From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat May  4 06:29:40 PDT 1996
Article: 34562 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!kryten.awinc.com!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!uoregon!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.dacom.co.kr!vyzynz!newsfeed.concentric.net!winternet.com!news1.ottawa.istar.net!news.ottawa.istar.net!news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: That's Incredible!
Date: 2 May 1996 12:03:58 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 36
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mamde$dej@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

 
# The witnesses also testified to electrocution, suffocation and
# steaming.  
 
Name one SS-man from Treblinka, Belzec, or Sobibor, who
testified to murder by such methods.
 
To the best of my knowledge, no such person exists. All testified
that the victims were murdered by poison gas.
 
The statement that "claims of steaming, electrocution etc are
supported by eyewitness testimony just as claims of gassing
are", is a blatant lie. But what can one expect from you? After
you lied so much on this newsgroup, it's no surprise.
 
Re the steaming etc stories:
 
These were misinterpretations of members of the Polish underground
who were spying on the camps from a distance. They realized that
numerous people were being murdered there, but couldn't see what
was happening inside the gas chambers; they did see the corpses
taken out and buried. 
 
For instance, seeing the door of the gas chamber open and a cloud
of the engin's exhaust coming out, someone spying on the camp from
a distance could easily mistake the killing procedure to
"steaming". The same mistake could be made by someone who was
in the camp (and escaped), but who never saw the gas chambers from
close range and never spoke to the sonderkomman, on this one I have to go
with Giwer.  I distinctly recall Isaiah Trunk providing witness testimony
about steam.  I also remember Trunk's pious footnote: "not attested to by
any other source."

Did it ever occur to you that not only gas chambers but also real-live
showers would generate clouds of mist that would look like steam?  Why
must you feel that you have to defend everything?


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat May  4 12:06:28 PDT 1996
Article: 34687 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Goldhagen's thesis (was Re: Alternate Introductory Systems)
Date: 3 May 1996 17:13:13 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 12
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mdst9$gq4@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mdrp6$gev@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Further on the point of the proper object of historical study:

I think it is a far more important to ask why something happened, than to
ask, who is responsible for this or that thing happening.  A historian who
wants to research "how many" Germans were involved in the Holocaust, or
"how many" Jews were Communists, is, in my view, barking up the wrong
tree.  Of far greater value would be to ask: now, how did these terrible
things happen?  Pursuit of the latter question, I submit, is more likely
to lead to the insights that will prevent a recurrence.

And so it is in real life too: some people like to fix blame, others like
to fix problems.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat May  4 17:45:30 PDT 1996
Article: 34761 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: ab.general,can.general,tor.general,mtl.general,van.general,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ARE FAGGOTS REALLY HUMAN?
Date: 4 May 1996 15:01:17 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mg9ht$9rp@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mg1cn$ine@ds2.acs.ucalgary.ca>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca ab.general:8751 can.general:76192 van.general:7843 alt.revisionism:34761

I like posts like "ARE FAGGOTS REALLY HUMAN" and "JESUS CHRIST JERKS OFF"
because the titles tell me that I don't have to bother to read them.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat May  4 19:54:10 PDT 1996
Article: 34794 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Goldhagen's thesis (was Re: Alternate Introductory Sys
Date: 4 May 1996 17:57:35 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 111
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mgjsf$d5p@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mes5d$o89@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote >:
 mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis) wrote::

:How do human beings do this? Your articles do not reflect value-free
:attitudes. 

Yes, and I notice that you are quick to inaccurately judge and snip
posters (are you the resident mohel here?)  Meanwhile, when I provided
exhaustive clarification of my background you failed to get on your knees
and kiss my feet.

> Both of my
>opponents in this dispute suggest that value-free speculation is the true
>intellectual equivalent of trading baseball cards.

:I agree. One can present all sides to an historical event without:
:commenting on the actions of the participants. This would allow the
:participants to speak for themselves.

Precisely my point.

:When one writes a history one wants to present it as it happened with
:the attitdes of the participants included. This in itself is not
:value-free for values are contained within the words of the
:participants. These values are different, in some cases, form our
:modern values.

No kidding!  But presenting a sentiment is not the same thing as solemnly
repeating bromides about how we should love each other or whatnot.

:[snip]

>I don't deny that our lives should be informed with a moral sense.  Nor
do
>I deny that history can be used for moral instruction: indeed, that is
one
>of its main purposes. 

:History, is that which we as the parents of the next generation(simply
:put), want to pass on to that generation.

[skip stupid sermonette about saving the children]

:[snip sports analogy that doesn't work]

Shows me what you know about baseball.

>On the other hand, no one comes to the study of history value-free,
>because we all have values.  But we must in the study of history set
aside
>our values in order to analyze correctly, 

:We do and that is what the discipline is about. Any good historian
:takes all the data in whether he likes it or not and should make use
:of it ALL. This is where integrity comes in. This is where the
:failureof distortionists and deniers mostly lay: they do not take it
:all in. They refuse to use it all. They refuse to move from a to b to
:c in an honest an value-free attitude. 

I am half in agreement with you here.  What you fail to say is that both
sides do it.

>On this board, however, and I have had occasion to satirize it,
historical
>facts are used in a discontinuous manner to score points, feel good,
>confirm prejudices. 

:I see. You want to go back to square 1. Well, some of us can do that.
:Let's go back to 1918 and work our way forward through the social,
:political, and economic record of Germany in a honest fashion.[snip!] 
This board
:has a history older than both our introductions and it is up to you to
:start at the beginning and this is NOT what you did. 

No, that is not what I did. I made a mild initial post and I was attacked
by a guy with a pair of scissors (you).  I posted a generous post about
Three Holocausts and I got no response.  I posted a little piece referring
to some absurdities of the legend, and I get tons of e-mail.  It is a
simple case of supply and demand.

> Probably it could not be otherwise on a Board.  But
>that is not "historical inquiry" that IS a kaffeeklatsch.  In graduate
>school, you would get thrown out of the seminar room expressing half the
>overheated sentiments recorded here.  It is just not professional.  

:When did this board become a graduate history seminar? Where is the
:membership listed as for schaolars only. It'll get real quiet here for
:very few of the deniers are historians or have degrees in the
:discipline.

Do you want to have intelligent debate here or do you just want to shoot
Giwer-trolls in the barrel?

:[snipped more dictations to the group}

Perhaps you just want to play with your scissors.

:[does he want to discuss the USSR or Nazi Germany. We are dealing with
:two separate histories here and two different perspective histories.]

Not as different as you might think.  The only problem is, the larger our
sample, the less easy to deliver anti-semitic or anti-German comments, and
the more the requirements for real synthetic thinking.

:Bah!
 
Bah:  the sound of the impotent gnashing of teeth.  Does not recognize
that the history of the USSR and Nazi Germany are tightly woven.  Probably
doesn't have the qualifications or skills to pursue the comparison anyway.
 If I need a suit made, I will call you.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat May  4 20:10:57 PDT 1996
Article: 34807 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Burning pits
Date: 4 May 1996 19:37:16 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 103
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mgpnc$ess@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mf3g3$9f2@atlas.uniserve.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

In <4md7cn$8j3@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
wrote:

>I am sure that I am regarded with suspicion, even though I have gone out
>of my way to present such non-denier bona fides as I can, and even though
>I have tried to express sincere sympathy for what the Jewish people lost
>in World War Two.  But these postings about rivers of fat are just too
>much for me.  How can anyone be so credulous as to believe something like
>this?

Then, hostrov@uniserve.com (Hilary Ostrov) epistolated:

:Mr. Ehrlich606, notwithstanding your self-professed "non-denier bona
:fides ... [and] sincere sympathy", I am somewhat puzzled by your
:reference to "postings about rivers of fat", explicit mention of which
:is not even found in the Moranic Post (tm) to which you were
:apparently responding.

:Strange that an erudite scholar such as you profess to be should
:choose to follow the "straw man" rather than addressing the salient
:points of Mr. Van Alstine's factual post (and Mr. Curtis' confirmation
:thereof) 

:Or perhaps you were simply conflating credulity and antipathy.

Ehrlich606 pedantically responded:

I don't think I am conflating credulity with antipathy, although in the
realm
of circumlocations I think you should stick with close encounters of the
non-ethnic cheeleading kind.

As I followed the string in question, someone asked about burning pits,
and
someone else, I believe it was Mr. Van Alstine, started providing a lot of
specs that I found incredible.  If you think that the expression of
incredulity is synonymous with hostility then you are inviting not only
silence but also indifference to the "historical memory" that you profess
to
be so concerned about.

If I was really out to cause trouble I would have made a bigger stink
about
the "blue smoke = fat Hungarians, etc. etc." type of testimony posted by
El
Huber man the other day.  Puh-leez!

While we are on the subject, I have seen many posts by Nizkorites claiming
that the death tolls at the "Big Six" camps as they stand as of May 4,
1996
have always been the accepted death tolls.  This reminds me of post WW2
Polish historical atlases, which pretend that back in the 9th Century, the
borders of the original Polish state were EXACTLY what they are now.   As
recently as 1974, Dawidowicz was claiming huge numbers at A-B, and 1.2
mill
at Majdanek.  In 1954, Reitlinger argued that the overall death toll was
probably between 2-4 million, and he adduced several plausible reasons
(mainly involving the Soviet Union) why this was likely.  One of the
Nizkor
historians, just as a public service, should recap the extent to which
Gerald
was reamed for this.  Meanwhile, I don't have a problem with six million
victims, German responsibility, and some usage of lethal gas.  So where is
my
"antipathy"?

The fact that there is an ebb and flow to Holocaust studies, that body
counts
go up and down, that overall counts go up and down, that historians judge
much testimony wanting, and demonstrate their judgment by passing over it
in
silence,  that there is not nor has there ever been a complete consensus
on
the meaning of the various documents -- all of this should be well known
to
anyone who has read widely in Modern European history, the history of
World
War 2, the history of the Holocaust or the History of the Soviet Union. 
It
is clear as day to me, and I am not even a specialist on this topic.  I
guess
that must mean that I am "antipathetic."

Only here, on this board, are we presented with a monolithic
interpretation
which supposedly has existed for all time and which will never change for
all
time.  This is absurd.  Anyone the least familiar with historiography
knows
that the interpretations of events change constantly over time, and
ultimately lead to a more or less Procrustean reconciliation of opposites
(cf., the historiography of Charles I/Cromwell, the American Civil War,
the
French Revolution, even to a large extent WW1).  But such a reconciliation
will not take place here, so long as the advocates on both sides are
unwilling to admit mistakes, or insist on maximalist positions.

If this board is going to be a forum where we can -- more or less --
coolly discuss problems of evidence, chronology, participation,
responsibility, and where-do-we-go-from-here's, we can do that. On the
other hand, if this board is going to be a place where "deniers" lie in
ambush for "holohuggers" and vice versa, we can do that to. You pays your
money and you takes your choice.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat May  4 21:00:58 PDT 1996
Article: 34814 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Historians Debate: Goldhagen a Schmuck? [snip]
Date: 4 May 1996 20:23:14 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 69
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mgsdi$fma@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

On 2 May 1996, Ehrlich606 wrote>
then Marty Kelley  (mkelley@U.Arizona.EDU) >>

>>I wouldn't be so quick to read this as an utter rejection of Goldhagen, 
>>Mr./Ms. Ehrlich606.  Craig has reservations about Goldhagen's book, but 
>>seems fairly supportive of Goldhagen's basic thesis, as a reading of 
>>Craig's full review will show.  In the context of the full review, it 
>>appears that Craig essentially agrees with much of Goldhagen's analysis,

>>but thinks that Goldhagen should have provided further examples to 
>>support some aspects of that analysis.

>>I haven't found the issue of _NYRB_ that you refer to yet;  
>>I'm assuming that Craig is responding to 
>>a letter about his full review of Goldhagen, which ran in the April 18 
>>issue of the _NYRB_ (#7, pp. 4-8).  I *have* read that review, and while

>>it's certainly not a glowing review of the book, neither does it reject 
>>Goldhagen out of hand, as you imply.

At this point Marty launches into a long but very good review of Craig's
review, warts and all.  Furthermore, he is correct:  I was referring not
to the original review, but to a response to a letter in #9.  Not wanting
to belabor the point, his overall comments are -- in my view -- even more
devastating than the one I quoted. 

[]

>>I invite you to read Craig's full review of _Hitler's Willing 
>>Executioners_.  I'd be interested in hearing your reactions to it.

I have been reading the NYRB every two weeks for 20 years.  A truly trashy
publication, but a good source for the latest lingo, jargon, and academic
hobby horses.  I am glad that they aren't running as many articles about
transexuality, gender transformation, and about how Akhenaten was a
transvestite, or whatever it was Carl Schorske was getting at on that
occasion ....

Anyway, I DID read the initial review, but the review combines a review of
Goldhagen with a review of a book on Jews in Germany:  you have to read
both together to get an accurate account of how Craig feels.  In a couple
of places in the second review he adverts back to Goldhagen in passing.

The only thing I will add is that wanting to solve the "Jewish Problem" is
not equivalent to agreeing to, let alone acclaiming, mass murder.  And
EVERYBODY in those days, even the Jews, recognized that there was a
"Jewish Problem" -- how do you think Zionism got started?  Read Leo
Pinsker's "Auto-Emancipation", which I read in German or Russian but which
I am confident is in English somewhere.

Making a comparison to current events, something I don't like to do, I
have talked to several Jews who feel that the only way to solve the
Palestinian Problem is with resettlement.  The people who say this are
quite decent, and would NEVER condone murder, but they know there is a
problem and they are looking for solutions.  But one thing we learn from
the Holocaust, the expulsions of the Germans, the Bosno-Serbian "ethnic
cleansings" and even the Greek-Turk transfers after WW1, population
transfers always disintegrate into promiscuous violence, even when their
ultimate aim is not ultimate extermination, as it was with the Jewish
Resettlement by the Germans in WW2 (see the Wannsee minutes).

>>Finally, I would note, as I mentioned in my previous reply to your post,

>>that nowhere in the article does Craig call Goldhagen a schmuck.  

ROTFLMAO!

Of course, Craig would never use such language and I never said he did.  I
know a good headline when I see it, and I'd rather be read than dead.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun May  5 18:41:31 PDT 1996
Article: 34909 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: A serial Leuchter
Date: 5 May 1996 14:24:25 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 47
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mirop$215@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mi5hm$4d9@access1.digex.net>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

mstein@access1.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) wrote:

   > So if homicidal gassing with cyanide is really so dangerous why does
>delousing cyanide suddenly become safe to vent at ground level?  Is this
>more "evil intelligence" on the part of the cyanide, where it gets nasty
>after killing someone but is peaceful after killing lice?  (Sorry, I
>forgot, I said I would be serious.)  :) 

   >The point I am making is that much of what is done in US executions
>seems to be going far beyond what is _really_ needed for safety.

Personally, I don't think the issue is whether or not homicidal gassing is
dangerous, while delousing gassing is benign.  Fumigations (for which
Zyklon
B were designed) can take up to 3 days for deep-down infestations, and
houses
are to be cleared room by room over the course of up to several hours.  My
guess is that the barracks usage of Zyklon followed such a timetable.  If
a
barracks was therefore cleared of all of its gas in fifteen minutes with
large
fans to make room for inhabitants it would follow that the concentrations
outside of the barracks could be at least momentarily harmful. 

Those who insist on very high death rates via Zyklon B gassings (as
opposed
to very high death rates from a combination of factors) must therefore, I
guess, assert that the German program for extermination insisted upon
overriding safety precautions so that their victims would die from Zyklon
B
inhalation, rather than from other means.  Otherwise, the Germans could
have
pursued their known homicidal agenda by simply penning the extra inmates
at
A-B into barbed wire enclosures and allowing them to die from hunger and
exposure.  Such was the fate of countless Soviet POWs.

