Holocaust
Revisionism as a vehicle to make Nazism respectable again. The larger
point, that Zundel wants to make Nazism respectable again, may be true,
but Zundel does not take credit for the book. According to Hoffman, Zundel
provided photographs for the book, and the moniker "Christof Friedrich"
assigned as the author was used by American publisher George Dietz instead
of his own. Dietz was the author according to Zundel and Hoffman, and
Dietz to my knowledge has never denied his authorship of the book. A
question anti-Nazis may respond to is whether one's opinions alone should
be enough to land one in jail. During the Spanish Inquisition it was
accepted by Spanish society as fit and proper for heretics to be burnt at
the stake for attempting to pervert and lead astray the immortal souls of
the people. Today it is the idealogical unity, and other forms of unity,
that leaders of the anti-Nazi/anti-racist/anti-Revisionist crowd want to
preserve at the cost of the truth about the gas chambers, the true purpose
of the concentration camps, and to the liberty of the telling of the plain
truth about these matters. The anti-Revisionists are either too
indoctrinated in the false historical myths invented by the anti-Nazi
propagandists to see the truth about these things, or they are too blinded
by their hatred of the Nazis to be open minded about these things, or they
are politically motivated like the anti-Nazi propagandists to deny the
truth and fight against any telling of the truth. The argument that Zundel
is either a Nazi or too friendly to Nazis is about on the level with "he's
a Jew or a Jew-lover and nothing he says can possibly be true." If that's
the kind of argument you are making, it seems to be a very convenient
method of cutting all discussion about the details and accusations. It
also seems to be an appeal to prejudice and party spirit--not to a careful
analysis of the evidence without fear or favor to any side. 

Do you say you want the truth about the gas chambers, the Final Solution
to the Jewish Problem, and the concentration camps? You can prove your
claim of wanting the truth by examining the details involved, and by
allowing every argument and explanation to be made and given full
opportunity to be explored and told. The hostile attitude toward Holocaust
Revisionism that is so common is the result of a reluctance to examine
even- handedly without prejudice the facts involved. To resolutely refuse
to consider arguments against the Extermination Thesis does not appear to
me to be the sign of an open minded person untouched by party feeling. 

Arthur Dexter Lindberg               

(a revisionist friend of Ross Vicksell)

Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: Nazi-Boy Advocates Censorship (Was: Re: "SCHINDLER'S LIST..)
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <2s1dpk$jq5@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  	 
Date: Fri, 27 May 1994 21:41:10 GMT
Lines: 27

bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) writes:


>One more time:

>From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
>>The argument that Zundel
>>is either a Nazi or too friendly to Nazis is about on the level with "he's
>>a Jew or a Jew-lover and nothing he says can possibly be true."

>I just want to point out that the term "jew-lover" is offensive.

>Not that I expect you to care.

>But I thought it worthwhile to put your name close to its usage.

I didn't do it.  I just turned over my terminal to Arthur for so he could
a guest posting, since he seemed to know about "The Hitler We Loved and
Why."  I didn't censor what he was writing.  Indeed, I didn't even read it
before I posted it.  Therefore I disclaim any responsibility for its
content. 

It is interesting, however, that  no one seems to have taken note of the 
main point of Arthur's post, namely that Zuendel was NOT the co-author of 
the above-mentioned book.

                               Ross Vicksell

Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: Nazi-Boy Advocates Censorship (Was: Re: "SCHINDLER'S LIST..)
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <2s1dpk$jq5@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  
Date: Sat, 28 May 1994 05:11:35 GMT
Lines: 12

dspiegel@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Dan Spiegel) writes:

>   Oh, and for at least the fifth time, who pays you and how much do you
>get for exposing yourself as a lackey of scum lying shit? 

About the same pay as you get from the Zionists/Exterminationists, an 
occasional pat on the back.

               Ross Vicksell

p.s. Most of the revisionists I know are nice people, once you get to 
know them.


Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: Nazi-Boy Advocates Censorship (Was: Re: "SCHINDLER'S LIST..)
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <2s1dpk$jq5@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  <26MAY199414550150@bpavms.bpa.arizona.edu>
Date: Sat, 28 May 1994 05:25:19 GMT
Lines: 16

dmittleman@bpavms.bpa.arizona.edu (Daniel Mittleman) writes:

>In article , codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell) writes...
>> 
>>Actually he said "not neo-Nazi, Nazi stuff.  There's a big difference." He
>>sells the Nazi stuff more to make money than for its propaganda value. 
>>seeing no reason why he shouldn't get a piece of the Nazi memorabilia
>>business, which is largely run by Jews, as documented in a recent article
>>in the NY Times Magazine. 

>    I'd be interested in reading this.  Do you recall which issue it was
>    in?
Nov. 28, 1993. It's called "Evil for Sale: the market for Nazi 
memorabilia is growing, and many of the collectors are Jews."
>===========================================================================
>daniel david mittleman     -     danny@arizona.edu     -     (602) 621-2932


Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Re: Swindler's Jest revisited
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <2s84j3$qai@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
Date: Sun, 29 May 1994 04:20:10 GMT
Lines: 16

dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:

>Rick_Savage@nile.com (Rick Savage) writes:

>#    The revisionist's will have a field day with this one.  Count on Swindler's
># Jest as being A-1 feature centerpiece of all their upcoming promotions.  This
># movie of fiction has got to be the worst thing that the Holocaust propaganda
># lobby could have produced. 

>Then why are "revisionists" trying to ban it, you clown?

