The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/nyms/ehrlich606/1997/ehrlich.0197


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Jan  8 16:18:32 PST 1997
Article: 91815 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!news.uoregon.edu!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!newspump.sol.net!howland.erols.net!worldnet.att.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!152.163.170.17!newstf01.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Theses on National Socialism
Date: 8 Jan 1997 16:37:37 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <19970108163500.LAA07527@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <19970108154900.KAA06382@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <19970108154900.KAA06382@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
truthsk763@aol.com (Truthsk763) writes:

>>ehrlich606@aol.com on 8 Jan 1997 03:02:44 GMT wrote:
>
>>1.  It is obvious that the National Socialist regime in Germany acquired
>>power in Germany legally, it is also obvious that in the years from 1933
>>to 1939 it improved the lot of the average German while at the same time
>>acting in an extremely arbitrary fashion with regards to the traditional
>>rule of law, which victimized many individuals who were disapproved of
by
>>that regime, including Jews.  But in keeping with the arbitrary nature
of
>>the regime, these penalties and punishments -- some of them quite
>>horrendous -- were never meted out equally.
>
>The Nazis never came to power through an election.  In fact, they were
>always a minority in the Reichstag.  The Nazi bloc joined by the
>Communists disrupted the proceedings of the Reichstag to the point where
>no business could be conducted. Disruptions were more than supplemented
>through daily street violence -- not very democratic.  A decision was
made
>to co-opt them and a coalition government was installed on January 30,
>1933 with Adolf Hitler as Chancellor. 

Rarely have I ever had such a wrong headed and dense reading of a post. 
Nothing you mention here confutes the obvious fact: the National Socialist
seizure of power was done in accordance with the laws of the Weimar
Republic.

As to the rest of your comments, I might even be offended by the
suggestion that I am an apologist for National Socialism were it not for
the fact that I explicity condemn the ideology.  Are you sure that English
is your native language?  Or perhaps you think that attempts to
deconstruct National Socialism constitute approvals thereof, unless one
demeans oneself by hashing out the same shopworn and by now ritualized
maledicta (you may reach for your dictionary again, son.)

Indeed, in Para 14 I explicitly make it clear -- in _two_ languages, that
National Socialism will only succeed in my country over my dead body.

The rest of your reply consists of simply more of the same emotion-laden
dross that is so pointless and feckless 50 years after the fact.  People
who died 50 years ago are entitled to dignity: Wow!  May I quote you on
that?  Is that going to be the rallying cry at the barricades?  And what
pray tell does that have to do with human anxiety and suffering _today_? 
pardon my sarcasm.

Your reply simply explains yet another defect of Emotics: it encourages
irrational and snap judgments, and readings of texts that are
discontinuous, and self-indulgently ballistic, as for example, in your
totally wrong-headed reading of my post.

In short, you have proved my point.





From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed Jan  8 19:36:43 PST 1997
Article: 91865 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!portc02.blue.aol.com!newstf02.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Jake LaMotta vs Nizkor
Date: 8 Jan 1997 21:48:44 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <19970108214600.QAA15431@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <5b0pkn$1b4q@cnn.cc.biu.ac.il>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <5b0pkn$1b4q@cnn.cc.biu.ac.il>, schultr@ashur.cc.biu.ac.il
(Richard Schultz) writes:

>I realize that the above passes for cleverness in your part of the world
>(although I for one have no trouble distinguishing Mr. Anderson from
>Petruchio).  But you seem to be forgetting that "lingual" is not Greek,
>but Latin (the fact that it's "bilingual" and not "dilingual" should have
>tipped you off).  Thus, the proper negation, it seems to me, would be
>either "illingual" or "non-lingual."  I'd opt for the latter because it's
>more clear what it means.
>
>Although if reports reaching these shores are correct, your proposed
>neologism more properly applies to Giwer and Moran vis-a-vis you than
>it does to anyone else who posts here.
>
>

I can see that your sense of humor has decidedly mellowed in the past
year, since you last attributed a malicious origin to my nom de cyber.  Of
couse the post was totally bogus.  _No kidding_.  Did you figure it out
all by yourself?  Actually, the Latin analogue would be *un-*
corresponding to Greek *a-* which takes a nasal before vowels and a rough
aspirate but not before a liquid.

Of course, if I had remained totally pedantic I would have had no fun. 
But clearly the use of *a-* here is the Greek negative particle in
question, and should be expected to conform to Greek rules. Besides, many
neologisms combine Latin and Greek roots: biochemistry, I believe, is an
example.  But you know that.

Let's review the insults so far.  X accuses Moran and Giwer of having no
language, I accuse X of being an bootlicker and defend Moran and Giwer,
and then you arrive and claim that the phrase best applies to Moran and
Giwer vis a vis me?  Vis a Vis youself.

That's about typical for this board.  You are advised to be skeptical of
the reports you receive.  But then you are perhaps one of those credulous
types.


  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu Jan  9 08:38:35 PST 1997
Article: 91903 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!152.163.170.17!newstf01.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Theses on National Socialism
Date: 9 Jan 1997 01:18:03 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 100
Message-ID: <19970109011600.UAA21339@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <19970108030000.WAA21325@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Subject:	Re: Theses on National Socialism
From:	dkeren@world.std.com (Daniel Keren)
Date:	Wed, 8 Jan 1997 21:47:52 GMT

ehrlich606@aol.com writes:

# 16.  On the subject of the Holocaust, there is no doubt
# that the National Socialist government pursued an anti-Jewish
# agenda and that many Jews perished from it.