But please note that these kinds of issues are only important for those
who insist a) that no gassings took place, or, b) that mindboggling
amounts of gassings took place at specific locations.  Those of us who
accept the principle of lethal gassings, but who have no vested interest
in defending either a number of zero per day or 20,000 per day don't have
a problem.  

   




From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun May  5 23:08:55 PDT 1996
Article: 34928 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!news.uoregon.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism,soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: The word "anti-Semitic" (theorem)
Date: 5 May 1996 15:47:12 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 28
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mj0k0$3be@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4miv7u$3no@moe.cc.emory.edu>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:27777 alt.revisionism:34928 soc.culture.jewish:47762

Subject: Re: The word "anti-Semitic" (theorem)
From: libwca@curly.cc.emory.edu (william c anderson)
Date: 5 May 1996 19:23:42 GMT
Message-ID: <4miv7u$3no@moe.cc.emory.edu>

Bud (budwrite@niven.imsweb.net) wrote:

: What you are trying 
: to do is ignore some of the truth in his statement.  I suggest you read
a 
: copy of a book recently published in Australian entitled "The Hand That 
: Signed the Paper."  A graphic book telling about some of the atrocities 
: done in Russian under "some" Jews leadership.  

: libwca@curly.cc.emory.edu (william c anderson) replied:

>>Excuse me--is this another "Stalin was secretly Jewish" argument?  If 
>>so, I'm going to need to see some proof before we continue.

No, it is not an argument about Stalin being Jewish.  Consult the
literature on Soviet History, reference "anti-semitism" and you will find
ample reference to Jews (in the ethnic sense, of course) who occupied high
places in the government of the Soviet Union (at least until 1938, when
many were purged, because Stalin was an anti-semite.)  But as I said
elsewhere, Jews are no more accountable as a group for such (ethnic) Jews,
than Germans are accountable as a group for what other Germans may have
done.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun May  5 23:08:56 PDT 1996
Article: 34932 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.ernst-zundel,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: 960505: Jamie's response acked; Toronto conference on postwar occupation
Date: 5 May 1996 19:30:08 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 70
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mjdm0$7sr@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.fan.ernst-zundel:888 alt.revisionism:34932

From: rich@c2.org (Rich Graves)
Date: Sun, 05 May 1996 15:21:59 -0700
Message-ID: 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <199605051942.AAA008247@infinity.c2.net>, ezundel@alpha.c2.org
(E. Zundel Repost) wrote:

(http://www.almanac.bc.ca/cgi-bin/ftp.pl?people/r/rimland.ingrid/science.0
1)
> 
> *       On another note:  There is an interesting conference shaping up
I
> know some folks in the Toronto area will want to know about.  I wish
there
> had been more lead time - this could really have been advertised widely
> and built up properly.  But maybe it will lead to bigger things and
become
> a regular event.
> 
> Conference on
> 
> The Allied Occupation of Central Europe: Justice or Revenge?
> 
> At Massey College, University of Toronto, May 17,18,19, 1996.  Sponsored
> by the Historical Society of Mecklenburg/Upper Canada.

 rich@c2.org (Rich Graves) then wrote>>

>>Yes, that would be interesting. You see, the difference between Nazis
and
>>people who believe in justice and democracy is that the latter have
moral
>>scruples. It is widely believed that the Versailles treaty went too far,
>>and there is some debate about the occupation and rebuilding of Germany.
>>Surely, though, most believe that the Allies' help in the restructuring
of
>>West Germany (partly as a bulwark against the Communist threat) was a
good
>>thing.

Ehrlich606 replies:

It is evident that the respondent has been appropriately programmed to
consider the activities of the Western Allies as being morally scrupulous
and imbued with justice and democracy.  He makes no mention of the forced
expulsion of several millions of Germans after WW2, whose ethnic cleansing
>from  Eastern Europe was no less severe than the "cleansing" of Jews,
except that there was not a planned homicidal agenda.  These expulsions
were carried out with extreme violence and brutality, did nothing to stop
them.  Indeed, such was the "moral scruples" of the Allies that many more
Germans would have perished after the end of World War 2, were it not for
the efforts of the English Jew, Victor Gollancz.

It is also clear that the respondents moral barometer is keyed only to
atmospheric changes in the European peninsula.  He remains blind to the
many, many instances of colonial brutality, racism, mass murder and lack
of moral scruples demonstrated again and again in the 19th and 20th
Centuries by the English, the French, the Russians -- and yes, the
Americans.

There are those who fancy that Nazism grew peculiarly out of the German
tradition, and that no one else could have ever achieved it.  Get Real! 
The roots of National Socialism lay in attitudes common to all Europeans,
and, indeed, in attitudes still prevalent among many in Western
Civilization.  The difference between freedom and justice and the Nazis? 
It is the difference of whether or not you choose to recognize yourself in
the mirror.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May  6 13:08:43 PDT 1996
Article: 35020 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.jumppoint.com!news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Antichrist Identity
Date: 2 May 1996 12:33:46 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 76
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mao5a$dso@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ma3j5$hei@atlas.uniserve.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Hilary Ostrov is giving me a hard time, to wit:

Mr. Ehrlich606:

I don't know if you have taken advantage of the opportunity to apprise
yourself of the recycled themes that so frequently float through the
ether of alt.revisionism.  Quantities (and precision in the expression
thereof) are a major concern to those who mistakenly call themselves
"revisionists", and to Mr. Moran in particular.

So it would be most helpful to all of us if you could define "a lot".
And since you assert that this is "explains" the "conflation of
Bolshevism and Judaism", you will, of course, be able to provide us
with the comparative numbers of Jewish and non-Jewish "Bolsheviks and
Communist functionaries" to substantiate the "fact" that there were "a
lot" of both.

>And that is what history is about: understanding why things happen.  
>It is not about ethnic cheerleading.

It seems to me that this "totally erroneous conflation" can be given
explanatory status in this particular ethnic characterization of the
non-cheerleading kind, only if it can be shown that "a lot" means a
significant majority.  Or are you suggesting some sort of
inverse-Gestalt, i.e. that the whole is determined by the percentage
of its smallest paru provide an example of "non-erroneous
conflation"?)

hro


Ms. Ostrov:  Thank you for being proof of the fact that, while no man is
an
island, at least one woman is.

I expected to take heat for that assertion.  I have nothing to gain by
going
through the history of the Social Democracy in Russia, the
Menshevik/Bolshevik division, the sizable Yiddish Labor groups in Eastern
Russia, or the subsequent evolution of Bolshevism.  Nor do I have anything
to
gain by going into the text-book explanation as to why Ashkenazi Jews were
natural candidates for Bolshevism, just as the German Jews were natural
candidates for neo-Kantianism.  In the context of THIS board, that would
qualify as an excuse, and I note that people on YOUR side are never
interested in reasons why Germans would be Nazis.

The idea of going back in history to count up people by ethnicity is truly
repugnant, even if I had the time.  Suffice that no one well versed in
Russian or Soviet history, or for that matter, in the conduct of the
Communist International would deny that "a lot" of Jews were involved in
Bolshevism.  If I say "a lot" I submit that your request for "numbers"
lies
in the fact you think I am attacking your favorite team.  (Especially
since you go out of your way to insinuate that Jews comprised "the
smallest part")  It would be like
saying that "a lot" of Germans participated in the Holocaust.  Next
question:
HOW MANY??  As if that makes any difference.

Nevertheless, the conflation of German, Nazism, and the murder of Jews is
one
of the prime articles of faith on this board.  That conflation is just as
erroneous, just as destructive, but just as understandable, as the
conflation
of Jew and Bolshevik.  That was what I was trying to say.

Do I know of any conflations that are NOT erroneous?  In terms of
empirical
events, I would say no.  In terms of philosophy, I could think of many. 
But
in terms of this Board, I am almost tempted to conflate the true believers
on
both poles of this Board and call them "The Fifth Antinomy of Pure Reason"

Regards!


From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May  6 14:11:54 PDT 1996
Article: 35022 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!sgigate.sgi.com!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Zyklone B - Unlikely Agent
Date: 6 May 1996 11:57:32 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 86
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ml7hc$oh4@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


> mvanalst@rbi.com (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
 
> >GIWER HEAD-UP-ASS ALERT: What is most amazing is that Giwer, after
being
> >told about the killiing operations by the Einsatzgruppen in the East,
the
> >preparations for Aktion Reinhard, the Wetzel-Lohse letter, Ho"ss's
> >memoirs, and Eichmann's interrogation- all of which indicate that
either
> >systematic killing took place or was in planning prior to the Wannsee
> >Conference -continues to bleat that the "official" Nazi policy in
regards
> >to the Jewish Question prior to the Wannsee Conference was merely
> >"emigration to the east." Truly it is hard to imagine a person being
this
> >dense. Mr. Curtis's observation that Giwer is like a huge rock is quite
> >apropo, as a huge rock approaches Giwer's intellectual density. 
> 
>         You refuse to answer questions.

Although it is true in many languages that repetition is the mother of
learning, the constant repetitions of the above paragraph in this post,
are not, IMHO, very instructive.

I would think that there is certainly enough latitude for interpretation
on the issue of the significance of the Wannsee minutes that we could
discuss this without going crazy.  After all, some historians think that
the "Final Solution" began with Goering's famous letter of July, 1941,
other think that it began with the Commissar Order of the month before,
Lucy Dawidowicz opined that the Madagascar Plan was a "code word" for mass
murder, and so on.

Yes, it would appear that Jews were killed or died in large numbers before
the Wannsee Conference.  Although we refer to the Holocaust in a global
sense to describe the destruction of the (mostly) East European community,
that doesn't mean that every Jew who was killed or who died perished on
the basis of their ethnicity or their religion.  To argue that every
single Jew who died in WW2 died as a result of a German master plan is,
IMHO, simply pushing the meager documentary evidence we have too far.

For example, I am sure that some Jews died in the crossfire, some Jews
died in reprisals, some Jews died in combat, some Jews died engaged in
partisan activities, and some Jews died because they were intellectuals
(cf. the Polish intelligentsia). I am also relatively sure that some died
because they were affiliated with the Communist Party (ref. the Commissar
Order), and that still others were killed by local populations (Latvians,
Lithuanians, Ukrainians) without any prompting from the Germans.

The turning point, or so it would seem to me, is when the Germans/Nazis
stopped killing Jews because they believed they were communists, and
started killing them just because they were Jews -- in an ethnic or racial
sense.  That turning point, it seems to me, can be dated to Aktion
Reinhardt, which naturally comes after Wannsee because it came after
Heydrich's assassination.  And, precisely because it comes after
Heydrich's assassination, I think one could easily suggest that the Aktion
took on a completely different character than originally envisioned at the
Wannsee Conference.

The minutes to the Wannsee Conference are explicit:  the Jews are to be
expelled beyond the borders of the General Gouvernment and broken up into
single sex labor gangs.  Cutting through the euphemism, they are to serve
as slave laborers until they die.  Cutting through another euphemism,
those that survive should probably be exterminated.

There: the document says EXACTLY what is says.  Moreover, there is plenty
of corroboration to the document: populations were gathered, expelled,
concentrated into ghettoes, and drawn off for labor (and, yes, early in
the process, drawn off for extermination).  There were several ghettoes
and labor camps in Eastern Europe within and beyond the General
Gouvernment right up to the Summer of 1944.

There is also plenty of corroboration for the fact that the implementation
of the Wannsee minutes exceeded the original plan, e.g., labor draw offs
that end in extermination camps, population relocations that end in mass
shootings near railheads, etc. etc.

Historians have spent 50 years looking for the "smoking gun" articulating
the German/Nazi program for genocide.  I submit that it has been under our
nose the whole time:  right there in the Wannsee minutes.  Why do we have
to insist otherwise, refer to oral orders that we have no evidence were
ever given, push documents to say what they do not say?  And why do we
have to get so upset about differences of opinion?





From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May  6 14:11:56 PDT 1996
Article: 35024 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Nizkor searching
Date: 6 May 1996 12:27:56 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 46
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ml9ac$p1b@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mk2d4$nja@cnn.cc.biu.ac.il>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


Laura Finsten (finsten@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca) wrote:

:>Thank God.  For a moment I thought maybe I was/am Ehrlich606, whose
gender
:>hasn't even been determined yet.

: I think it is pretty safe to guess that Ehrlich is male.

>>It is probably pretty safe to guess that Ehrlich's *sex* is male, but 
>>Ehrlich's *gender* remains to be determined.  I vote for neuter (das
>>Ehrlich, des Ehrlichs, dem Ehrlich, das Ehrlich).

>>Richard Schultz  


Who, ME?  Although in the 10 days since my discovery of this board I have
attempted to remain au courant I must admit that I had no idea that my
identity had become such a topic for discussion.

Under normal circumstances I would have had no problem in emerging from my
commodious, pile carpeted, and oak paneled hall closet to reveal my true
identity.  It never occurred to me that there was anything wrong with
pseudonyms, since I have used a variety of same under non-Internet
auspices for some time (there is a family harmony issue here.)  Yet I will
admit that, given the vehemence of expression characteristic of this
forum, I see nothing to be gained by instructing my servants to type my
real name at the end of these little missives.

I can assure you all that I would not be Doubting Thomas, nor he be me. 
OTOH, I may be a doubting Thomas, but that does not make me he.  Are you
as confused as I am now?

Since so much of this board involves projections of attitudes onto others,
I am tempted to remain anonymous permanently, just to see what other
identities or characteristics are projected onto me.  Perhaps I am Howard
Hughes, or a Space Alien, or maybe I am just an undergraduate sociology
student writing a paper on projections to be derived by using a pseudonym
on alt.rev. Qui le sait?

Best Regards!  --  Ehrlich606







From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May  6 18:52:47 PDT 1996
Article: 35066 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Grand gas experiment
Date: 6 May 1996 17:35:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 8
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mlrbg$2fa@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Mark:

You seem to be one of a few historians who consider this kind of flip-flop
credible.  I do not.  Neither do many mainstream historians.  Let's face
it, Hoess has a bad rep as a witness.

OK, so don't face it.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue May  7 05:09:42 PDT 1996
Article: 35106 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.jumppoint.com!news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Goldhagen's thesis (was Re: Alternate Introductory Systems)
Date: 2 May 1996 15:42:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 28
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mb369$gnp@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


Marty Kelley  (mkelley@U.Arizona.EDU)

As to question #2, I think that discussion of _respnsibility_ ( a less 
loaded term than "blame") is indeed a valid focus of historical inquiry.  

Ehrlich606 responds:

For the life of me, I cannot understand how a discussion of responsibility
is a legitimate focus of historical inquiry, unless:  a) one wants to get
someone to pay for something (e.g., Article 231 of Versailles Treaty), b)
one wants to identify with a larger group and by "historical inquiry" be
empowered to feel morally superior to some other larger group, or c) one
wants to indulge oneself in the intellectual equivalent of trading
baseball cards.

Historical responsibility, because of its semantic content, is even harder
to establish than historical causes.  But establishing historical chains
of cause and effect are always speculative, and the best historians
recognize this.  That is why the only historians that we remember and
continue to consult are those who put questions of responsibility and
cause and effect far enough in the background so as to make it possible
for the content of primary source material to shine through.

But to look for "responsibility" for an event, IMHO, overloads the
investigative enterprise.  It is a moral judgment.  But as Schiller so
aptly put it, "Die Weltgeschichte is die Weltgericht"  i.e., the history
of the world is its OWN moral judgment.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue May  7 05:09:43 PDT 1996
Article: 35124 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!loki.tor.hookup.net!nic.wat.hookup.net!xenitec!van-bc!news.rmii.com!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: ab.general,can.general,tor.general,mtl.general,van.general,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ARE FAGGOTS REALLY HUMAN?
Date: 4 May 1996 22:20:48 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 10
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mh3a0$hmc@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca ab.general:8845 can.general:76354 van.general:7928 alt.revisionism:35124

The post on the humanity of humanity  is most instructive, insofar as it
has generated many more posts than subtly written analyses of historical
conundrums. But of course, homosexuals are human, in the words of
Shakespeare, "If you prick them, do they not bleed?" or something like
that.