Make that  "revisionist." The state-side revisionists I know are 
appalled at the notion of censorship, in any way, shape or fashion.


       Ross Vicksell


Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Ernst Zuendel
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: 
Date: Mon, 30 May 1994 20:20:09 GMT
Lines: 60

stara@husc7.harvard.edu (Felix Vagabond) writes:

> Ross Vicksell Quoting his Friend Fred Leuchter(?):

I'm not quoting anybody but myself (and Zuendel).

>"Actually he said "not neo-Nazi, Nazi stuff.  There's a big difference." He
>sells the Nazi stuff more to make money than for its propaganda value.
>seeing no reason why he shouldn't get a piece of the Nazi memorabilia
>business, which is largely run by Jews, as documented in a recent article
>in the NY Times Magazine.
> 
>As for the distinction between "neo-Nazi" and "Nazi", Zuendel finds the
>neo-Nazi youths in Germany who adopt the trappings of a bygone era rather
>silly.  He has a similar attitude toward to KKK."
> 
>Ross just where are you on this beside quoting stupid fellow who lost every
>moral reasoning to stand on, who has lied on many occasions.
>Do you care to tell us that you are in accord with him, or just can't find 
>other lunatics who are off the norms.
>Ja herr Zuendel, der scharlatan, der bertugerisch, und er lebet mit luge und
>tauschung. 
>Ross once I had some respect for you, but now you have mix with a man who
>not only embraces Nazi ideas but he has advocated its practice and has 
>greatly contributed to its raise in Germany now.
>Ross in order to restore your respect here you have to change your stand.

I don't agree with Zuendel's racial philosophy.  
Multi-ethnic/multi-ethnic societies have their pluses as well as their 
minuses. I think it would be kind of dull living in a racially 
homogeneous society.  As for blaming the non-whites for how the U.S. has 
been slipping, I think the real cause of our national decline is the 
absolutely insane economic policies of the federal government, which has 
been letting basic industries get destroyed over the last thirty years 
without lifting a finger to save them.  No other major industrial power 
on the face of the earth has a trade policy as benighted as ours.
But all this belongs in alt.new-world-order.

Getting back to Zuendel, he's done more to get the revisionist message 
out than all the rest of the people in the movement put together. 

All through his prolonged persecution he's been playing by the rules
with regards to the various legal restrictions placed on him by Germany
and Canada: suspension of mailing privileges, injunction on talking about
the Holocaust while his convictions were being appealed, restrictions on
travel, and God knows what else.

The beautiful thing about it is that he finally won!  A triumph for freedom, 
especially free speech.  Almost makes you want to believe in the system.

As for the secret Nazi bases in the Arctic, I figure that was just 
a posture he adopted for a while to get his foot in the door of radio and 
TV talk shows.  He received considerable criticism at the time from 
others in the revisionist movement for going off on this tangent, I 
understand.  (That was before my time (Before Leuchter)).

                  Ross Vicksell


Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
From: codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell)
Subject: Nazi Memorabilia (Was: Re: Nazi-Boy Advocates Censorship)
Message-ID: 
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <2s1dpk$jq5@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  <26MAY199414550150@bpavms.bpa.arizona.edu>  
Date: Mon, 30 May 1994 20:52:31 GMT
Lines: 49

golux@mcs.com (The only Golux in the World, and not a mere Device) writes:

>In article , codfish@netcom.com (Ross
>Vicksell) wrote:

>> dmittleman@bpavms.bpa.arizona.edu (Daniel Mittleman) writes:
>> >In article , codfish@netcom.com (Ross Vicksell) writes...
>> >>Actually he said "not neo-Nazi, Nazi stuff.  There's a big difference." He
>> >>sells the Nazi stuff more to make money than for its propaganda value. 
>> >>seeing no reason why he shouldn't get a piece of the Nazi memorabilia
>> >>business, which is largely run by Jews, as documented in a recent article
>> >>in the NY Times Magazine. 
>> 
>> >    I'd be interested in reading this.  Do you recall which issue it was
>> >    in?
>> Nov. 28, 1993. It's called "Evil for Sale: the market for Nazi 
>> memorabilia is growing, and many of the collectors are Jews."

>Well, this is confusing, Ross.  The subtitle says "...many collectors are
>Jews," but you say the Nazi memorabilia business is "largely run by Jews." 
>Which is it?  I mean, many collectors of comic books are children, but the
>comic book business is not largely run by children.

>Does the body of the article support your characterization a little better
>(in which case, please post the appropriate excerpts), or have you
>mischaracterized the article?

The article's emphasis is on the ethnicity of the collectors, not of the 
dealers, so I admit to gratuitously assuming that the dealers tend to be 
Jewish, too.

Only two dealers, per se, are mentioned in the article, one Jewish
and the other apparently Italian.

A couyple of excerpts:

"The most unsettling impulse may also be the most banal: a desire for 
profit. "I've always considered this better than the stock market," 
Hasher said.  Many items that entered the United States as wartime 
souvenirs are increasing in value by about 20% a year. "Selling it is 
like selling your children," Hasher laments. "But my intention is to sell 
a bundle and travel the world for my retirement."

"Quite honestly, most of collectors happen to be Jewish," says Newman, 
who is Jewish himself."  But he says he's not rattled by combative 
questions about why he sells what he does.  "It's my business - it's 
merchandise," he answers.  "I say, 'If you find it offensive, I'd advise 
you to purchase it.  I'll supply you the matches and you can take it into 
the bathroom and burn it. '"

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