That is indeed true.-DK

# The numbers are really irrelevant,

This, however, is a terribly idiotic and inhuman statement.-DK

Danny, listen.  There is nothing idiotic or inhuman about it, unless you
want to say that if it turns out that it wasn't 6 mill but something less
then that means that Hitler and National Socialism should be let off the
hook proportionally.

The numbers of victims of the Holocaust are no more relevant than the
numbers of German dead at Dresden.  In the first place, the dead are dead,
and in the second place, in my opinion you reach a threshold where after a
certain point the numbers just don't matter, in terms of moral judgement.

I hope we don't have to go back to square one and agree that killing
people is generally wrong, and that killing non-combatants in wartime is
also wrong.  The Germans were very deliberately killing people (usually,
Jews) just because of who they were, and that's wrong. Duh.  We don't have
to count up to 6 million to agree that it was wrong, I hope.

# since most historians scarcely analyze them anyway,

Another horribly idiotic statement.-DK

It is simply true.  Most historians just say *millions*.

# and besides once you get past a few hundred thousand the exact
# totals are meaningless.

This one is so idiotic and inhuman that I suspect the "ehrlich"
is simply trying to flame people.-DK

I am not trying to flame anybody.  In fact, my motivation for this post
was twofold: to try to be conciliatory, and to refute the argument of
Winston Smith and Deborah Lipstadt.  And, oh, BTW, to make it clear that
National Socialism is irrelevant to a discussion of Holocaust Revisionism.

# 20.  Such tolerance should include two classes: (a) those who
# just don't buy the massive gassings

Didn't you once write in an e-mail to me that you are "sure that
gassings took place in LK1 (in Kremas II & III) and elsewhere"?
Or maybe you forgot?-DK

Private e-mail cuts both ways.  Nice to know you do not respect it, but I
still do.  What I said back in the summer was that I was convinced that
gassings took place but I was unconvinced about the scale.  That is what I
said then.  

BTW, your "essay" misses all the important features of Nazism.-DK

Sez you.  I have deliberate elided racism, which I have addressed
elsewhere on this board, or perhaps you missed it.  I have elided it here,
because race issues as they exist today have virtually no relevance to a
discussion of National Socialism.  How many people do _you_ know who
consider white people and Jews as separate races?  I don't know any. 
OTOH, I know many white people, including Jews, who consider Africans and
African-Americans to be a lesser race.  That is where the future problem
lies.

I have also deliberately elided moralistic posings because I for one am
sick and tired of them.  Nowadays appeals to morality are at worst appeals
to political cynicism and self interest and at best appeals to Mom and
Dad.  In either case, moralism is perceived by far too many as a sign of
weakness, and yet it is precisely such people who have to have it
explained to them that National Socialism is a non-starter.  Do you
understand?

I respect your _feelings_ on this topic.  But if you really want to get
into Comparative Atrocities 101 then you are going to have to argue that
the German killings were of a nature incommensurable with the killings of
the Soviets, and many many others.  And, again, while I respect your
feelings, I must disagree.


PS - how's it going, Alan? Still feeding the troll with rubbish
     that you don't want to post yourself? Isn't this a rather
     cynical thing - to use a very sick individual this way?-DK

What tripe.  I passed on 3-4 things at the end of August to those on my
mailing list because I wanted to get away from the board to concentrate on
languages and other things.  However, if you are sufficiently paranoid to
believe that I am some kind of eminence grise for this board you are
entitled to your delusion, and I am not the least surprised that you would
be so credulous.  I am surprised at you in other ways, but there is no
point in continuing.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu Jan  9 08:38:36 PST 1997
Article: 91910 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.win.hookup.net!hookup!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!worldnet.att.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!152.163.170.17!newstf01.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Wagner
Date: 9 Jan 1997 02:58:30 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <19970109025601.VAA24354@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <19970108202600.PAA13196@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <19970108202600.PAA13196@ladder01.news.aol.com>, mgiwer@aol.com
(Mgiwer) writes:

>
>    Fascinating that someone actually keeps track of such things.   BTW: 
>Korngold mit ein K.  
>
>=====

Fascinating too that a conventionalist would use the Nuremberg Laws as a
criterion when it suited his/her/its purpose.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu Jan  9 08:38:36 PST 1997
Article: 91960 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!noc.van.hookup.net!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!worldnet.att.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!152.163.170.17!newstf01.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Typical Nature of Holocaust Accounts
Date: 9 Jan 1997 16:02:29 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <19970109160000.LAA10748@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <32d5e6a7.1267669@199.0.216.204>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <32d5e6a7.1267669@199.0.216.204>, tm@pacificnet.net (tom moran)
writes:

>
>	"Years". We'll give you the benefit away from further absurdity.
>Lets say 2 years. The Russians were there in later 1944. Nizkor
>"annotation" said Aug. and beyond, 1943 the camp was still in
>existance. Which is more like a year, non plural. Years would be 1942.
>If it said 1942 then you would have years. From Aug. 1943 to fall 1944
>is about a year.
>
>	Whatever, Holocaust historians all have diferent dates and
>accounts. That's what happens with documenting lies.

Something that one should keep in mind about the Aktion Reinhardt camps is
that they all were supposed to have begun operation in the Spring and
Summer of '42 and some operated at least until the Fall of '43.  In
addition, the entire territory of the Aktion Reinhard camps fell to the
Russians no later than the end of August of 1944, in the course of the
tremendous encirclements of Operation Bagration, which literally ran out
of gas on the outskirts of Warsaw..

That means in the first place that a camp like Treblinka could not have
been out of service for a year, much less years.