People who know how to read books should consult the second volume of
Schopenhauer's "Will & Representation" for a discussion in the Appendix on
the philosopher's take on this form of sexuality.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 07:10:53 PDT 1996
Article: 35281 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!izzy.net!aanews.merit.net!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!lexis-nexis!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: 960505: Jamie's response acked; Toronto conference on postwar occupation
Date: 7 May 1996 12:16:11 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 77
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mnt0b$n7l@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mm0m5$55k@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) writes:
and  rich@c2.org (Rich Graves) responds >>

>The reason why the Germans perpetrated the Holocaust, as opposed to
>France, England, or Italy, is because of what Bismarck said:  "My map of
>Africa lies in the East."  Then you should read about Leopold II's
Belgian
>Congo, Roger Casement's role in exposing colonial atrocities in the late
>19th Century, Britain's activities in India, China, and South Africa,
>France's activities in Algeria, Indochina, and elsewhere in Africa, and

>>I am far more familiar with these cases than with the Holocaust, and
>>have discussed them, at great length, in other forums. But this forum is
>>about the Holocaust. Your crocodile tears about these cases say nothing
>>about Nazi apologists who deny the Holocaust.

Your use of the term "crocodile tears" is a completely unwarranted
attribution of motive ad hominem.  Please note that the breach of civility
came from your side.  This forum is about the Holocaust:  says who?  It is
called "alt.revisionism" not "alt.holocaust"  Furthermore, the argument
here is not about Nazi apologists who deny the Holocaust.
If you are saying that the only permissable statements herein are attacks
on Nazi apologists who deny the Holocaust, and counter-statements by Nazi
apologists, then I can see why this board is the way it is.

>Italy in Ethiopia.  None of these cases even involved colonization, just
>pure economic exploitation.  But I guess everybody does these things, so
>no big deal.

>>Italy's attempt to dominate Ethiopia was largely a joke, but the others
>>were a big deal, and mainstream historians recognize that they were a
>>big deal. No one here has ever said that these cases were not a big
>>deal. The kind of people who would argue that these cases were no big
>>deal are the same kind of people that deny the Holocaust.

Good!  But overall, what I am trying to say here is that other nations
have
demonstrated tendencies that COULD HAVE elicited a Holocaust.

>Yet one rarely find large heavy books with pompous theses about how
>"colonialist ideologies" or "dominationist idelogies" took over the
>British or Russian mind.

>>Sure you do. I've got a library full of them. You will find no books
>>about totalitarianism or planned genocide among the British or Russians
>>(before Stalinism got into full swing in 1940, that is) because that did
>>not happen; totalitarian terror for the purpose of genocide only
>>occurred in Nazi Germany.

You are right: I forgot about books under the classification "political
science" --
but PoliSci is not History or vice versa. Anyway, I believe you are wrong,
Franz Neumann's "Behemoth" had already adumbrated the idea in 1938.  I am
inclined to accept the latter statement, as long as you define what you
mean by "totalitarian", "terror" and "genocide".  If you are as familiar
with the literature as you claim, you know these terms have about 20-30
different definitions.

>Whereas Mr. Goldhagen finds himself in the midst of a veritable cottage
>industry of social scientists, each arriving at a fancy theory about how
>the Germans are uniquely bad, and the Holocaust thus uniquely evil.

>>Where does Mr. Goldhagen say this? The Nazi experience was uniquely bad
>>in the 20th century. It was a uniquely bad application of advanced means
>>of totalitarianism for the purpose of genocide. 

Ditto, supra.

>all the while the cloud just rolls along, high above the earth, which is
>to say -- high above human experience or empirical evidence!

>>An excellent summary of this post.

A good riposte!  But fails to address the issue.  But -- what ELSE is new?




From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 07:10:54 PDT 1996
Article: 35311 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!izzy.net!aanews.merit.net!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!lexis-nexis!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Matt Giwer's Wasted Breath
Date: 7 May 1996 17:26:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 39
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mof6h$suf@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


RANDOM THOUGHTS FOR MATT GIWER


After observing this board for something like two weeks, it is obvious to
me that no concessions about anything are going to be made here.  Now, I
was able to vent a bit about a handful of details of the Holocaust that
always made me roll my eyes, and, interestingly, I got several e-mails
>from  people who would grant me that one or the other was probably a
fantasy.  Eventually, all of my points were covered.

On the other hand, no matter how mindboggling a detail may be, if it is
mentioned in public, that is, on the board, one of the relevant experts
who has a copy of the two to three books that comprise the source material
for this board will quote from the source material (usually, witness
testimony) and that will be it -- ipse dixit.

Now at this point, you either believe it, or you don't.  Of course, you
can try to argue the technical details, but in the end it always comes
down to the testimony, and no one is going to admit doubts to (most)
testimony in public.

There is probably a reason for that.  So let's continue the thought
experiment: what if all the incredible details were false?  Does that
really change how we perceive Nazi Germany or the Jewish Holocaust?  It
might conceivably affect some associations in our minds, but I don't think
it would change the fundamental picture.

So let's stand the standard revisionist/denier question on its head: if
you are so sure that this or that detail is false, why are you making such
a big deal about it?  Go on with your life.  But if you are asking for a
public statement that this or that detail is wrong, then the suspicion is
that the detail is not the thing, but rather the public statement.  With a
view to what end, and who is going to benefit by such a statement?  And
besides, you should know by now that you aren't going to get the
statement.

So let's move on to other things, and if you hear something you don't
believe, ignore it.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 07:10:55 PDT 1996
Article: 35418 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Evil German Baby Goulash
Date: 8 May 1996 12:32:56 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 124
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mqibo$ktf@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Subject: Evil Little German Babies
From: Koenraad Vogel <103133.2361@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 7 May 1996 21:25:56 GMT
Message-ID: <4mof55$naj$1@mhade.production.compuserve.com>


 Koenraad Vogel <103133.2361@CompuServe.COM> writes:

>Okay, I've been hearing this crap for long enough.  Let's blame the
>Jews yet again:  "Germany's reputation is being endlessly dragged through
the
>mud by the Jews", "We'll be hearing about the 6 million FOR THE NEXT 6
>MILLION YEARS!", "Hey, it was 50 years ago, won't the Jews ever let it
>rest??!!" [...]  So, you ask, how long are "they" [the German
>people] going to take being hammered endlessly by "the Jews"?

I don't want to take credit for discovering America here, but there was a
very good reasons why the Holocaust was continually brought up after WW2,
and I deliberately absent from the discussion sentimental, moral, and
emotional reasons.

In the first place, the Holocaust served as justification for the post WW2
status quo.  By this I don't mean just the division of Germany, or the
loss of the Eastern German Provinces, or even the Expulsions.  Remember
that Poland lost quite a bit of land to the USSR, including such historic
Polish cities as Wilno (Vilnius) and Lwow (Lviv) and got fobbed off with
such historically German cities as Breslau (Wroclaw) and Stettin
(Szczeczin).  Ask your average Pole if he thinks he got a fair trade, but
for 50 years the Soviets and their Polish communist lackeys could play the
Polish victims of the Holocaust card to keep people in line: this would
justify not only the territorial adjustment, but sanctify the continued
Soviet presence.

You have to keep in mind that the Germans were greeted as liberators by
many of the people on the Western fringe of the USSR.  That means that
Lithuanian, Latvian, and Ukrainian nationalists were likely to collaborate
with the Nazis -- whether individuals actually took part in war crimes is
another issue.  But in the postwar environment, the Soviet government
could use the simple association of non-Soviet nationalism equals
collaboration with Nazism equals the Holocaust as experienced in these
locales as an excuse for repressing local nationalisms, much in the same
way that Serbs seek to taint Croatian and Bosnian nationalist claims by
referencing Croatian and Bosnian collaboration. (How many of you know of
the Albano-Bosnian Moslem SS division?  It would make for great copy in
the Middle East.)

There is more.  Czechoslovakia had minor territorial adjustments
(territorial adjustments mean A LOT to Europeans -- Canadians and
Americans have so much we don't know what to do with it), Rumania lost
Moldavia, and Yugoslavia was artificially welded together.  Most of these
adjustments, carried out by communist governments, were justified and
enforced over local national interests by reference to the Holocaust.

Now I have been saying "Holocaust" throughout, but please understand that
the usage of the term, when it was used by communist governments to
enforce territorial changes and government policies, did not refer to a
Holocaust of Jews: No, it referred to a Holocaust of Poles, Czechs,
Rumanians, Byelorussians, or whatever national interest was being
compromised at the time.  That is why I used to think, somewhat
sardonically, that the reason the Soviets insisted on such high death
tolls at Auschwitz was because they wanted all of their subject peoples to
be sufficiently represented.

Finally, I would cite the example of Hungary, because that is the one I am
most familiar with.  In the first place you must know that the Hungarians
are of an almost unique linquistic stock and are quite concerned for their
national survival.  Therefore, a loss of territory is doubly traumatic to
them.  You should also know that Germans and Jews have trafficked
extensively in Hungary for centuries.

Hungary's "homeland" if you will, is Transylvania, which for centuries
maintained in a predominantly rural format at least five ethnic groupings:
"Szeklers" or the original Magyar (actually Cuman) settlers, Jews, who
settled along old medieval riverine trade routes and stayed when the trade
dried up, Rumanians, who migrated in from the South, Gypsies, who migrated
>from  India via Turkey, and Germans, who were brought in about 700 years
ago to man the frontiers and establish cities (which is why the Germans
call the region "Siebenburgen", i.e., the Seven Cities).  A telling
characteristic of WW2 is that most of this ethnic variety was wiped off
the map, although a sizable Hungarian minority remains, and a tiny German
one.

Hungary lost Transylvania after WW1, at Trianon, which, it is understood,
was part of a plot by the Western Allies to permanently weaken and
infantilize the Central and East European nations.  Hungary's alliance
with Germany in WW2 was entirely a matter of attempting to play the
diplomacy card sufficiently to regain their Szekely homeland.

For the first few years, the Germans allowed the sizable Hungarian Jewish
population to be more or less unmolested: that was part of the deal. 
However, late in the war, the Germans demanded that all of the Hungarians
be interned and transferred (we know what that means) and the fascistic
government of Hungary, along with the anti-semitic Arrow Cross (a kind of
SA in green shirts), carried out the process.  I have known several
Hungarians who were victims of this "process", as well as victims of
Soviet "liberation" -- some were victims of both.

The complicity of the Hungarian government in the Holocaust, as well as
the actions of Arrow Cross, was enough to justify a communist post war
government which -- and here's the catch -- gave up any claims to
Transylvania.  But from 1945 on, whenever Hungarians pined for their
homeland, or for that matter, cried out for justice for the suppression of
the 1956 revolt, they would always have two words thrown back at them:
Auschwitz Birkenau.  The irony of all this is that most of the Hungarians
I have known are highly assimilated ethnic Jews who wanted an end to
Soviet harrassment and who want Transylvania back as much as anyone.

This concludes my argument that one of the reasons for remembering the
Holocaust -- at least in Eastern and Central Europe -- was as a means of
legitimizing territorial changes and as a means of justifying social
control.  

The reader will note that I make no reference to Israel.  First of all,
whatever public relations Israel may have gained over the years via the
Holocaust has not been that decisive:  the Holocaust was not present
during the Six Day War.  Secondly, Israel's interest would have been best
served, IMHO, by as large a Jewish immigration as possible after WW2.  To
say that Zionists would endorse the idea of possible "sympathy" in return
for a much smaller population to be a "fact on the ground" is absolutely
idiotic, even from a purely Realpolitik point of view (which I have
deliberately adopted in this article).

Other parts will be addressed elsewhere.
  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 07:10:56 PDT 1996
Article: 35419 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Evil Proud German Babies
Date: 8 May 1996 12:33:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 115
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mqic5$ktp@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Subject: Evil Little German Babies
From: Koenraad Vogel <103133.2361@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 7 May 1996 21:25:56 GMT
Message-ID: <4mof55$naj$1@mhade.production.compuserve.com>


 Koenraad Vogel <103133.2361@CompuServe.COM> writes:


>First of all, how is a statement made by one Jew automatically an attack
on
>the German people by "the Jews"??  Are we back on that worn-out
>"Jewish/Zionist conspiracy" nonsense??? [...]  No,
>the catalyst for revisionism in Germany (and elsewhere) is that same,
>old-fashioned anti-Semitism which caused the Holocaust to begin with, not
any
>Jew's understandable unwillingness to forget the tragedy of millions
dead.

While I think it is true that people who harp on Holocaust revisionism are
usually anti-semitic, there are usually clues that give the issue away. 
For example, someone who brings up Holocaust revisionism and then leads
the discussion into a criticism of Israel, US support for Israel, the
price of gasoline, the Trilateral Commission, or some other mysterious,
vague entity that controls our lives is -- I think -- anti-semitic, and as
they go on they will eventually start making explicit collective judgments
(usually negative) about Jews.

Another overrall comment I would make is that just because someone is a
Jew, or Jewish, that does not make him or her a designated spokesman or
flak-catcher for Israel, World Jewry, or any individual who is Jewish.  I
can't recall how many times a Jew or an Israeli will be named in a
newspaper for involvement in one thing or another, and a Jew I know will
be expected to give an account of the whole thing.  Gentiles do this kind
of thing all the time, and think they are being friendly, as in, "Did you
read in the paper about this Jewish guy who killed this other guy?  You're
Jewish -- why do you think he did it?"  And so on ....

My main point however in this post is my belief that some revisionists are
revisionists not because they are anti-semitic but because they are
pro-German.  I submit -- referencing my correspondence with Mike Curtis --
that this should be tolerated up to a point.  I once saw a large color map
that was used in German schools describing the progress of the Holocaust: 
black symbols marked the site of extermination camps and concentration
camps.  The marks would be labelled with the names of the camps, and camps
that contained famous anti-Nazis would have the names of these famous
anti-Nazis IN LARGE CAPITAL LETTERS.  And, naturally, the death tolls on
the map used the lowest Gerald Reitlinger (1954) estimates, which were
about 2 million overrall.

Now it is possible to be grumpy about this (cf. Lucy Dawidowicz, "The
Holocaust and the Historians") and say that this is anti-semitic, or, as
she said, that Kurt Vonnegut was anti-semitic for extravagantly condemning
the bombing of Dresden.  I think we have to respect that people are going
to view the Holocaust differently, describe it differently, and assess it
differently.  Toleration -- as in the toleration of religious differences,
which invariably impinge on historical awareness -- should be operative
here.

People who admire Germany have a tough time with the Holocaust.  The MAIN
problem they have is with the fact that it was better for everyone that
Germany lost the war.  The problem with people like David Irving, in my
view, is not that he is anti-semitic but that his pro-German sentiments
lead him to discount German involvement in atrocities.  Americans should
be familiar with the sentiment: it crops up in conversations with
Americans from the South all the time.  Even today they deny that the
Civil War involved slavery, they insist on calling the Civil War the War
Between the States, and so on.  They glory in the knightly values of the
Confederate Army, and define a noble cause "States Rights" to counterpoise
to the evil of slavery.

Exactly the same situation obtains in Europe.  Many Germans, and
Pro-Germans, take pride in Germany's courage and gallantry under fire in
both World Wars.  And -- taken from a purely military history point of
view -- there is much to admire.  They counterpoise "anti-communism" to
anti-semitism and racism.  My guess -- in Irving's case -- is that he is a
Prussian wannabe.  He is fascinated with the Ritterlich culture, hence,
most of his books have had a military focus or sub-focus.  I can
understand that Jews or others who feel the Holocaust very intensely are
not likely to appreciate this attitude -- even though I have known Jews
who have a strong admiration for the German Army.  I would suggest that
this kind of attitude is not anti-semitic, either.

Of course, it is fashionable to ridicule this kind of attitude as just a
bunch of grown men playing with model tanks.  But it is not so simple. 
Many men admire military virtues not because they admire killing, but
because military virtues are just traditional virtues under duress.  Joe
Blow who drives a sanitation truck for a living may read books about the
Wehrmacht or the Waffen SS -- that doesn't mean he hates Jews.  It means
that he likes to read about courage, endurance, self sacrifice, self
control, and above all, LOYALTY.  And, he likes to read about these things
because he wants to personify these things; and, indeed, to the extent
that he does personify these things, he will be a better citizen, husband,
and father.  He doesn't want to hear about atrocities, and may resent
hearing about them, because they offend his amour propre which he has
projected onto Germany.  But that, per se, is not anti-semitic.

Pride in Germany or in German accomplishments -- even if they took place
during the period of Nazi Dictatorship -- is not equivalent to
anti-semitism.  But I have seen that sentiment expressed many times in
books and periodicals.  OTOH, a certain melorism among Germans and
Pro-Germans towards the Holocaust is to be expected.  National histories
ALWAYS do this!  And, I submit, that this is not anti-semitic either.

In fact, IMHO, a German or Pro-German who minimizes the Holocaust is less
of a threat than the Nazi who would say, "Yes, we did it, and it's a pity
we didn't finish the job."  To me, it is somewhat reassuring that that
sentiment is NEVER expressed, even among the most hard-core revisionists.

We must grant that something less than unilateral acceptance of the
Holocaust in all of its particulars is not necessarily anti-semitic. 
Those who guard the memory of the Holocaust most intensely, want, above
all, for their story to be respected.  So let us treat that story with
respect, and, in return, let those guardians respect those who worship
other gods.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 07:10:56 PDT 1996
Article: 35430 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Historians Debate: Goldhagen a Schmuck? [snip]
Date: 8 May 1996 13:33:49 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 58
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mqltt$m0b@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

>From  an exchange between Marty Kelley and Ehrlich606:

> >>Finally, I would note, as I mentioned in my previous reply to your
post,
> >>that nowhere in the article does Craig call Goldhagen a schmuck.  
> 
> ROTFLMAO!
> 
> Of course, Craig would never use such language and I never said he did. 
I
> know a good headline when I see it, and I'd rather be read than dead.

Marty Kelley inquires:

And a little invective and ad hominem argument is a good way to get 
read?  

Ehrlich606 replies:

Marty!  There is a difference in using invective towards someone
indirectly and using it face to face.  Ditto ad hominem.  It's not as if I
called YOU a schmuck.  That wouldn't be nice.  OTOH, if I write no-ripple
articles with smooth, creamy peanut butter titles I won't get any feedback
on my ideas and I won't learn anything.  If I hurt your feelings by
calling Goldhagen a Schmuck, then I apologize.  There is also a difference
between humor and vitriol -- although I will grant that the line is
sometimes hard to distinguish.

Your recent notes have been rich with ideas.  Unfortunately, I have so
many ideas buzzing around that I can hardly address them all, even to
myself.  But there is one that I would like to elaborate on:
"Eliminationism" vs. "Exterminationism"

There is probably a lot to be said for the idea that "Eliminationism"
INCLUDING assimilationism was regnant in 19th Century Germany.  But look
around: isn't it regnant EVERYWHERE?  You see, one of the reasons the East
European Jewish community flourished for so long is because the Polish
State was pre-industrial and the reins of social order were accordingly
lax.  Now name me one industrialized society in the world today that
willingly tolerates the level of "difference" a typical Orthodox East
European Jew would have represented.  We have enough of a problem in the
USA with people speaking Spanish!

Industrialized nation states want homogeneous populations, that celebrate
the same secular holidays, follow the same secular week, engage in the
same secular activities, honor the same secular gods, speak the same
language, value the same values, take all their problems to the same
secular courts, get all their education at the same secular schools, and
in general be interchangeable.

I am not saying this is good, and I am not sure why it has to be that way.
 But that is the way it is.  I will let someone tell me the above is
overdone, maybe it is, but not by much. The toleration the United States
accords to Hassids in New York, and Amish in Pennsylvania, is unusual, and
probably would be the source of a lot of friction if those tiny
communities were large and growing, as a result of immigration.

  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 07:10:57 PDT 1996
Article: 35468 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Evil German Baby Goulash
Date: 8 May 1996 16:33:31 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mr0er$p1u@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mqibo$ktf@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

ERRATA:  The city of "Szczeczin" referenced in my article (supra) is of
course, correctly spelled "Szczecin" and is pronounced "Szczecin"


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 07:10:58 PDT 1996
Article: 35476 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Goldhagen's thesis (was Re: Alternate Introductory Systems)
Date: 8 May 1996 03:08:16 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 12
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mph90$d30@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4moljm$71e@boris.eden.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)

It is claimed that Ehrlich606 wrote the following:

>: there's documents
>   and letters from the Germans which talk about the campain against
typhus,
>   how can you deny that it was their goal? ooops! you said 'their
>   _only_ goal,  but I still don't see your point. 

I never wrote such a thing and I don't know what it means.

Ehrlich606



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 07:10:58 PDT 1996
Article: 35542 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!news.uoregon.edu!news.sol.net!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: what is a troll?
Date: 8 May 1996 09:28:00 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mq7h0$hgg@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <831376208snz@abaron.demon.co.uk>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Subject: what is a troll?
From: Alexander Baron 

>What exactly is a troll? Somebody once told me what a spam is but I'm not
sure
>I understand that either.


Alex:  I am sure it is reference to the beast in the tale known stateside
as "Billy Goat's Gruff" in which a small boy, attempting to cross a
bridge, must -- according to various versions -- either pay money, answer
questions, or just generally be terrorized or lectured by a dwarf living
underneath.  If the "bridge" is the "path" to the Internet, then the rest
is self explanatory.

Of course, the synthetic reader will catch the association to Oedipus and
the Sphinx immediately.  But Giwer would not be so characterized, because
Giwer-Sphinx is too hard to spell.  OTOH, Giwer-Sphincter ....

-- 


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 07:10:59 PDT 1996
Article: 35600 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!news.nstn.ca!news.dal.ca!torn!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Star Jewish pop. source goes bye, bye
Date: 8 May 1996 21:42:23 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 109
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mrihv$1ke@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mqutq$fqr@news.nyu.edu>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


Matt Giwer (mgiwer@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: tm@pacificnet.net (tom moran) wrote:
: 
: 
: >	Quite often the topic of Jewish population before the war pops
: >up on alt.revisionism. It is important to the Holocaust story to show
: >there were enough Jews in Europe to be killed and add up to 6 million.
: >Most of the time, those in favor of the story respond to challenges by
: >citing German estimates on the population of Jews in Europe.
: >Something like, 'WHAT? What are you talking about? Look, even the
: >Germans estimated ...'.
: 
: >	As it turns out these estimates are deeply suspect.
: 
: >	"In the final solution conference of January 20, 1942, the
: >Reich Main Security Office offered the following population statistics
: >for these countries: Findland 2,300; ... Netherlands, 165,000; ...
: >Romania, 342,000; ... Hungary, 742,000; ... France (occupied) 165,000;
: >... France (unoccupied), 700,000; The total is 2,475,100. But the sum
: >was inflated, principally because of the gross over-estimate for
: >unoccupied France, by about 600,000 people."
: >                                                       *Raul Hilberg
: 
: 	I have found it interesting that to even come up with the 11M of
: the Wannsee document that there has to be an estimate of 5M in
: Russia.  Yet they barely held control of half of Western Urals
: Russia at best and then only for the duration of the Winter.


>>(a)What does the estimate of the Wannsee document have to do with the
>>maount of control they had?  I doubt at the time of Wannsee, they would
>>have assumed that they were going to fail to completely take Russia
>>eventually.

Ehrlich606 interjects:  I consider the Wannsee document a document that
provides irrefutable proof for a program for ultimate extermination.  The
document clearly specifies sex-segregated slave labor first.  The only
question is the extent to which this "blueprint" was abandoned later that
year, and for what reasons.

>>(b)Unlike you, I will admit what I don't know -- I don't know what
>>percentage of Russia's Jews were under control of the Germans, at what
>>points, or how long.  Perhaps you would care to provide the source for
>>your information so I can go look it up?

Ehrlich606 interjects:  The short answer, Jeremy, (assuming the above is
you) is that no one knows.  Reasons are as follows: so many people died
within the borders of present day CIS that no one can tell who of what
group died where.  In 1982, or 1983, a journal of Soviet Studies published
an article calculating pop. statistics between 1929 census and 1954
census.  The answer: 50 million excess deaths, i.e., the pop. was 50
million lower than it should have been.  Germans usually blamed for 20
mill, but Gorby mentioned 30 shortly before German reunification.

Next issue: How many Jews and where?  Consult:  Reitlinger, Final
Solution, preferably 1954 edition, Appendix.  It is known that the pre-WW2
Russian Jewish pop was inflated for two reasons.  #1:  The Russians took a
big slice of Poland in 1939, which was probably the most densely settled
portion of the old 'Pale' -- these Polish Jews now become Soviet citizens.
 #2: Furthermore, it is generally accepted -- I think Yad Vashem did a
study over 14 years ago on this -- that 200,000 to 300,000 Polish Jews
fled the Nazis in 1939 and went over to the Soviets.  Finally, it is
generally stated by war historians that Stalin evacuated many Jews beyond
the Urals when Hitler invaded Russia in 1941.  How many? I do not know,
nor do I have a reference.  But on the basis of these data, Reitlinger low
balled the Polish death toll, and furthermore arrived at the conclusion
that Russia ended WW2 with more Jews than it began.  That's how he got
into the 2-4 million range.  Reitlinger was criticized for this.  All
variations on the 6 million figure -- a figure, BTW, which I accept --
depend on estimates of Russian Jewish pops.

Of course, all of this is speculative, and could only be answered by the
former Soviet government, which probably has statistical breakdowns, since
in Russia Jews are considered an ethnic group, not a religious group, and
hence their passports are stamped as "Jews."

 : : 	It is unclear why, when inretreat, that resources
would be : diverted from combat to continue rounding up people.  Combining
: that with only having access to 8.5M people that gives us a
: rather astonishing 70% efficiency rating overall.  

Ehrlich606 interjects: The Germans were constantly moving Jews and
non-Jews in and out.  In the first place, they had a plan for expanding
Germany.  So Poles and Jews were moved East.  Later, this becomes an
extermination policy.  When?  My guess is Spring of 1942.  Second, the
area was the dumping ground for the Final Solution pops of West European
Jews: which also ended up in an extermination program.

The German ideology demonized Jews.  As  I once ghost wrote in a letter,
"All Jews were evil, and all evil was Jewish" -- this phrase later became
popular.  I wish I had not conceived it, because it wasn't that
mysterious.  The Germans thought that Jews were Bolsheviks and spies who
would stab Germany in the back as they were convinced they had in WW1. 
Hence, as they retreated, they intensified the roundup in places like
Hungary.  It was considered a survival measure.  Once you are committed to
moving the people, and have committed the resources, extermination is not
such a huge step.

In addition, the Germans also moved a lot of Ukrainians West.

>>In part, I'm with you on this, in that i think the German zeal for
>>murdering Jews was not a concept of rationality -- I think it was the
>>irrational acts of people whose judgment was clouded by rabid
>>anti-Semitism.  If you want to know *why*, you're going to have to find
an
>>answer from someone responsible.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 21:15:06 PDT 1996
Article: 35281 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!izzy.net!aanews.merit.net!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!lexis-nexis!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: 960505: Jamie's response acked; Toronto conference on postwar occupation
Date: 7 May 1996 12:16:11 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 77
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mnt0b$n7l@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mm0m5$55k@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) writes:
and  rich@c2.org (Rich Graves) responds >>

>The reason why the Germans perpetrated the Holocaust, as opposed to
>France, England, or Italy, is because of what Bismarck said:  "My map of
>Africa lies in the East."  Then you should read about Leopold II's
Belgian
>Congo, Roger Casement's role in exposing colonial atrocities in the late
>19th Century, Britain's activities in India, China, and South Africa,
>France's activities in Algeria, Indochina, and elsewhere in Africa, and

>>I am far more familiar with these cases than with the Holocaust, and
>>have discussed them, at great length, in other forums. But this forum is
>>about the Holocaust. Your crocodile tears about these cases say nothing
>>about Nazi apologists who deny the Holocaust.

Your use of the term "crocodile tears" is a completely unwarranted
attribution of motive ad hominem.  Please note that the breach of civility
came from your side.  This forum is about the Holocaust:  says who?  It is
called "alt.revisionism" not "alt.holocaust"  Furthermore, the argument
here is not about Nazi apologists who deny the Holocaust.
If you are saying that the only permissable statements herein are attacks
on Nazi apologists who deny the Holocaust, and counter-statements by Nazi
apologists, then I can see why this board is the way it is.

>Italy in Ethiopia.  None of these cases even involved colonization, just
>pure economic exploitation.  But I guess everybody does these things, so
>no big deal.

>>Italy's attempt to dominate Ethiopia was largely a joke, but the others
>>were a big deal, and mainstream historians recognize that they were a
>>big deal. No one here has ever said that these cases were not a big
>>deal. The kind of people who would argue that these cases were no big
>>deal are the same kind of people that deny the Holocaust.

Good!  But overall, what I am trying to say here is that other nations
have
demonstrated tendencies that COULD HAVE elicited a Holocaust.

>Yet one rarely find large heavy books with pompous theses about how
>"colonialist ideologies" or "dominationist idelogies" took over the
>British or Russian mind.

>>Sure you do. I've got a library full of them. You will find no books
>>about totalitarianism or planned genocide among the British or Russians
>>(before Stalinism got into full swing in 1940, that is) because that did
>>not happen; totalitarian terror for the purpose of genocide only
>>occurred in Nazi Germany.

You are right: I forgot about books under the classification "political
science" --
but PoliSci is not History or vice versa. Anyway, I believe you are wrong,
Franz Neumann's "Behemoth" had already adumbrated the idea in 1938.  I am
inclined to accept the latter statement, as long as you define what you
mean by "totalitarian", "terror" and "genocide".  If you are as familiar
with the literature as you claim, you know these terms have about 20-30
different definitions.

>Whereas Mr. Goldhagen finds himself in the midst of a veritable cottage
>industry of social scientists, each arriving at a fancy theory about how
>the Germans are uniquely bad, and the Holocaust thus uniquely evil.

>>Where does Mr. Goldhagen say this? The Nazi experience was uniquely bad
>>in the 20th century. It was a uniquely bad application of advanced means
>>of totalitarianism for the purpose of genocide. 

Ditto, supra.

>all the while the cloud just rolls along, high above the earth, which is
>to say -- high above human experience or empirical evidence!

>>An excellent summary of this post.

A good riposte!  But fails to address the issue.  But -- what ELSE is new?




From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 21:15:07 PDT 1996
Article: 35311 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!izzy.net!aanews.merit.net!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!lexis-nexis!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Matt Giwer's Wasted Breath
Date: 7 May 1996 17:26:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 39
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mof6h$suf@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


RANDOM THOUGHTS FOR MATT GIWER


After observing this board for something like two weeks, it is obvious to
me that no concessions about anything are going to be made here.  Now, I
was able to vent a bit about a handful of details of the Holocaust that
always made me roll my eyes, and, interestingly, I got several e-mails
>from  people who would grant me that one or the other was probably a
fantasy.  Eventually, all of my points were covered.