It also means that if there is anything to the revisionist approach -- and
I think there is -- what one has to look at is what exactly the Soviets
found when they swooped over Byelorussia.  (One might also want to keep in
mind the topographical features of the region, in terms of lack of
communications, poor transportation, bogs, marshes, forests, etc. not only
in terms of pockets of survivors, partisans, and German soldiers, but also
in terms of mass graves, and the hypothetical difficulty of locating
same.)

It is also noteworthy as a historical fact that Aktion Reinhardt camps
tend to correspond with the 1939 border between Russia and Germany, and at
various railheads thereof.  Since it is known that Russia has always used
a wider gauge rail, any further transporation (it might well have involved
shootings in Minsk, etc.) would have required wholesale transfers.  Worth
exploring.

Further on this point full scale forensic excavations of these sights
could be undertaken should anyone really want precise numbers.  I think it
is interesting that no such full-scale excavations have ever been
attempted, especially since the UN has conducted such full scale
excavations at the site of alleged Serbian mass shootings quite recently
(the result is that they have found that the death tolls have been
exaggerated on average by factors of 8 or 10 to 1.  What a surprise.)

    


From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri Jan 10 16:00:26 PST 1997
Article: 92072 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!visi.com!mr.net!newsfeeds.sol.net!hammer.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!portc02.blue.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Wagner
Date: 10 Jan 1997 18:59:29 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <19970110185700.NAA19634@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <5b61co$517@lendl.cc.emory.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <5b61co$517@lendl.cc.emory.edu>, libwca@larry.cc.emory.edu
(william c anderson) writes:

>
>Don't you think that would pretty much do it all by itself, without
>your fascinating theory?
>
>Bill
>
>

Thank you for agreeing that my theories are fascinating.  However, the
point is not whether Wagner wrote antisemitic articles, but whether he
wrote antisemitic operas.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri Jan 10 20:06:46 PST 1997
Article: 92088 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.nap.net!news.wwa.com!gail.ripco.com!tezcat!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!portc02.blue.aol.com!newstf02.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Opinion of what really happened (Was: Why is "Holocaust Denial" a bad thing
Date: 10 Jan 1997 18:59:35 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <19970110185700.NAA19637@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <19970110181200.NAA18496@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <19970110181200.NAA18496@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
truthsk763@aol.com (Truthsk763) writes:

>Sifting fact from fiction also took place after World War II, but while
>some initial assumptions were incorrect, nothing has emerged after more
>than 50 years to discredit two core incontrovertible facts.  First, Nazi
>Germany was an imperialist power out to conquer and enslave Europe. 
>Second, Nazi Germany systematically murdered 6,000,000 Jews.
>
>Another difference, during World War I, allied governments disseminated
>"hate German" propaganda to motivate their peoples to fight.  This
>included exaggerated tales of German actions.  During World War II, these
>same nations, despite having proof of German large scale murder, kept
this
>knowledge under wraps.
>
>

You have excellent taste in cinema, but this is a little too simplistic. 
Whether Germany was out to conquer and enslave Europe has been questioned
by many historians, not just the *denier* types.  And, agan, whether
Germany in fact *systematically* murdered six million Jews has been a
perennial topic for change ever since Reitlinger's 1954 book at least.

Also, you should read WW2 materials some time.  You will find a plethora
of White Books, Black Books, Brown Books, etc. all of them detailing
atrocities against the Germans that very few mention nowadays.  In
addition, you will find many news stories rehearsing atrocities from
unnamed sources and Soviet War Crimes Commisions (is that an oxymoron?) 
that are similarly ignored, even by so-called *Holocaust Historians*.

Kept the knowledge under wraps?  Hardly.  Disseminated the truth and the
falsehoods through unofficial channels?  You bet.





From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri Jan 10 20:06:47 PST 1997
Article: 92094 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!portc02.blue.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Opinion of what really happened (Was: Why is "Holocaust Denial" a bad thing
Date: 10 Jan 1997 21:39:15 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <19970110213700.QAA24178@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <19970110165000.LAA16531@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <19970110165000.LAA16531@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
dvdthomas@aol.com (DvdThomas) writes:

>
>Regarding the exchange between Sara, Gordon and Ehrlich:
>
>Sara's resembled a mink in the past few posts, and by that I don't mean a
>smooth, furry exterior.  Sharp, quick bite.  Well, everybody gets in bad
>moods, big deal.  But I absolutely would like to see some backup for that
>statement about the WWI atrocity accusations against the Germans:
>
>

Actually, something that I found very interesting from Gord's post is that
*Etzel* is the German form of *Atilla*, which I had never given much
thought before.  Now, OTOH, I am prepared to suggest that *Edsel* is the
English form of the German.  The implications are profound.

Could you imagine driving around in a *1959 Attila?*

Or purchasing a book entitled *Leadership Secrets of Edsel the Hun?*

On a more serious note, it would appear that Henry Ford, as an upright
Scotch Irish Germanophile, had the Kaiser's speech in mind when he named
his eldest son.  Or maybe not.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri Jan 10 21:59:27 PST 1997
Article: 92106 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!n3ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!winternet.com!visi.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!152.163.170.17!newstf01.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Jake LaMotta vs Nizkor
Date: 8 Jan 1997 16:37:34 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <19970108163501.LAA07525@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <5b0ehu$64v@lendl.cc.emory.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <5b0ehu$64v@lendl.cc.emory.edu>, libwca@curly.cc.emory.edu
(william c anderson) writes:

>: 	What? You mean they didn't accuse you of being a bad speller or
>: not being able to read the English language? Those are the worst ones.
>
>I know, it's tough, Zeyde.  But Mr. Blackmore, in spite of being an
>antisemitic liar with overt Nazi sympathies, is in fact a very good
>speller, and has even demonstrated some ability to understand the 
>English language.  You and Matt are still the only alingual types on
>alt.revisionism.
>
>Best of Billy Anderson
>
>

In Greek it is not usual to negate (in this case, a + lingual) by the use
of a vowel before a liquid, and in any case the vowel quantity of the *a*
could not be long as is implied in this case because there is no evidence
of a prepositional laryngeal as per Saussure's famous analysis.