On the other hand, no matter how mindboggling a detail may be, if it is
mentioned in public, that is, on the board, one of the relevant experts
who has a copy of the two to three books that comprise the source material
for this board will quote from the source material (usually, witness
testimony) and that will be it -- ipse dixit.

Now at this point, you either believe it, or you don't.  Of course, you
can try to argue the technical details, but in the end it always comes
down to the testimony, and no one is going to admit doubts to (most)
testimony in public.

There is probably a reason for that.  So let's continue the thought
experiment: what if all the incredible details were false?  Does that
really change how we perceive Nazi Germany or the Jewish Holocaust?  It
might conceivably affect some associations in our minds, but I don't think
it would change the fundamental picture.

So let's stand the standard revisionist/denier question on its head: if
you are so sure that this or that detail is false, why are you making such
a big deal about it?  Go on with your life.  But if you are asking for a
public statement that this or that detail is wrong, then the suspicion is
that the detail is not the thing, but rather the public statement.  With a
view to what end, and who is going to benefit by such a statement?  And
besides, you should know by now that you aren't going to get the
statement.

So let's move on to other things, and if you hear something you don't
believe, ignore it.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 21:15:08 PDT 1996
Article: 35418 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Evil German Baby Goulash
Date: 8 May 1996 12:32:56 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 124
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mqibo$ktf@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Subject: Evil Little German Babies
From: Koenraad Vogel <103133.2361@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 7 May 1996 21:25:56 GMT
Message-ID: <4mof55$naj$1@mhade.production.compuserve.com>


 Koenraad Vogel <103133.2361@CompuServe.COM> writes:

>Okay, I've been hearing this crap for long enough.  Let's blame the
>Jews yet again:  "Germany's reputation is being endlessly dragged through
the
>mud by the Jews", "We'll be hearing about the 6 million FOR THE NEXT 6
>MILLION YEARS!", "Hey, it was 50 years ago, won't the Jews ever let it
>rest??!!" [...]  So, you ask, how long are "they" [the German
>people] going to take being hammered endlessly by "the Jews"?

I don't want to take credit for discovering America here, but there was a
very good reasons why the Holocaust was continually brought up after WW2,
and I deliberately absent from the discussion sentimental, moral, and
emotional reasons.

In the first place, the Holocaust served as justification for the post WW2
status quo.  By this I don't mean just the division of Germany, or the
loss of the Eastern German Provinces, or even the Expulsions.  Remember
that Poland lost quite a bit of land to the USSR, including such historic
Polish cities as Wilno (Vilnius) and Lwow (Lviv) and got fobbed off with
such historically German cities as Breslau (Wroclaw) and Stettin
(Szczeczin).  Ask your average Pole if he thinks he got a fair trade, but
for 50 years the Soviets and their Polish communist lackeys could play the
Polish victims of the Holocaust card to keep people in line: this would
justify not only the territorial adjustment, but sanctify the continued
Soviet presence.

You have to keep in mind that the Germans were greeted as liberators by
many of the people on the Western fringe of the USSR.  That means that
Lithuanian, Latvian, and Ukrainian nationalists were likely to collaborate
with the Nazis -- whether individuals actually took part in war crimes is
another issue.  But in the postwar environment, the Soviet government
could use the simple association of non-Soviet nationalism equals
collaboration with Nazism equals the Holocaust as experienced in these
locales as an excuse for repressing local nationalisms, much in the same
way that Serbs seek to taint Croatian and Bosnian nationalist claims by
referencing Croatian and Bosnian collaboration. (How many of you know of
the Albano-Bosnian Moslem SS division?  It would make for great copy in
the Middle East.)

There is more.  Czechoslovakia had minor territorial adjustments
(territorial adjustments mean A LOT to Europeans -- Canadians and
Americans have so much we don't know what to do with it), Rumania lost
Moldavia, and Yugoslavia was artificially welded together.  Most of these
adjustments, carried out by communist governments, were justified and
enforced over local national interests by reference to the Holocaust.

Now I have been saying "Holocaust" throughout, but please understand that
the usage of the term, when it was used by communist governments to
enforce territorial changes and government policies, did not refer to a
Holocaust of Jews: No, it referred to a Holocaust of Poles, Czechs,
Rumanians, Byelorussians, or whatever national interest was being
compromised at the time.  That is why I used to think, somewhat
sardonically, that the reason the Soviets insisted on such high death
tolls at Auschwitz was because they wanted all of their subject peoples to
be sufficiently represented.

Finally, I would cite the example of Hungary, because that is the one I am
most familiar with.  In the first place you must know that the Hungarians
are of an almost unique linquistic stock and are quite concerned for their
national survival.  Therefore, a loss of territory is doubly traumatic to
them.  You should also know that Germans and Jews have trafficked
extensively in Hungary for centuries.

Hungary's "homeland" if you will, is Transylvania, which for centuries
maintained in a predominantly rural format at least five ethnic groupings:
"Szeklers" or the original Magyar (actually Cuman) settlers, Jews, who
settled along old medieval riverine trade routes and stayed when the trade
dried up, Rumanians, who migrated in from the South, Gypsies, who migrated
>from  India via Turkey, and Germans, who were brought in about 700 years
ago to man the frontiers and establish cities (which is why the Germans
call the region "Siebenburgen", i.e., the Seven Cities).  A telling
characteristic of WW2 is that most of this ethnic variety was wiped off
the map, although a sizable Hungarian minority remains, and a tiny German
one.

Hungary lost Transylvania after WW1, at Trianon, which, it is understood,
was part of a plot by the Western Allies to permanently weaken and
infantilize the Central and East European nations.  Hungary's alliance
with Germany in WW2 was entirely a matter of attempting to play the
diplomacy card sufficiently to regain their Szekely homeland.

For the first few years, the Germans allowed the sizable Hungarian Jewish
population to be more or less unmolested: that was part of the deal. 
However, late in the war, the Germans demanded that all of the Hungarians
be interned and transferred (we know what that means) and the fascistic
government of Hungary, along with the anti-semitic Arrow Cross (a kind of
SA in green shirts), carried out the process.  I have known several
Hungarians who were victims of this "process", as well as victims of
Soviet "liberation" -- some were victims of both.

The complicity of the Hungarian government in the Holocaust, as well as
the actions of Arrow Cross, was enough to justify a communist post war
government which -- and here's the catch -- gave up any claims to
Transylvania.  But from 1945 on, whenever Hungarians pined for their
homeland, or for that matter, cried out for justice for the suppression of
the 1956 revolt, they would always have two words thrown back at them:
Auschwitz Birkenau.  The irony of all this is that most of the Hungarians
I have known are highly assimilated ethnic Jews who wanted an end to
Soviet harrassment and who want Transylvania back as much as anyone.

This concludes my argument that one of the reasons for remembering the
Holocaust -- at least in Eastern and Central Europe -- was as a means of
legitimizing territorial changes and as a means of justifying social
control.  

The reader will note that I make no reference to Israel.  First of all,
whatever public relations Israel may have gained over the years via the
Holocaust has not been that decisive:  the Holocaust was not present
during the Six Day War.  Secondly, Israel's interest would have been best
served, IMHO, by as large a Jewish immigration as possible after WW2.  To
say that Zionists would endorse the idea of possible "sympathy" in return
for a much smaller population to be a "fact on the ground" is absolutely
idiotic, even from a purely Realpolitik point of view (which I have
deliberately adopted in this article).

Other parts will be addressed elsewhere.
  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 21:15:10 PDT 1996
Article: 35419 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Evil Proud German Babies
Date: 8 May 1996 12:33:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 115
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mqic5$ktp@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Subject: Evil Little German Babies
From: Koenraad Vogel <103133.2361@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 7 May 1996 21:25:56 GMT
Message-ID: <4mof55$naj$1@mhade.production.compuserve.com>


 Koenraad Vogel <103133.2361@CompuServe.COM> writes:


>First of all, how is a statement made by one Jew automatically an attack
on
>the German people by "the Jews"??  Are we back on that worn-out
>"Jewish/Zionist conspiracy" nonsense??? [...]  No,
>the catalyst for revisionism in Germany (and elsewhere) is that same,
>old-fashioned anti-Semitism which caused the Holocaust to begin with, not
any
>Jew's understandable unwillingness to forget the tragedy of millions
dead.

While I think it is true that people who harp on Holocaust revisionism are
usually anti-semitic, there are usually clues that give the issue away. 
For example, someone who brings up Holocaust revisionism and then leads
the discussion into a criticism of Israel, US support for Israel, the
price of gasoline, the Trilateral Commission, or some other mysterious,
vague entity that controls our lives is -- I think -- anti-semitic, and as
they go on they will eventually start making explicit collective judgments
(usually negative) about Jews.

Another overrall comment I would make is that just because someone is a
Jew, or Jewish, that does not make him or her a designated spokesman or
flak-catcher for Israel, World Jewry, or any individual who is Jewish.  I
can't recall how many times a Jew or an Israeli will be named in a
newspaper for involvement in one thing or another, and a Jew I know will
be expected to give an account of the whole thing.  Gentiles do this kind
of thing all the time, and think they are being friendly, as in, "Did you
read in the paper about this Jewish guy who killed this other guy?  You're
Jewish -- why do you think he did it?"  And so on ....

My main point however in this post is my belief that some revisionists are
revisionists not because they are anti-semitic but because they are
pro-German.  I submit -- referencing my correspondence with Mike Curtis --
that this should be tolerated up to a point.  I once saw a large color map
that was used in German schools describing the progress of the Holocaust: 
black symbols marked the site of extermination camps and concentration
camps.  The marks would be labelled with the names of the camps, and camps
that contained famous anti-Nazis would have the names of these famous
anti-Nazis IN LARGE CAPITAL LETTERS.  And, naturally, the death tolls on
the map used the lowest Gerald Reitlinger (1954) estimates, which were
about 2 million overrall.

Now it is possible to be grumpy about this (cf. Lucy Dawidowicz, "The
Holocaust and the Historians") and say that this is anti-semitic, or, as
she said, that Kurt Vonnegut was anti-semitic for extravagantly condemning
the bombing of Dresden.  I think we have to respect that people are going
to view the Holocaust differently, describe it differently, and assess it
differently.  Toleration -- as in the toleration of religious differences,
which invariably impinge on historical awareness -- should be operative
here.

People who admire Germany have a tough time with the Holocaust.  The MAIN
problem they have is with the fact that it was better for everyone that
Germany lost the war.  The problem with people like David Irving, in my
view, is not that he is anti-semitic but that his pro-German sentiments
lead him to discount German involvement in atrocities.  Americans should
be familiar with the sentiment: it crops up in conversations with
Americans from the South all the time.  Even today they deny that the
Civil War involved slavery, they insist on calling the Civil War the War
Between the States, and so on.  They glory in the knightly values of the
Confederate Army, and define a noble cause "States Rights" to counterpoise
to the evil of slavery.

Exactly the same situation obtains in Europe.  Many Germans, and
Pro-Germans, take pride in Germany's courage and gallantry under fire in
both World Wars.  And -- taken from a purely military history point of
view -- there is much to admire.  They counterpoise "anti-communism" to
anti-semitism and racism.  My guess -- in Irving's case -- is that he is a
Prussian wannabe.  He is fascinated with the Ritterlich culture, hence,
most of his books have had a military focus or sub-focus.  I can
understand that Jews or others who feel the Holocaust very intensely are
not likely to appreciate this attitude -- even though I have known Jews
who have a strong admiration for the German Army.  I would suggest that
this kind of attitude is not anti-semitic, either.

Of course, it is fashionable to ridicule this kind of attitude as just a
bunch of grown men playing with model tanks.  But it is not so simple. 
Many men admire military virtues not because they admire killing, but
because military virtues are just traditional virtues under duress.  Joe
Blow who drives a sanitation truck for a living may read books about the
Wehrmacht or the Waffen SS -- that doesn't mean he hates Jews.  It means
that he likes to read about courage, endurance, self sacrifice, self
control, and above all, LOYALTY.  And, he likes to read about these things
because he wants to personify these things; and, indeed, to the extent
that he does personify these things, he will be a better citizen, husband,
and father.  He doesn't want to hear about atrocities, and may resent
hearing about them, because they offend his amour propre which he has
projected onto Germany.  But that, per se, is not anti-semitic.

Pride in Germany or in German accomplishments -- even if they took place
during the period of Nazi Dictatorship -- is not equivalent to
anti-semitism.  But I have seen that sentiment expressed many times in
books and periodicals.  OTOH, a certain melorism among Germans and
Pro-Germans towards the Holocaust is to be expected.  National histories
ALWAYS do this!  And, I submit, that this is not anti-semitic either.

In fact, IMHO, a German or Pro-German who minimizes the Holocaust is less
of a threat than the Nazi who would say, "Yes, we did it, and it's a pity
we didn't finish the job."  To me, it is somewhat reassuring that that
sentiment is NEVER expressed, even among the most hard-core revisionists.

We must grant that something less than unilateral acceptance of the
Holocaust in all of its particulars is not necessarily anti-semitic. 
Those who guard the memory of the Holocaust most intensely, want, above
all, for their story to be respected.  So let us treat that story with
respect, and, in return, let those guardians respect those who worship
other gods.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 21:15:10 PDT 1996
Article: 35430 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Historians Debate: Goldhagen a Schmuck? [snip]
Date: 8 May 1996 13:33:49 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 58
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mqltt$m0b@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

>From  an exchange between Marty Kelley and Ehrlich606:

> >>Finally, I would note, as I mentioned in my previous reply to your
post,
> >>that nowhere in the article does Craig call Goldhagen a schmuck.  
> 
> ROTFLMAO!
> 
> Of course, Craig would never use such language and I never said he did. 
I
> know a good headline when I see it, and I'd rather be read than dead.

Marty Kelley inquires:

And a little invective and ad hominem argument is a good way to get 
read?  

Ehrlich606 replies:

Marty!  There is a difference in using invective towards someone
indirectly and using it face to face.  Ditto ad hominem.  It's not as if I
called YOU a schmuck.  That wouldn't be nice.  OTOH, if I write no-ripple
articles with smooth, creamy peanut butter titles I won't get any feedback
on my ideas and I won't learn anything.  If I hurt your feelings by
calling Goldhagen a Schmuck, then I apologize.  There is also a difference
between humor and vitriol -- although I will grant that the line is
sometimes hard to distinguish.

Your recent notes have been rich with ideas.  Unfortunately, I have so
many ideas buzzing around that I can hardly address them all, even to
myself.  But there is one that I would like to elaborate on:
"Eliminationism" vs. "Exterminationism"

There is probably a lot to be said for the idea that "Eliminationism"
INCLUDING assimilationism was regnant in 19th Century Germany.  But look
around: isn't it regnant EVERYWHERE?  You see, one of the reasons the East
European Jewish community flourished for so long is because the Polish
State was pre-industrial and the reins of social order were accordingly
lax.  Now name me one industrialized society in the world today that
willingly tolerates the level of "difference" a typical Orthodox East
European Jew would have represented.  We have enough of a problem in the
USA with people speaking Spanish!

Industrialized nation states want homogeneous populations, that celebrate
the same secular holidays, follow the same secular week, engage in the
same secular activities, honor the same secular gods, speak the same
language, value the same values, take all their problems to the same
secular courts, get all their education at the same secular schools, and
in general be interchangeable.

I am not saying this is good, and I am not sure why it has to be that way.
 But that is the way it is.  I will let someone tell me the above is
overdone, maybe it is, but not by much. The toleration the United States
accords to Hassids in New York, and Amish in Pennsylvania, is unusual, and
probably would be the source of a lot of friction if those tiny
communities were large and growing, as a result of immigration.

  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 21:15:11 PDT 1996
Article: 35468 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Evil German Baby Goulash
Date: 8 May 1996 16:33:31 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mr0er$p1u@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mqibo$ktf@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

ERRATA:  The city of "Szczeczin" referenced in my article (supra) is of
course, correctly spelled "Szczecin" and is pronounced "Szczecin"


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 21:15:12 PDT 1996
Article: 35542 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!news.uoregon.edu!news.sol.net!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: what is a troll?
Date: 8 May 1996 09:28:00 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mq7h0$hgg@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <831376208snz@abaron.demon.co.uk>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Subject: what is a troll?
From: Alexander Baron 

>What exactly is a troll? Somebody once told me what a spam is but I'm not
sure
>I understand that either.


Alex:  I am sure it is reference to the beast in the tale known stateside
as "Billy Goat's Gruff" in which a small boy, attempting to cross a
bridge, must -- according to various versions -- either pay money, answer
questions, or just generally be terrorized or lectured by a dwarf living
underneath.  If the "bridge" is the "path" to the Internet, then the rest
is self explanatory.

Of course, the synthetic reader will catch the association to Oedipus and
the Sphinx immediately.  But Giwer would not be so characterized, because
Giwer-Sphinx is too hard to spell.  OTOH, Giwer-Sphincter ....

-- 


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 21:15:13 PDT 1996
Article: 35600 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!news.nstn.ca!news.dal.ca!torn!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Star Jewish pop. source goes bye, bye
Date: 8 May 1996 21:42:23 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 109
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mrihv$1ke@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mqutq$fqr@news.nyu.edu>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


Matt Giwer (mgiwer@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: tm@pacificnet.net (tom moran) wrote:
: 
: 
: >	Quite often the topic of Jewish population before the war pops
: >up on alt.revisionism. It is important to the Holocaust story to show
: >there were enough Jews in Europe to be killed and add up to 6 million.
: >Most of the time, those in favor of the story respond to challenges by
: >citing German estimates on the population of Jews in Europe.
: >Something like, 'WHAT? What are you talking about? Look, even the
: >Germans estimated ...'.
: 
: >	As it turns out these estimates are deeply suspect.
: 
: >	"In the final solution conference of January 20, 1942, the
: >Reich Main Security Office offered the following population statistics
: >for these countries: Findland 2,300; ... Netherlands, 165,000; ...
: >Romania, 342,000; ... Hungary, 742,000; ... France (occupied) 165,000;
: >... France (unoccupied), 700,000; The total is 2,475,100. But the sum
: >was inflated, principally because of the gross over-estimate for
: >unoccupied France, by about 600,000 people."
: >                                                       *Raul Hilberg
: 
: 	I have found it interesting that to even come up with the 11M of
: the Wannsee document that there has to be an estimate of 5M in
: Russia.  Yet they barely held control of half of Western Urals
: Russia at best and then only for the duration of the Winter.


>>(a)What does the estimate of the Wannsee document have to do with the
>>maount of control they had?  I doubt at the time of Wannsee, they would
>>have assumed that they were going to fail to completely take Russia
>>eventually.

Ehrlich606 interjects:  I consider the Wannsee document a document that
provides irrefutable proof for a program for ultimate extermination.  The
document clearly specifies sex-segregated slave labor first.  The only
question is the extent to which this "blueprint" was abandoned later that
year, and for what reasons.

>>(b)Unlike you, I will admit what I don't know -- I don't know what
>>percentage of Russia's Jews were under control of the Germans, at what
>>points, or how long.  Perhaps you would care to provide the source for
>>your information so I can go look it up?

Ehrlich606 interjects:  The short answer, Jeremy, (assuming the above is
you) is that no one knows.  Reasons are as follows: so many people died
within the borders of present day CIS that no one can tell who of what
group died where.  In 1982, or 1983, a journal of Soviet Studies published
an article calculating pop. statistics between 1929 census and 1954
census.  The answer: 50 million excess deaths, i.e., the pop. was 50
million lower than it should have been.  Germans usually blamed for 20
mill, but Gorby mentioned 30 shortly before German reunification.

Next issue: How many Jews and where?  Consult:  Reitlinger, Final
Solution, preferably 1954 edition, Appendix.  It is known that the pre-WW2
Russian Jewish pop was inflated for two reasons.  #1:  The Russians took a
big slice of Poland in 1939, which was probably the most densely settled
portion of the old 'Pale' -- these Polish Jews now become Soviet citizens.
 #2: Furthermore, it is generally accepted -- I think Yad Vashem did a
study over 14 years ago on this -- that 200,000 to 300,000 Polish Jews
fled the Nazis in 1939 and went over to the Soviets.  Finally, it is
generally stated by war historians that Stalin evacuated many Jews beyond
the Urals when Hitler invaded Russia in 1941.  How many? I do not know,
nor do I have a reference.  But on the basis of these data, Reitlinger low
balled the Polish death toll, and furthermore arrived at the conclusion
that Russia ended WW2 with more Jews than it began.  That's how he got
into the 2-4 million range.  Reitlinger was criticized for this.  All
variations on the 6 million figure -- a figure, BTW, which I accept --
depend on estimates of Russian Jewish pops.

Of course, all of this is speculative, and could only be answered by the
former Soviet government, which probably has statistical breakdowns, since
in Russia Jews are considered an ethnic group, not a religious group, and
hence their passports are stamped as "Jews."

 : : 	It is unclear why, when inretreat, that resources
would be : diverted from combat to continue rounding up people.  Combining
: that with only having access to 8.5M people that gives us a
: rather astonishing 70% efficiency rating overall.  

Ehrlich606 interjects: The Germans were constantly moving Jews and
non-Jews in and out.  In the first place, they had a plan for expanding
Germany.  So Poles and Jews were moved East.  Later, this becomes an
extermination policy.  When?  My guess is Spring of 1942.  Second, the
area was the dumping ground for the Final Solution pops of West European
Jews: which also ended up in an extermination program.

The German ideology demonized Jews.  As  I once ghost wrote in a letter,
"All Jews were evil, and all evil was Jewish" -- this phrase later became
popular.  I wish I had not conceived it, because it wasn't that
mysterious.  The Germans thought that Jews were Bolsheviks and spies who
would stab Germany in the back as they were convinced they had in WW1. 
Hence, as they retreated, they intensified the roundup in places like
Hungary.  It was considered a survival measure.  Once you are committed to
moving the people, and have committed the resources, extermination is not
such a huge step.

In addition, the Germans also moved a lot of Ukrainians West.

>>In part, I'm with you on this, in that i think the German zeal for
>>murdering Jews was not a concept of rationality -- I think it was the
>>irrational acts of people whose judgment was clouded by rabid
>>anti-Semitism.  If you want to know *why*, you're going to have to find
an
>>answer from someone responsible.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May  9 21:15:14 PDT 1996
Article: 35712 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Grand gas experiment
Date: 9 May 1996 16:14:03 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 15
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mtjmb$oc0@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

In an exchange between Ehrlich606 and Mark Van Alstine, there has been
considerable discussion over the veracity of Hoess' memoirs.  Ehrlich606
continues to doubt these memoirs.  MVA continues to accept their
genuineness.  But in quoting from Hoess' memoirs, MVA includes the
following Hoess quotation:

"Figures given by former prisoners are figments of their imagination and
have no foundation in fact.

Source: Ho"ss, _Death Dealer_; pp. 38-39.

It seems to be if we accept the genuineness of the above remark we are
also accepting the genuineness of the assertion overall.

  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri May 10 10:55:18 PDT 1996
Article: 99152 of alt.politics.correct
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.smokers,alt.politics.correct,sci.med,alt.activism,alt.conspiracy,alt.revisionism,alt.flame,alt.support.non-smokers,alt.support.asthma,alt.politics.usa.misc
Subject: Re: The Fascist Agenda of Non-smoking Health Nazis Revealed!
Date: 10 May 1996 08:02:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mvb81$cfr@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <199605090310.UAA22172@infinity.c2.org>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.smokers:30547 alt.politics.correct:99152 sci.med:95412 alt.activism:45094 alt.conspiracy:48375 alt.revisionism:35874 alt.flame:10365 alt.support.non-smokers:3383 alt.support.asthma:5788 alt.politics.usa.misc:80004

someone says:

    Is there, you ask, a parallel between the Nazi persecution of
    the Jews and the American persecution of smokers?

    Oh yes. Oh my, yes.

Ehrlich606:  I think this is far-fetched.  I don't believe that the Nazi
persecution and murder of Jews is comparable to anti-smoking campaigns. 
But I would guess that most of the "conventionalist" on the alt.rev. board
are committed anti-smokers.  It is just a gut feeling.  As for me -- I am
not going to tell you whether I smoke or not. So there!






From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri May 10 12:34:52 PDT 1996
Article: 35874 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.smokers,alt.politics.correct,sci.med,alt.activism,alt.conspiracy,alt.revisionism,alt.flame,alt.support.non-smokers,alt.support.asthma,alt.politics.usa.misc
Subject: Re: The Fascist Agenda of Non-smoking Health Nazis Revealed!
Date: 10 May 1996 08:02:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mvb81$cfr@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <199605090310.UAA22172@infinity.c2.org>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.smokers:30547 alt.politics.correct:99152 sci.med:95412 alt.activism:45094 alt.conspiracy:48375 alt.revisionism:35874 alt.flame:10365 alt.support.non-smokers:3383 alt.support.asthma:5788 alt.politics.usa.misc:80004

someone says:

    Is there, you ask, a parallel between the Nazi persecution of
    the Jews and the American persecution of smokers?

    Oh yes. Oh my, yes.

Ehrlich606:  I think this is far-fetched.  I don't believe that the Nazi
persecution and murder of Jews is comparable to anti-smoking campaigns. 
But I would guess that most of the "conventionalist" on the alt.rev. board
are committed anti-smokers.  It is just a gut feeling.  As for me -- I am
not going to tell you whether I smoke or not. So there!






From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri May 10 12:34:52 PDT 1996
Article: 35934 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.jumppoint.com!news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Goldhagen's thesis (was Re: Alternate Introductory Systems)
Date: 3 May 1996 16:53:58 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 60
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mdrp6$gev@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

To sum up:  Ehrlich606 holds that the proper atmosphere of historical
speculation should be value-free, and concerned with cause and effect to
the extent that these can be determined.  Jason Silverman -- in a post
that is much improved over prior communications -- argues that this
"German romantic Heidiggerian" concept doesn't work for everyone.  Mark
van Alstine then stepped in to suggest that ALL history much be informed
with a "moral sense" and cites in this regard John Keegan.  Both of my
opponents in this dispute suggest that value-free speculation is the true
intellectual equivalent of trading baseball cards.

Minor matters first:  Jason, for using the locution "German romantic
Heidiggerian" you are condemned to spend the weekend visualizing Martin
Heidegger and Hannah Arendt in the sack, and Mark, the formula is "to
wit."

I don't deny that our lives should be informed with a moral sense.  Nor do
I deny that history can be used for moral instruction: indeed, that is one
of its main purposes.  When I speak of the "intellectual equivalent of
trading baseball cards" I mean the extent to which kaffeeklatsch
discussions of "responsibility" have little or no relationship to the
facts of history, but are more akin to discussions of whether the 1927
Yankees were a "better" team than the 1955 Brooklyn Dodgers.  Indeed, for
those who are addicted to moral pronouncements, you will find no lack of
them in that discussion!

On the other hand, no one comes to the study of history value-free,
because we all have values.  But we must in the study of history set aside
our values in order to analyze correctly, otherwise we may inadvertently
highlight or suppress evidence which compromises a particularly cherished
notion.  When it therefore comes time to make up our mind, we must have
the integrity and honesty to ourselves to arrive at the conclusion that is
true, and never mind if it conflicts with a preconceived opinion.

On this board, however, and I have had occasion to satirize it, historical
facts are used in a discontinuous manner to score points, feel good,
confirm prejudices.  Probably it could not be otherwise on a Board.  But
that is not "historical inquiry" that IS a kaffeeklatsch.  In graduate
school, you would get thrown out of the seminar room expressing half the
overheated sentiments recorded here.  It is just not professional.  If,
when you sum up, you wish to make a moral appeal -- if you insist -- you
are supposed to use restraint.  And another lesson that I learned:  you
must never phrase a thesis that is a moral judgment -- moral judgments
cannot be tested by evidence.  You may not believe it, but 20 years ago I
was just like you two.

As for John Keegan and the "moral sense" -- in this context he is
castigating Irving for being insensitive, and for carrying the
Hitler-was-like-everyone-else theme so far as to be offensive to many. 
But Keegan's remarks, while very pious, and while an excellent exemplar of
"inclusive" history (e.g., 6 Armies in Normandy), neglects at the same
time the problem of the Soviet Union.  Furthermore,  he is clearly working
>from  an embattled position: in other words, he really thinks that how we
perceive WW2 has implications for the future of our civilization; so what
he is really saying is that Irving is irresponsible.  But this is
mythopoesis, not history, IMHO.

I can see I have already gone on too long.  I will elaborate another time.
 Regards!
  



From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri May 10 14:43:49 PDT 1996
Article: 35946 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Grand gas experiment
Date: 10 May 1996 12:29:58 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 96
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mvqu6$gh6@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mtnu8$p8j@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Subject: Re: Grand gas experiment
From: rich@c2.org (Rich Graves)
Date: 9 May 1996 14:26:32 -0700
Message-ID: <4mtnu8$p8j@Networking.Stanford.EDU>

Ehrlich606's latter comments are marked: >>>

 rich@c2.org (Rich Graves) writes: >>

ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) writes: >

>"Figures given by former prisoners are figments of their imagination and
>have no foundation in fact.
>
>Source: Ho"ss, _Death Dealer_; pp. 38-39.

>>Yes, in this case, Hoess was more or less telling the truth. As the
>>person responsible, he was in a better position to assert, as he did,
>>that some 1.2 million people were murdered in his camp, than were the
>>victims who guessed 4 million or the "revisionists" who fabricate
>>figures that are far lower. In fact, most historians have always
>>accepted figures in line with those given by Hoess. See:

>>>Two comments: how does one "guess" 4 million?  Second, who are "most"
>>>historians?  Compare Dawidowicz, Feig, and others.  At this point Rich
>>>provides an extensive quotation, from whence, I do not know:

 http://www.wiesenthal.com/resource/revision.htm#13

   13. For years, the death statistics at Auschwitz-Birkenau had been
          put at well over 3 million. Recently, however, a memorial
          plaque at the former death camp estimates Jewish losses
          closer to 1 million. Shouldn't the new figures imply that
          Jewish losses for the Holocaust are much lower than
          previously thought?

>>>This is clearly a question that sets up the response. OK, so far, so
good.

          The figure of 3-4 million murdered at Auschwitz-Birkenau was
          an invention of communist officials in Poland (and the former
          U.S.S.R.) which sought to blur the uniqueness of Jewish
          suffering at Auschwitz. To do this, they purposely overstated
          the number of non-Jewish casualties at Auschwitz-Birkenau by
          many times their true numbers. In a clever attempt to
          disguise the subterfuge, the figures for Jewish losses were
          inflated by nearly double, so that their losses would still
          be larger than those of non-Jewish victims, though now by a
          much smaller ratio. With the end of communism in Poland and
          the former Soviet Union, officials at the Auschwitz museum
          finally lowered the casualty figures in line with the
          estimates of historians who, for years, have insisted that
          between one and 1 1/2 million people perished at
          Auschwitz-Birkenau, 80 - 90% of them Jews.