The proper procedure would involve the use of *a* plus the appropriate
nasal, i.e., *an* or *am*, and, before a liquid, to insert a linking
vowel.  In this way the short vowel quantity of the negating prefix is
maintained, and euphony is achieved.

The word you are looking for is therefore not *alingual* but rather
*analingual* but on second thought this is perhaps a better descriptor of
conventionalists, and at any rate certainly does not pertain to either the
courageous Giwer or the stout-hearted Moran.

BTW, the proposed neologism is not synonymous with *tongue in cheek.*



From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Jan 11 07:21:41 PST 1997
Article: 92192 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!clicnet!news.clic.net!news.alfred.edu!news.sprintlink.net!news-pen-14.sprintlink.net!snunews.snu.ac.kr!newsfeed.dacom.co.kr!arclight.uoregon.edu!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!portc02.blue.aol.com!newstf02.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Jake LaMotta vs Nizkor
Date: 8 Jan 1997 22:19:49 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <19970108221800.RAA16265@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <5b0q77$9u3@lendl.cc.emory.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <5b0q77$9u3@lendl.cc.emory.edu>, libwca@larry.cc.emory.edu
(william c anderson) writes:

>
>Sorry, Erlich--I'm not Greek.  I was just making a funny.
>
>Bill
>
>

Me too. You might want to cast the message upon the waters so that the
bread of humor will be washed up on them shores.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Jan 11 07:21:41 PST 1997
Article: 92197 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!n3ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!tor.istar!east.istar!uunet!in1.uu.net!152.163.170.17!newstf01.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Jake LaMotta vs Nizkor
Date: 9 Jan 1997 15:06:05 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 122
Message-ID: <19970109150400.KAA09330@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <5b2502$jt6@cnn.cc.biu.ac.il>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <5b2502$jt6@cnn.cc.biu.ac.il>, schultr@ashur.cc.biu.ac.il
(Richard Schultz) writes:

>ehrlich606@aol.com wrote:
>
>: I can see that your sense of humor has decidedly mellowed in the past
>: year, since you last attributed a malicious origin to my nom de cyber. 

>
>I never attributed a malicious origin to your nom de cyber.  I suggested
>that you adopted it as an indication of your desire to rid the world
>of vermin to demonstrate that (a) you have no sense of irony and (b) you
>can dish it out, but you cannot take it.

At this point you are reminding of my son, who told me the other day that
the reason he overslept was that, although he woke up at 6 o'clock, _he
couldn't move_.  Yeah, OK.

>
>: Of couse the post was totally bogus.  _No kidding_.  Did you figure it
out
>: all by yourself?  
>
>What I pointed out (as you would have seen were you not irony impaired)
>was not that the post was bogus, but that it wasn't funny.  (I also 
>included the Shakespeare allusion to demonstrate in a subtle way that
>I knew what you were talking about (vide infra) and that you're not as
>smart as you appear to think you are.)

I understand that you didn't think it was funny.  That's cool.  On the
other hand the only thing worse than diagramming a joke is explaining the
erudite nature of one's allusions. And there is a difference between
having an allusion at hand and forcing one. *not as smart as I appear to
think*?  What makes you think I think that I am so smart?  I just read a
lot.  I also like arcane jests.  You don't.  That is also cool.

>
>: Let's review the insults so far.  X accuses Moran and Giwer of having
no
>: language, I accuse X of being an bootlicker 
>
>No, you accused William Anderson (your "X") of being an *asslicker*.
>Let's call a spade a spade, why don't we?  Mr. X was not accusing
>Moran and Giwer of "having no language."  He was pointing out that their
>posts tend toward gibberish and are filled with collections of words
>that cannot be parsed into anything approaching grammatical English. 
This
>is not an "insult" -- it is a statement of fact, as anyone who reads 
>through their posts (excuse me, anyone *literate* who reads through their
>posts) can see.

No, in fact I was not accusing Mr. X of being what you say.  In the first
place, my service provider won't allow to use language like that, but
beyond that I prefer not to use such language.  I think the best way to
conceptualize my post is to recognize that I was reading about phonology
over the weekend and the post inspired me to respond.  In the process, I
delivered a mild jab at the conventionalists collectively.

Now I see you are going to insinuate that I am illiterate.  Be my guest. 
Now, I suppose that I let it pass in silence I am showing I can take it,
but if I fail to respond that means I can't?

>
>:                                              and defend Moran and
Giwer,
>: and then you arrive and claim that the phrase best applies to Moran and
>: Giwer vis a vis me?  Vis a Vis youself.
>
>Would you care to explain which language that last sentence was in? 
>Although I won't press the matter --  anyone who would defend Moran and 
>Giwer has enough problems already.

Actually, I couldn't figure out what _you_ were trying to say.  So I
returned the phrase.