>>>I would like to know who wrote this, and on what factual basis.  Who
"invented"
>>>what?  Where is the evidence that it was "invented" to "blur ...
uniqueness"?
>>>Who "purposely overstated"?  Where does this "clever attempt to
disquise
the
>>>subterfuge" come from? According to who?  Finally, some historians, by
no
>>>means all or even most, have used the cca. 1 million figure.

          The figure of 6 million Jewish losses during the Holocaust
          has always been in line with the lower Auschwitz figures.

>>>Uh huh.  I have never questioned the six million figure, but this
statement should be
>>>juxtaposed with the distributions proposed by Reitlinger, Hilberg, and
Dawidowicz.
>>>In fact, Reitlinger and Hilberg, both of whom have endorsed death tolls
at
A-B of
>>>1 million OR LESS have never accepted the six million figure, ranging
instead from
>>>2 million to 5 million.

>It seems to be if we accept the genuineness of the above remark we are
>also accepting the genuineness of the assertion overall.

No; these are completely different and often contradictory conclusions. 
It is a rather different thing to accept that someone said something
than to accept that what they said was the truth. Consider "I can prove
that he said a lie." In this case, though, Hoess wasn't lying; you are,
in suggesting that he said anything that supports revisionism.

>>>As a matter of fact, this exchange came about in the course of my
DOUBTS
>>>about Hoess' testimony.  So I am not "lying", you are just being rude. 
My
>>>copy of Mark's extract was, in fact, a tweak at his broad assertion as
to
>>>the veracity of Hoess' memoirs.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri May 10 14:43:50 PDT 1996
Article: 35947 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Zyklone B - Unlikely Agent
Date: 10 May 1996 12:30:05 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 53
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mvqud$ghi@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mtde1$s4n@mn5.swip.net>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Subject: Re: Zyklone B - Unlikely Agent
From: stephane.bruchfeld@mailbox.swipnet.se (Stephane Bruchfeld)
Date: Thu, 09 May 1996 18:29:20 GMT
Message-ID: <4mtde1$s4n@mn5.swip.net>


ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote in
<4ml7hc$oh4@newsbf02.news.aol.com>:

stephane.bruchfeld@mailbox.swipnet.se (Stephane Bruchfeld) writes back>>


[snip]

>The turning point, or so it would seem to me, is when the Germans/Nazis
>stopped killing Jews because they believed they were communists, and
>started killing them just because they were Jews -- in an ethnic or
racial
>sense.  That turning point, it seems to me, can be dated to Aktion
>Reinhardt, which naturally comes after Wannsee because it came after
>Heydrich's assassination.  And, precisely because it comes after
>Heydrich's assassination, I think one could easily suggest that the
Aktion
>took on a completely different character than originally envisioned at
the
>Wannsee Conference.

[snip]

>>A few things. AFAIK it is not established that the name of Aktion
>>Reinhard is linked to Heydrich or his assassination. Secondly, in
>>view of your theory, how do you explain the killing of (Jewish)
>>women and children by the Einsatzgruppen and related units, which
>>started in late July 1941 and went on relentlessly? Thirdly, what
>>was the purpose of the killing center at Chelmno, which began
>>operating Dec 8, 1941, one day before the originally planned date
>>of the Wannsee conference? Those killed in the first actions were
>>Jews from Kolo and neighbouring communities, men, women and
>>children. They had been born in the wrong bed, that's all. And
>>Heydrich was still alive.

Stephanie, your comments are well taken.  All I am trying to do is make
the
events fit in with the Wannsee minutes, which I consider a rock solid
document.  Generally, documentary evidence is more solid than testimony
(or
memoirs), and among documentary evidence one makes a choice for
reliability.
Again, I consider the Wannsee minutes rock solid.  So I key my
interpretation
to that.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri May 10 14:43:51 PDT 1996
Article: 35948 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Matt Giwer's Wasted Breath
Date: 10 May 1996 12:30:11 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 43
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mvquj$ghl@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4mueiq$3iqq@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


In article <4mof6h$suf@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ehrlich606@aol.com
(Ehrlich606) said:
>
>RANDOM THOUGHTS FOR MATT GIWER

>After observing this board for something like two weeks, it is obvious to
>me that no concessions about anything are going to be made here.  Now, I
>was able to vent a bit about a handful of details of the Holocaust that
>always made me roll my eyes, and, interestingly, I got several e-mails
>from people who would grant me that one or the other was probably a
>fantasy.  Eventually, all of my points were covered.

>On the other hand, no matter how mindboggling a detail may be, if it is
>mentioned in public, that is, on the board, one of the relevant experts
>who has a copy of the two to three books that comprise the source
material
>for this board will quote from the source material (usually, witness
>testimony) and that will be it -- ipse dixit.

Gord McFee lectures Ehrlich606:

>>That is quite unfair, Mr. Ehrlich.  There are far more than two or three
>>books that comprise the source material, and it is almost always *not*
>>witness testimony.  Someone as well read as you claim to be should think
a
>>little more carefully before writing.

>>>Gordon:  I know that, and you know that, so how come I keep seeing
references
>>>to the same 2 or 3 books?  Furthermore, witness testimony is the
bulwark
of
>>>explanation for frequently opaque documents.  I am suggesting that we
could have
>>>more fruitful debates and better rapport if we knew when to move on
from
entrenched
>>>positions.






From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri May 10 17:24:00 PDT 1996
Article: 35955 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!imci3!imci4!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Review of Goldhagen
Date: 10 May 1996 10:10:29 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 231
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mviol$e9b@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


Ehrlich606 notes: karlpov@access5.digex.net (Charles R.L. Power) searched
out my original review of Goldhagen, and wrote the following review, which
I quote a few excerpts and bracket my reactions thus >> (from the original
review is still: >).  I would UNDERLINE that I think that this and other
articles are precisely what this board needs more of;  Mr. Power has done
an excellent job, and although he is ad hominem here and there he is also
witty.

Ehrlich606: I saw your complaint about the collective neglect of
your review of Goldhagen's book HITLER'S WILLING EXECUTIONERS. . I hope
I'm not replowing too much well-tilled ground.

There appears to be a great deal of pretension here as to your
competence to determine what constitutes history.

>>Witty, in the context of my beginning, but vacuous.

>A review of the text indicates that it derives from post-graduate
>research.  This book came about in the following manner:
>
>1)  Goldhagen found a primary source (here, police files, and testimony
of
>forced marches) that had been underutilized.  He decided to write a book
>on the subject.
>
>2)  After reading quite a bit of this material (I hope) he chose his
>thesis, which is, stated in an extremely unrefined way, that the German
>people were willing participants in the Holocaust.  Of course, it is
quite
>possible that the thesis came before the topic selection.  verbum
sapienti
>sat.

Ehrlich606, did you neglect to read the book you reviewed or are
you simply lying about it? Goldhagen clearly explains that his
thesis predated his formal research. I would suspect that it
originated in conversations with his father, to whom he dedicated
the book. Goldhagen writes:

     The hypothesis I believed most likely to be borne out, upon
     embarking on the empirical research for this study, was that
     the perpetrators were motivated to take part in the lethal
     persecution of the Jews because of their beliefs about the
     victims, and that various German institutions were therefore
     easily able to harness the perpetrators' pre-existing
     antisemitism once Hitler gave the order to undertake the
     extermination. [p. 463]

>>I plead guilty to this one.  I perused the book in the course of a day. 
But the quote >>you provide is even more damning than my surmise: Mr.
Goldhagen obviously had >>prejudged the issue before starting.  I would
also praise Mr. Power for providing an >>extended example of Professor
Goldhagen's Spenglerian prose style.

>3)  The thesis in such a book as this is not so much a theorem to be
>proved, as it is a framework (a la Dilthey) to show in best relief the
>primary material at Goldhagen's disposal.
>
>4)  However, to make the book "durchcomponiert" or symphonic in form,
>Goldhagen repeatedly returns to his thesis before introducing some more
>primary material.

I quote these two paragraphs for the sake of completeness; they
seem to have no point beyond demonstrating what a clever fellow
you are.

>> :)  I gather you don't know what it means.

>5)  I repeat that the main purpose of a book like this is to set out the
>new research, or spotlight on primary sources.  It is not the purpose of
>this book, or most historical books, to question the veracity, or even
>methodological adequacy, of secondary sources.

Goldhagen's book does not conform to your preconception of a
"book like this". I would suggest that maybe it is not a "book
like this" and therefore should not be judged by so meaningless a
standard. Goldhagen certainly has good reason to question the
veracity of both primary and secondary sources.

>>You are missing the point here.  Goldhagen was accused of not checking
some of his >>secondary sources.  I was saying that historians who write
lay-directed books with >>National Enquirer type titles do not.  I was
actually defending Goldhagen here.

>6)  The tireless repetition of the thesis of this book, I believe, is
what
>conjures up the negative reaction: "20,000 German babies, etc."  But in
>fact, a thesis of this nature should have never gotten out of the seminar
>room.  Here's why:  it is subjective.  There is no way one can prove or
>disprove what was in the minds of average Germans, or any percentage
>thereof, at any time.  It just is not a historical question: it is a
>polemic.

Goldhagen's book refuses to conform to your narrow and
idiosyncratic definition of "history" which excludes discussion
of motivation. Of course one doesn't "prove" such things: one
considers the evidence as best one can.

>>All I can say to this is that my "narrow" and "idiosyncratic" definition
is
>>the one that was continually drummed into me in college and grad school.
>>There are many qualifications one must employ in intellectual history:
>>it is a difficult field.

>7)  A better thesis for Goldhagen, IMHO, would have been something of
this
>order:  "The Holocaust is usually described as blahblahblah, but the
>vicissitudes of the Jewish experience were much more complex than that,
in
>particular, blahblahblah, and in this book I intend to explore
>blahblahblah."

Blahblahblah indeed. Is the above paragraph supposed to mean
something?

>>Now I think you are just being rude.  I am saying that Goldhagen would
have been
>>much more successful if he had limited himself to an empirical thesis,
rather than
>>a cumbersome moving around of black boxes labelled "exterminationist"
and >>"eliminationist" ideologies.  Such hypostases are no longer
convincing to me,
>>nor are they convincing to many others.

>8)  Such subsidiary conclusions as Goldhagen arrives at are also weak in
>analysis and intuition.  For example, to argue that the marches of Jews
in
>the later days of the war were systematically arranged just to kill them
>off (not "forced marches" but "death marches") is not only borderline
>paranoid, IMHO,  but a clear case of post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Goldhagen argues his case on evidence well beyond the fact that
many Jews died on these marches: do I need to repeat his
arguments? Didn't you read the book? Are we supposed to care that
you find his conclusions "borderline paranoid"? Isn't this an
extremely strange term to use concerning mass murder?

>>Obviously, you cared enough about my conclusions to rebut them!  I am
saying 
>>that you cannot infer from the evidence that the purpose of the marches
was
>>to kill off the marchers.  It assumes that every action or decision ever
made by
>>the Germans was done with a view of furthering exterminationism, even
when
>>countervailing motives might be inferred.  That's paranoid.  Many people
died on
>>the march: no dispute.  But death march, I repeat, is post hoc ergo
propter hoc.

>9)  Furthermore, subtlety does not appear to exist in the world anymore. 
>How many Americans actively desired, at any time, the extermination of
>African-Americans?  But, particularly in the South, the attitudes of
>Whites towards Blacks was anecdotally very bad, and there is little
>documentation of Whites interfering in the maltreatment of their Black
>counterparts  (I include the ante bellum period, in my mind, here).  It
>does not follow, however, that White Southerners could be characterized
as
>"Jefferson Davis' Willing Slavemasters" or that Robert E. Lee was an evil
>man.

And yes, white Southerners, slave owners or not, could indeed be
characterized as Davis's willing slavemasters insofar as they
helped prop up the system of slavery. Nothing particularly
difficult here. Whether Robert E. Lee was an evil man is another
question altogether, and depends, obviously, on an analysis of
his motives, an area you seem to find an unacceptable subject for
research.

>>So write the book on "Davis' Willing Slavemasters" and take the heat.
>>As far as Lee is concerned, no such mitigation is normally allowed for
>>German generals.  Their motives are generally considered irrelevant.

>10)  The hostility that many Germans felt to the waves of Polish Jewish
>immigration (after the partitions in the 18th Century) is well
documented,
>and in most cases was sociological in nature.  In other words, it usually
>did not involve Blood Libels and so forth, as it did farther East.  There
>is ample reason to believe that as the Jewish population assimilated this
>hostility would have abated (remember that German Jews were very
>patriotic, and very successful in their adopted homeland).  But the
social
>upheavals in Eastern Europe post-WW1 attenuated this problem.

OK, this is a legitimate disagreement with Goldhagen. Feel free
to elaborate on your "ample reason". (It is more than a little
ridiculous to bring up Jewish assimilationism in support of this
thesis.)

>>Feel free to elaborate on why you think it is ridiculous to cite
assimilationism, unless
>>you are entranced with Goldhagen's conceptual shell game.  German Jews
were 
>>successful, patriotic, and assimilated.  Their rate of intermarriage
approached that 
>>current in the US today.  That is one reason that German Holocaust
victims were older.
>>Moreover, even the Wannsee minutes -- bestial as they are -- recognize
that 
>>exceptions should be made for German-Jewish marriages and their progeny.

>11)  German hostility towards German Jews and "Ostjuden" was fed by
>Hitler, and his propaganda machine [including Goebbels, who, I surmise,
>was of part Sinti heritage], and particularly by wartime propaganda.  But
>at no time was there acclamation for war among the Germans, let alone for
>mass murder.

Right, and Saddam Hussein never wanted war either: he just wanted
Kuwait. Really, this is simplistic beyond belief.

>>What does Saddam Hussein, a known individual, have to do with the German
People,
>>a collective entity?

>13)  Goldhagen's book represents the fruit of original research, and that
>part of the book that is original has some value.  But the framework is
>crude, ahistorical, and pointless, and the book -- like so much academic
>prose written today -- masks vulgarity of thought behind an enervating 
>facade of au courant intellectual jargon. IMHO!

You consider Goldhagen some sort of intellectual poseur. The
description is dead-on, but Goldhagen is not the one to whom it
applies. IMHO!

>>You are not the first disgruntled reader who has sought to throw my
words back at me. >>Ho Hum!  If I wrote less effectively, you would
denigrate my intelligence.  But anyway,
>>good try.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat May 11 07:56:05 PDT 1996
Article: 36114 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!insync!news.io.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Grand gas experiment
Date: 10 May 1996 12:29:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 68
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mvqtl$gh1@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4muflp$oka@news.enter.net>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Subject: Re: Grand gas experiment
From: yawen@enter.net (Yale F. Edeiken)
Date: 10 May 1996 04:11:37 GMT
Message-ID: <4muflp$oka@news.enter.net>

>   ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) writes:

>>and then YFE wrote:

>  Ehrlich606 responds:  No problem here with Joe McCarthy's lack of
>  credibility.  What I am saying is that most historians on the Battle of
>  the Bulge reference the beatings as mitigating on the trials.

>>Please name them and name the primary source material that they 
>>used.   Lucius Clay states in his autobiography "Decision in Germany"
that,
although >>allegations of physical  brutality were made, there was no
evidence of it  Their >>conclusion was that the charges were unfounded.

OK, YFE. You have a deal: I will do something I am loath to do, I will
actually go out and try to buttress my assertions.  I do this because I
respect you, and because you have treated me honorably!  It may take a few
days ... keep posted.  BTW, understand that my lack of access to sources
leads me to make unfounded assertions all the time. But I assume that one
of
the guys with sources at their fingertips will confirm, deny, or fine-tune
what I say.  Well, I can't help it!  But see below ...

>>What was established was that there were some shady tactics used to 
>>break the "conspiracy of silence" and extract confessions.  Neither Clay
nor the 
>>commission that investigated the events deny this and, in fact, commuted
an

>>number of sentences because of the irregularities.  I suggest that
either
you
>>misremember what those historians wrote ...