>
>: That's about typical for this board.  You are advised to be skeptical
of
>: the reports you receive.  But then you are perhaps one of those
credulous
>: types.
>
>Once again, Mr. Salvarsan demonstrates what I pointed out above -- he
>can dish it out, but he cannot take it.

Apparently your definition of not being able to take means not responding
to a post.  If that is your litmus test then I can certainly do that.
>
>But I will take your advice and be skeptical:  are you denying that you
>have ever sent any material to Giwer; are you denying that no material
>you sent him ever appeared on alt.revisionism; or are you just blowing
>smoke in the wind (in which case, I would advise the -- in your own 
>phrase -- "analingual" Mr. Giwer to give you a wide berth)?

I don't know about you, but I have spent maybe 5-6 days reading messages
on  this board in the last six months.  Perhaps you find that hard to
believe.  Who cares?

I have a regular group of correspondents.  Very occasionally I have sent
out messages indicating my desire for wider distribution.  I really don't
know what has shown up here because I don't follow this board regularly. 
If you wish to believe that there is a systematic skullduggery at work
here, all of it in accordance with the illuminated copy of the *Protocols
of the Ehrlichs of 606* that I keep in my attic, feel free.  But I think
the idea laughably paranoid.

There are a lot of things to do in life and getting bogged down on this
board is definitely one of the lowest-quality things a person can do.  If
I come across interesting information, it is better to pass it on to my
mailing list than to post it myself and sucked into the usual BS.  But
when I have something that really reflects my thinking I come here and
post, which is why I came by this time, but I have got to be going.

Did you know So long is cognate to Shalom?




>
>




From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Jan 11 07:21:42 PST 1997
Article: 92229 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!n3ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!nntp.portal.ca!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!news-xfer.netaxs.com!feed1.news.erols.com!worldnet.att.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!152.163.170.17!newstf01.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Wagner
Date: 9 Jan 1997 18:34:24 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 95
Message-ID: <19970109183200.NAA14689@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <19970109145100.JAA09082@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


In article <5b2t0m$bif$1@gruvel.une.edu.au>, ibokor@metz.une.edu.au
(ibokor) writes:

>Doc Tavish (tavish@phoenix.net) wrote:
>: ibokor wrote:
>: > 
>: > Mad Max (Freedom@Speech.FORREAL) wrote:
>: > :       Speaking of which, where are the great jewish composers?  Are
>: > : they are the same leaflets as jewish sports legends just to fill
the
>: > : space?
>: > :
>: > 
>: > If we use then Nuremberg law criteria, we could start
>: > with Mendelssohn, Mahler, Offenbach, Goldmark, Weill,
>: > Corngold, Copeland, Gershwin......
>: They are minor composers and they have not achieved the status of being
>: truly giants. 
>
>
>
>Mahler a "minor composer"?
>Mendelssohn a "minor composer"?
>I guess that since Mendelssohn was composing long
>before reaching the age of consent he, like Mozart
>and Rossini was composing as a minor and so was
>a "minor" composer. But he outgrew that and went on
>to be an adult composer as well.
>
As Ernest Newman said in Richard Strauss' obit, Mendelssohn began as a
genius and ended as a talent (I think he was quoting someone else.) 
Mendelssohn was essentially written out by the time he was 30.

Outside of Mahler and Mendelssohn, you've got no heavy hitters on your
team.  Sorry.
>
>: This is not my opinion alone but the opinion is shared by
>: many devotees and cognoscenti of classical music. Gustav Mahler was
>: morbid and death mongering,
>
>And Wagner was full of life, cheer and lightness of heart, I suppose.
>It is difficult to find many composers who had as profound an influence
>on subsequent musicians as Bach, Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, Wagner, Liszt,
>Mahler, Schoenberg, for various reasons.
>
There are some things in Mahler I like.  But he is really a Wagnerian
epigone.  Shoot, he even swipes stuff from Bruckner (cf. the Scherzo in
the Titan with the 3rd Movement of Bruckner's 3rd) who was definitely a
Wagnerian epigone.  I don't think Mahler or Strauss had much influence on
anybody, although *Elektra* clearly anticipates Schoenberg (*Erwartung*),
and Bartok was inspired by *Zarathustra.*
Probably, both Mahler and Strauss are the grandfathers of modern film
music.

>
>
>: Copeland built upon native existing music to an extent and
>
>So did Bartok, Kodaly, Brahms, Mozart, Beethoven, Dvorak.
>
>: Gershwin was a product of tin pan alley or the mass construction Jewish
>: song factory that Sir Henry Ford despised so much. 
>
>Now there is an intellectual and cutural giant:
>a man of supreme authority in matters of music
>and culture. "History is bunk" says all.
>

Somebody besides me is getting very confused here.  _Copland_ is my
favorite 20th Century composer, but the writing of a coherent symphonic
structure without lapsing into vulgarity was clearly quite beyond him.  I
grew up on Gershwin: however, just to be contentious we could point out
that *Porgy and Bess* is an ugly racist opera.  Certainly for more
explicitly so that anything Wagner ever composed.  (I like it anyway.)

>
>And there are many who would certainly put Bach, Mahler and Wagner in
>with your list, or add Brahms, Haydn, Bartok as well.
>I don't know about you, but my musical tatse and preferences have
>evolved over the years and I must confess that for a long time
>I could not bear to listen to Bartok or Shoshtakovich, whom I
>both enjoy now. It has taken a measure of maturity for me to become
>receptive t Bruckner, Mahler and Wagner --- it was through the
>records: "Klempere Conducts Wagner" that I managed to progress
>past the morose turgidness of his music and was introduced to 
>more coloured and richly textured music

Klemperer was a superb Wagnerian.  The best in the USA were George Szell,
and Fritz Reiner (Hungarian emigres of Jewish background, as you know;
their approaches somewhat different -- I particularly recommend Szell if
you find RW turgid.)  While you are at it, dig up Klemperer's recording of
Meistersinger, recorded in Budapest in 1948, sung in Hungarian.  A gas!




From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Jan 11 07:21:43 PST 1997
Article: 92230 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!world1.bellatlantic.net!out2.nntp.cais.net!in1.nntp.cais.net!tezcat!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!portc02.blue.aol.com!newstf02.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Dr. Ehrlich now on video!
Date: 10 Jan 1997 16:28:17 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <19970110162600.LAA15864@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


I am pleased to announce that one of my favorite films is now on video
tape, and I recommend it to one and all.  It is retailing at 19.99, but I
personally know that a couple of clearing houses in Illinois who have just
marketed it are selling it for $15 a copy.

*Dr. Ehrlich's Magic Bullet* (1940) is one a series of Warner Bros. biopix
which were a cut above the usual dramatic fare offered at the time.  The
film describes the career of the German Jewish physician, focusing in
particular on his development of the *Salvarsan* treatment for syphilis,
the first truly effective cure for that disease.

It features a sympathetic and earnest portrayal of the good doctor by
Edward G. Robinson, another guy whose name I always forget as his 
contemporary and pal Emil Behrens, and Ruth Gordon as Mrs. Ehrlich.  There
are also a couple of fabulous cameos, one by the famous German stage-actor
Albert Bassermann as Robert Koch, and Olga Cantrememberherlastnameeither
as a wealthy German widow.

Naturally, the film, in part scripted by John Huston, has its share of
historical and medical innaccuracy, but the story it tells is generally
true, all the way down to the Japanese assistant who helped develop the
606th treatment for the AIDS of the 19th Century.  It is not often that
one encounters a film that features character portrayals of several Nobel
prize winners. Keep a very sharp eye and I think you will see Rudolf
Virchow, too.

There are some negative German portrayals in the film, as well as I think
a realistic depiction of how anti-semitism operated in fin de siecle
Germany, but if you think the upshot of the film is negative about
Germans, you are in for a pleasant surprise.

Recommended to everyone who is interested in Medicine, History, German
Jewish relations, and wholesome films generally.  Kids from about 10 on up
would enjoy it too.

BTW,  there is also now available (has been for a couple of years) *The
Mortal Storm* another take on the Nazi period before America got into the
war, featuring the Wizard of Oz (Frank Morgan) as a German academic
imprisoned because he was a Jew, James Stewart and Margaret Sullavan as
star-crossed lovers, and many fine supporting roles, including the
inimitable Russian actress cited above.

These are both definitely feel-good movies for Germanophiles and even for
Jews (if you would think such a thing possible :)), generally accurate,
and showing an astounding generosity of spirit considering the time during
which they were created.

Tolle, vide!




From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Jan 11 13:15:48 PST 1997
Article: 92299 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!uunet!in2.uu.net!152.163.170.17!newstf01.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Wagner
Date: 10 Jan 1997 18:59:32 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <19970110185700.NAA19636@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <5b61jt$517@lendl.cc.emory.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <5b61jt$517@lendl.cc.emory.edu>, libwca@larry.cc.emory.edu
(william c anderson) writes:

>
>: Outside of Mahler and Mendelssohn, you've got no heavy hitters on your
>: team.  Sorry.
>
>I'm not sure what "team" this is--The Vienna Jews? The Hamburg Hebrews?--
>but if you don't consider Arnold Schoenberg a heavy hitter, you haven't
>been paying attention to the game.
>
>Bill
>
>

Schoenberg was notorious as a spray hitter who lacked the discipline to
keep his swing in the strike zone.  As a result, he struck out frequently.
 As a fielder, no one ever wanted him in left field because you could
never tell which base he was going to throw to.






From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Jan 11 17:41:31 PST 1997
Article: 92332 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.axionet.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!152.163.170.17!newstf01.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Wagner
Date: 9 Jan 1997 18:34:19 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <19970109183200.NAA14686@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <19970109145100.JAA09082@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

n article <5b2lfp$eo4@news.nevada.edu>, schlafo@nevada.edu (OSCAR SCHLAF)
writes:

> Taken from the insert in the CD "Wagner-Ouverturen-Vorspiele" 
>   from Deutsche Grammophon GmbH, Hamburg 1993.
>
>"Wagner undertook a much more thoroughing revision of his next Opera,
>Tannenhauser, originally composed in 1842 and 1843, for scandal-ridden
Paris
>production of 1861. The work,based on medieval knight legends, turns on
the
>conflict in the mind of the central character, the knight Tannhauser,
between
>sacred love, represented by the devout Elisabeth, and profane 
>love,represented by the goddesss Venus herself."
>
>  Happy? The main character is a knight which is tempted by Venus. 
>
> Now back to the original topic. If someone thinks Wagner anti-semetic. 
>Please point out the lines that you think indicate it.
> 

Actually, let's be realistic.  There is not a word in any of the Wagnerian
operas that is even remotely antisemitic.  The key -- for the twerps who
carry the argument forward -- is that the _characters_ of the _bad__guys_
in the operas are supposed to be Jews.  Thus, for example, Alberich, Mime,
Sixtus Beckmesser, Klingsor, etc. are supposed to be in reality Jews.

Apart from the fact that the analyses of the operas to force this
interpretation are about as facetiously tortured as the analysis I once
read arguing that the *Batman* movies were anti-semitic, what the argument
fails to understand is that we are talking about a shared set of concepts
here, i.e., Jews and modernization.

In other words, there are Jews.  Period.  There is Modernization
(including industrialization).  Period.  There is a tendency to combine
the two, erroneously.  Hence, an anti-semite will say that *Modernization
is a Jewish Plot* and similar stuff. That is what the *New World Order*
stuff is all about.  But it is possible to be opposed to the excesses of
modernization and industrialization without being anti-semitic, IOW,
without accepting the equation of Jews=Modernity.

And the Ring Cycle is basically about the problems of Modernity, not Jews.
 Casting the net still wider, and recognizing that Wagner was hip to the
*mind forg'd manacles* of Blake in his complaints about the _constraints_
of civilization from the late 18th C. onwards, repeated by Schiller in *An
die Freude* [*.... deine Zauber binden wieder was die Mode streng geteilt,
etc.] and we have the theme of *civilization is making us sick* which is
the main theme of _all_ of Wagner's operas, just as it is the ground bass
in Nietzsche, Freud, Kafka, and many many other Germans and German Jews.
Obviously, given some of the names I have just mentioned here, there is
nothing antisemitic in this *Kulturkritik* per se.

What the Wagner-haters essentially do is take the antisemitic maxim, viz,
that Modern Society is a Jewish Plot, and stand it on its head, saying,
anyone who criticizes Modern Society is actually a closet anti-semite. 
Whether these Wagnerphobes apply the same standards elsewhere and to
others, I do not know.  But whoever said they wished to be consistent? 
They simply hate Wagner, because they enjoy hating him.  They want to see
his music banned and they aren't going to succeed.  They think that if
they publicly slander his operas they are being fighters for truth.  What
they are in fact doing is exposing themselves as small minded mean
spirited ignoramuses.  Lass' mich in Ruh'!



From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Jan 12 06:34:19 PST 1997
Article: 92398 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!fozzie.mercury.net!zombie.ncsc.mil!newsgate.duke.edu!agate!newsgate.cuhk.edu.hk!news.glink.net.hk!uunet!in3.uu.net!152.163.170.17!newstf01.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Jake LaMotta vs Nizkor
Date: 9 Jan 1997 20:17:53 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 92
Message-ID: <19970109201600.PAA17357@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <5b37ns$j12@cnn.cc.biu.ac.il>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <5b37ns$j12@cnn.cc.biu.ac.il>, schultr@ashur.cc.biu.ac.il
(Richard Schultz) writes:

>ehrlich606@aol.com wrote:
>: In article <5b2502$jt6@cnn.cc.biu.ac.il>, schultr@ashur.cc.biu.ac.il
>: (Richard Schultz) writes:
>
>
>: I understand that you didn't think it was funny.  That's cool.  On the
>: other hand the only thing worse than diagramming a joke is explaining
the
>: erudite nature of one's allusions. 
>
>I didn't "explain the erudite nature of my allusions" -- I just pointed
>out that my response contained a Shakespeare allusion.  Not the same
>thing at all.  
>
>: *not as smart as I appear to think*?  What makes you think I think that

>: I am so smart?  I just read a lot.  I also like arcane jests.  You
don't.
>
>First of all, I never said that you think that you are "so smart" -- only
>that however smart you think you are, you are less smart than that.

Uh ... what?

>As for arcane jests, it so happens that I do like arcane jests -- vide
>my comparing Moran/Giwer/Bellinger to the Nairobi Trio.  Although it 
>occurs to me that Giwer/Bellinger/Ehrlich606 would do just as well, in
>that all three post from aol, and all three have a pecularly childish
>habit of insulting other people while insisting that others refrain from
>insulting them.

If you knew how to read, you would see that your claim is without
foundation.
vide infra.
 
>
>: >: Let's review the insults so far.  X accuses Moran and Giwer of
having
>: >: no language, I accuse X of being an bootlicker 
>: >
>: >No, you accused William Anderson (your "X") of being an *asslicker*.
>: >Let's call a spade a spade, why don't we?  
>
>: No, in fact I was not accusing Mr. X of being what you say.  In the
first
>: place, my service provider won't allow to use language like that, but
>: beyond that I prefer not to use such language.  I think the best way to
>: conceptualize my post is to recognize that I was reading about
phonology
>: over the weekend and the post inspired me to respond.  In the process,
I
>: delivered a mild jab at the conventionalists collectively.
>
>No, you said that Mr. Anderson's neologism "alingual" should have been
>"analingual."  Unfortunately for you, some people know what that word
>means -- and from your including a line about your post not being "tongue
>in cheek," it's pretty obvious that you do too.  I find it highly amusing
>that you consider your "allusion" or "arcane joke" as it were to be
>a "mild jab" while my arcane allusions to your login id are insults. 
Like
>I said:  you can dish it out, but you can't take it.

No, No, and again No.

Now this is what I wrote:

[[The word you are looking for is therefore not *alingual* but rather
*analingual* but on second thought this is perhaps a better descriptor of
conventionalists, and at any rate certainly does not pertain to either the
courageous Giwer or the stout-hearted Moran.]]

you note that I have _not_ said that the proposed neologism be applied to
_any_ individual, and you will note further that I even mitigated the (I
know it must have been terrible) _pain_ of the epithet by introducing it
with *perhaps.*  I did it that way on purpose. 

>
>: Did you know So long is cognate to Shalom?
>
>The etymology that I had read for "so long" was that it was a corruption
>of a Polynesian word that soldiers picked up during World War II.
>
>
FYI:  *So Long* < Malay-Indonesian *Salang* < Arabic *Salaam* = Hebrew
*Shalom*
There are many other Arabic loans on the Indian Ocean Rim and inland; I
assume most of these are immediately cognate to Hebrew.
 



From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Jan 12 07:14:34 PST 1997
Article: 92447 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!clicnet!news.clic.net!wesley.videotron.net!news-dc.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-10.sprintlink.net!southwind.net!news-out.internetmci.com!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!dciteleport.com!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!portc02.blue.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Wagner
Date: 11 Jan 1997 01:42:52 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <19970111014000.UAA01118@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <5b6f0m$dmp@lendl.cc.emory.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com


Schoenberg's production was inconsistent, but his good work stands
at the very top of the roster of twentieth-century music.

This sort of "Who's a Jew" argument is almost unbearably silly, so
I'd like to drop it now; I just couldn't resist the urge to defend
Mahler and Schoenberg.  

Bill

I agree.  Better to just listen to the music.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Jan 12 07:14:35 PST 1997
Article: 92450 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!hookup!news-dc.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.belnet.be!surfnet.nl!swidir.switch.ch!01-newsfeed.univie.ac.at!Austria.EU.net!EU.net!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!portc02.blue.aol.com!newstf02.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Wagner
Date: 8 Jan 1997 22:19:43 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <19970108221700.RAA16262@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article , joelr@winternet.com (Joel
Rosenberg) writes:

>
>In article <5b0vo1$1c6@Networking.Stanford.EDU> rcgraves@disposable.com
(Rich
>Graves) writes:
>>From: rcgraves@disposable.com (Rich Graves)
>>Subject: Re: Wagner
>>Date: 8 Jan 1997 12:23:29 -0800
>
>>ehrlich606@aol.com writes:
>>>
>>>I am saying that that fact alone muddies the waters for those who would
>>>make Wagner an apostle of Aryanism, just as it muddies the waters for
>>>those who would wish to exclude Germans from the Jewish German heritage
>>>which is the source of tremendous pride for Jews.
>
>>The thing that makes Wagner an apostle of Aryanism is the fact that he
was
>>an apostle of Aryanism. I don't see anyone or anything muddying the
waters
>>but you. As I'm sure you're aware, one of Wagner's descendants is on the
>>lecture circuit now discussing and repudiating his family's antisemitism
>>and not just support for, but sponsorship of the Nazis. 

If indeed Wagner was a half Jew that does indeed muddy the waters for
Aryanism in the late 20th Century, because the concept now is biological
and Wagner would thus fail to pass Aryan muster.  Do you understand _now_?
 And while you are at it you might try to quote from some of Wagner's
apostolic Aryan writings.  I would like to hear it.

The fact that Wagner has a descendant who would like to see his
grandfather's operas banned as *antisemitic* interests me about as much as
the original story concerning this silly rabbi.

>
>>Should this muddy the waters concerning Wagner's musical genius? 
>>Absolutely not. Any claim that his martial music is uniquely "Aryan" and
>>thus tainted by Nazism strikes me as nutty, and in its worst
incarnations,
>>racist in itself. But don't expect to get away with ahistorical nonsense
>>like the above, either.

Prithee explain just what is ahistorical here.  While you are at it, why
don't you cite a half dozen examples of this Wagnerian *march music* that
supposedly inspired Germans into being Willing Executioners.  Do you mean
the Hymn to Venus from Tannhaeuser?  Technically a march, but ....  Or
what exactly do you mean?  *Am stillen Herd* from Meistersinger?  The
*Liebestod* from Tristan?  The *Walkuerenritt* from Die Walkuere?  Act I
or the Final Scene from Act III from the same opera?  Not very many
marches in Parsifal, I can tell you.
>
>Serious question:  would you claim that there's no such thing as fascist 
>architecture, as well? 

See what I mean about shooting fish in a barrel?




From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun Jan 12 18:11:16 PST 1997
Article: 92524 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.InterGate.BC.CA!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!nntp.portal.ca!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!news-xfer.netaxs.com!feed1.news.erols.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!portc02.blue.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Theses on National Socialism
Date: 11 Jan 1997 17:05:43 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <19970111170300.MAA20802@ladder01.news.aol.com>
References: <5avn7b$ffl@sun1000.pwr.wroc.pl>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com
X-Admin: news@aol.com



: 20.  Such tolerance should include two classes: (a) those who just don't
: buy the massive gassings-soap factory-human skin handbag offal,

Do you understand what are you talking about? I doubt.
You play an educated, sophisticated , cold academician.

1. There was no soap factory. There was a laboratory
in Danzig, where human fat soap was experimentally
produced. 
The origins of the story were  -
there was a cheap soap RIF, explained as reines Judisches Fett.
2. There were several cases of human skin products.
3. Much more than one milion of people were gassed
by Germans.
                Jerzy Pankiewicz

Doubt away, Pan Pankiewicz.  You realize that the main source for the
*soap stories* are Mazur's Polish interrogatories, don't you?  Kindly
translate and post.  Then we'll see who believes them.

While you are at it, direct all of us to a _single_ skin product anywhere
in the world.  And don't tell me the 1 or 2 pieces of skin from Buchenwald
count.  By the way, where are they _now_?  Or don't you know?

Much more than 1 million people gassed?  I doubt it, but I didn't say it. 
So who exactly are you arguing with?  Playing a cold academician?  Better
than self-indulgent hysterics.  The world would be a better place if you
directed your indignation against crimes against humanity occurring in
1997 -- or maybe you don't think there are any?





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

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.