It is possible I misremembered some things.  But this seems odd:
allegations
of beatings are made, there is no evidence, but there are "shady tactics"
used to extract confessions, such that, even though the confessions are
not
in doubt, a number of sentences are commuted?  Hmm!  Seems to me that my
point -- that German soldiers in Western Allied captivity ALSO might
possibly
be pressured (not just those in Soviet tender mercies) -- is now a given.
    
>  The point is that beatings and enforced confessions has been alleged
>  against Western Allies in their treatment of Nazis.  And regular old
>  military historians believe these allegations, or at least believe that
>  the allegations compromise confessions and/or testimony.

>>When I researched this question I found no "historians" who stated 
>>that they believe these allegations or even stated that the confessions
were 
>>anything but accurate (unless, of course, you consider Lyin' Al Baron a
>>historian, but I don't think you do).  Please name them so that we can
see
what you're 
>>talking about.

As I said, I will check it out.  Keep this string live.  As for Al Baron,
no,
I wasn't thinking of him.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat May 11 07:56:05 PDT 1996
Article: 36122 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!insync!news.io.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: medium, raw, well done?
Date: 10 May 1996 14:25:07 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 8
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4n01m3$ige@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Danny Keren writes:

I see that our crazed "revisionists" are now claiming that 300 Kg
of coke are required to burn one corpse(!!).

Ehrlich interjects:  would that be the new coke or the old coke?




From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun May 12 12:05:33 PDT 1996
Article: 36446 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: 960505: Jamie's response acked; Toronto conference on postwar occupation
Date: 12 May 1996 12:37:40 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4n544k$7qe@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4n4oof$1tj@boris.eden.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

From: mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis)
Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 13:23:31 GMT
Message-ID: <4n4oof$1tj@boris.eden.com>

ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote:

>Ehrlich606 surveys the crime scene and provides a rueful chronology:

>1> Someone  says the Allies had “truth & justice” on their sides in WW2

>2>Ehrlich606 is angered by this, because he thinks, in general, that the 
>Allies, and particularly the Soviets, were not THAT much better than the
>Nazis.

 mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis)

Please point out to us all what the allies did that was comparible to
murdering 12 million non-combatants under a government program in WW2.

Ehrlich606 responds:  Not to get into this again, but the Soviet Union
murdered an approximate number of people, including perhaps 12 million
ofits own citizens in the examined period, 1927-1947 (lucky for you I am
not bringing up the Russian Civil War), but strangely, no one believes
that the denial of this augurs the collapse of Western Civilization.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun May 12 17:03:30 PDT 1996
Article: 36493 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Szymon Serafinowicz
Date: 12 May 1996 14:40:19 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4n5baj$a7l@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4n1rvs$su7@mimas.brunel.ac.uk>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

I understand this to mean that an 85 year old Belarussian, named Szymon
Serafinowicz, is about to be put on trial for murders which may or may not
have occurred over 50 years ago.  This too is a triumph!

Of course, hundreds of thousands of individuals left the generalized
region of the Western Soviet Union after WW2 to settle in the UK, USA and
elsewhere, and I am sure that some committed crimes in HItler's name, just
as some committed crimes in Stalin's name.  But I have never heard of any
push for prosecution of members of the latter group.  So much for the
self-anointed guardians of truth and justice.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun May 12 17:03:30 PDT 1996
Article: 36515 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!gatech!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads
Subject: Re: Aryan = Indo-European = White (was: Hasselbach lied)
Date: 12 May 1996 15:32:10 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4n5ebr$b6g@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4n0r3n$3vc@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:28434 alt.politics.nationalism.white:19735 alt.discrimination:46779 alt.revisionism:36515 alt.skinheads:22838


qut@netcom.com (Dave Harman) writes:

>		God grant me the serenity
>		to accept the things I cannot change
>		the courage to change the things I can
>		and the wisdom to know the difference

I think you should try another poem, Dave.

-rich

How about:

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change
the courage to change the things that I can
and the wisdom to hide the bodies of those people
I had to kill because they really pissed me off.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 13 06:28:09 PDT 1996
Article: 36574 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!sgigate.sgi.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: UFO and Cultural Anxiety
Date: 12 May 1996 23:27:03 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 108
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4n6a67$ld2@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com



It is a truism that growth of insight in a particular discipline can be
brought about by  other studies  which provide concepts which, when
applied to problems of the original discipline,  may, or may not, clarify
problems in that discipline.  For example, Stanley Elkins  well known book
on the psychology of slaves was indebted as least in part to psychological
speculations on concentration camp inmates.

Recently, and perhaps for some time before that, there has been discussion
of  UFOs and the Holocaust.  If I am covering old ground, direct me, but I
recently saw the following text which I reproduce here:

The influence of culture and personal belief lend some
credence to the second group of theories that hold that encounters involve
no literal external agents ... but are exteriorizations of the
unconscious.  The encounter is said to happen when the unconscious deems a
flight from reality necessary to relieve stress.  The individual
experiences a depersonalization and identifies with a culturally
acceptable model.  The unconscious decides what kind of encounter will
take place. ...

However, cultural and personal beliefs play a powerful
role in shaping the nature of an encounter and one s interpretation of it.
 Thus the Devil in the Middle Ages perhaps becomes the UFO related Man in
Black of modern times....

Research shows that some individuals are more likely to
have encounters with alternate realities than are others .... The most
significant factor seems to be excessive stress ....

Source: Harper s Encyclopedia of Mystical and Paranormal Experience,
Rosemary Ellen Guiley, p. 181ff.


The above may be useful to an intelligent and responsible attempt to
account for some vagaries in the Holocaust story.

But one thing that is clear to me is that Nazism has assumed a psychic
role in the general furniture layout of our culture analogous to medieval
concepts of Evil.  I do not think it is an accident, for example, that
Darth Vader wears an oversized coal scuttle helmet.  And of course there
is the standard fare of supermarket novels, which are always exploring
some kind of Devil-Nazi association.  Of course, it would follow that an
attempt to view National Socialism, and yes, its crimes, in a clearer
light would require suspension of judgment in what is now the socially
accepted locus of Evil.  It would also explain why the comparable crimes
of Stalinist Russia have no such impact on people s thinking overall: the
sinister iconography is absent.

Further developments of the train of thought:  Every culture has to have a
barometer of what constitutes Evil.  During most of Christianity that
locus was the Devil, with variously identified agents: Jews, witches,
Freemasons, Jesuits, and so forth.  With the development of the first
spiritual crisis after the Enlightenment, abstract spiritualist enemies
became replaced with concrete biologistic enemies: again, Jews, but also
Blacks, and also Asians (remember the Yellow Peril?  -- I request input on
this).  I do not think it is an accident that these  enemies  defined in
these ways arose simultaneously with non-resurrection spirituality and
agressive nationalism.  Compare Theosophy, Mme. Blavatsky, Spiritualism,
and so forth.  

If the latter hypotheses are correct, an attempt to regard National
Socialism as just another ideology, Hitler as just another politician,
Germany as just another country -- even with full acknowledgement of their
crimes, and responsibility -- will likely be met with an irrational anger
and fury comparable to challenging one s basic faiths.   This may seem
absurd: but we know that millions went to there deaths in earlier times
over questions such as the Thesaurus of Merit of the Procession of  the
Holy Spirit.

But the most fascinating aspect of all this as far as I am concerned is
the extent to which irrational fears over the rapid changes to Western
Society may have affected our basic view of the Holocaust. Characteristics
of industrial society that were quite fearful to Western Societies were, I
believe, at the root of the Yellow Peril.  Anonymity, loss of identity, 
serving the shapes  in Pirsig s well-known phrase, sinister machines that
no one understood, but which one tended in a senseless and irrational way,
a fundamental dissociation of function and responsibility, and giant
machines which remorselessly consumed people -- these were characteristics
of many dystopias of the early 20th Century, and which were magnificently
translated to film by Fritz Lang in his  Metropolis  (1925).  They are
also features of modern civilization that are troubling -- in less
spectacular language -- to many people.

I do not think it is an accident that it is precisely these
characteristics of the Holocaust that are most often stressed, and
perhaps, over stressed.  After all, the Holocaust was a many faceted
reality.  This is clear to anyone who reads the testimony, and the
hundreds of survivor accounts that are available.  And yet the story
always comes back to Auschwitz, an archetypal factory that exists for no
other reason than to drain its workers and ultimately consume them in
fire.  I submit that it is for these reasons -- rather than any body count
-- that Auschwitz holds such an important position in the mindset of both
Jews and Gentiles.  It was a fact, but it is also an archetype and a
warning.   It is the secular Calvary of industrial civilization.


copyright Ehrlich606 1996











From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 13 06:28:10 PDT 1996
Article: 36611 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!news.sover.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hebrew Numerology
Date: 12 May 1996 19:51:33 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 51
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4n5ti5$g4j@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4n58v9$94k@news.enter.net>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

YFE has expounded on rates of Jewish Population growth, inspired by Dan
Mittleman's first foray into this field:

Ehrlich606 compulsively blathers:

Further on the subject of putative Jewish pop stats being higher than
Gentile pop stats:

If the population stats for Jews are radically different, we could
hypothesize different medical practices.  Some other possibilities:

1)  I am currently trying to find the time to work out a little theory of
racism as a function of social position.  If it is right, it could explain
that the Jewish population could increase to the extent that the social
demand for a mercantilist, administrative class would increase.

For example, much is made of the traditional Jewish frowning on interfaith
marriages, and also on the concept of matrilineal descent as defining
Jewishness.  The latter concept -- matrilineal descent -- is, to my mind a
matter of cultural survival.  For example, after Prussia obtained Polish
lands, they forbid Polish speaking women from marrying German men, but
they did not forbid German women from marrying Polish men.  Reason? 
Because they knew that children imbibe their language and their culture
>from  their mother.  That, among other reasons, is why the most able German
general in WW2 was Erich von Lewitsky, better known by his adopted surname
of "Manstein."

As this would pertain to Jews, I have it from Lucy Dawidowicz' books that
it was comparatively ok for a non-Jewish male to marry a Jewish girl, so
long as the children were raised Jewish.  This is anecdotally true in many
of our families, and also explains the obvious fact that Jews in several
instances are hardly distinguishable in appearance form their non Jewish
peers.

The overall point in this ramble is that the concept of "Jewish" was
sufficiently elastic that it could adjust populations without these
necessarily hinging on low Jewish birth mortalities.

2)  Messianic Judaism:  there are breakdowns and shifts in the EE Jewish
community cca. 1650 with the odyssey of Sabbatai Zvi.  Perhaps one of
these, Hassidism, had something to do with increasing birth rates? 
Anecdotally, it would seem to make sense. Someone dig this up!

3)  Who's counting?  Jewishness, at least in part, is a subjective
concept.  Objectively, there are many indices one could use in determining
a Jewish population.  Therefore, at times when pop stats are discontinuous
one should ask what the definitions were to the census takers.

--- Altogether this is worthy topic for discussion on Mother's Day!




From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 13 09:24:51 PDT 1996
Article: 36641 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Nizkor searching
Date: 13 May 1996 09:44:24 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 59
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4n7ebo$1d8@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4n7gec$nd4@cnn.cc.biu.ac.il>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


DvdThomas (dvdthomas@aol.com) wrote:
: G. McFee writes:

: >That's *Mr.* McFee, Mr. Thomas.  And unlike you and Mr. Ehrlich, I post
: >under my real name.  Why don't you?

: And what in hell makes you think that we don't. . .

Richard Schultz:

Well, for starters, Mr. Ehrlich606's own claim that he was posting under
a pseudonym.  (And how clever he thought that pseudonym was -- I guess
it's somewhat less clever to those of us familiar with the Nazi "Jews
as bacilli" propaganda.)

Next question.

Ehrlich606's voice emanates from his dictaphone:

The comments of Richard Schultz are a classic example of the kind of
projections that seem to find themselves festooned around my name.  I will
now provide Enlightenment, since it is often claimed that it was a lack of
same that caused the event that caused this board. (Is this starting to
sound like one of those Hebrew cumulative memory rhymes?)

When I first got on to America On Line some months ago, I sought to go by
my real name (this was before I started getting admiring e-mail, thus
necessitating, for the sake of family harmony, a permanent series of
pseudonyms.)  As I had my name punched in, the system kept refusing to
accept it, abbreviation of my name with several digits following.  Roaming
through the world of chat I noted that many of the inhabitants therein had
had their surnames truncated and "digitized" as well. 

When I elected to go underground, I thought what names I might go by. 
Unfortunately, most of the individuals I admire had either just ordinary
names, or names already taken, or names which the system would not accept.
 I then thought of the German-Jewish physician, who I had always admired,
and whose healing art culminated in his 606th preparation for syphilis,
which was later marketed as "Salvarsan", and which was the first reliably
effective cure for that disease.  The system accepted the name, and I
thought that was pretty clever, insofar as people usually just assume my
name is Ehrlich and that AOL added the extra digits.

In the context of this board, I think the nom de cyber very appropriate. 
Ehrlich was a highly assimilated German Jew, a patriot, and a healer. 
Without over-idealizing the picture, he was a perfect representative of
the best of both cultures, and of their symbiosis.  How much we could use
to be reminded of that fructifying period for both peoples!  And again, he
combatted syphilis, a disease oft referenced as metaphor of the hatreds
that engendered so much killing and destruction in 20th Century Europe.

Mr. Schultz, OTOH, has chosen to see something else in my name, and I
would certainly conclude that he does not think much of me!  But as is the
case with most projections, his derivation of my name tells us more about
him than about me.





From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 13 10:02:53 PDT 1996
Article: 10365 of alt.flame
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.smokers,alt.politics.correct,sci.med,alt.activism,alt.conspiracy,alt.revisionism,alt.flame,alt.support.non-smokers,alt.support.asthma,alt.politics.usa.misc
Subject: Re: The Fascist Agenda of Non-smoking Health Nazis Revealed!
Date: 10 May 1996 08:02:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4mvb81$cfr@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <199605090310.UAA22172@infinity.c2.org>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.smokers:30547 alt.politics.correct:99152 sci.med:95412 alt.activism:45094 alt.conspiracy:48375 alt.revisionism:35874 alt.flame:10365 alt.support.non-smokers:3383 alt.support.asthma:5788 alt.politics.usa.misc:80004

someone says:

    Is there, you ask, a parallel between the Nazi persecution of
    the Jews and the American persecution of smokers?

    Oh yes. Oh my, yes.

Ehrlich606:  I think this is far-fetched.  I don't believe that the Nazi
persecution and murder of Jews is comparable to anti-smoking campaigns. 
But I would guess that most of the "conventionalist" on the alt.rev. board
are committed anti-smokers.  It is just a gut feeling.  As for me -- I am
not going to tell you whether I smoke or not. So there!






From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 13 13:56:29 PDT 1996
Article: 36695 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: New Holocaust History Revisionist?
Date: 13 May 1996 15:31:10 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 18
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4n82lu$789@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4n81o4$6tn@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com


New Holocaust History Revisionist?

	
	A professor of history (if he can be believed) wrote a review in
the
Houston "Comical" Newspaper about Daniel Goldhagen's Hitler's Willing
Executioners: Ordinary Germans & the Holocaust - and actually mentioned
the Jewish historian Simon Dubnow (internet historians never heard of
him).

Ehrlich606 replies:  I have indeed heard of him.  He was the mystery
historian of a week ago, who, I informed the group, cried out, "Yidn,
farschreibt!" as he was led into Nazi custody. 

NB: the phrase may be most accurately translated as, "Jews, write it
down!" because alternate translations, like, "Jews, take notes!" or "Jews,
record!" sound alternately silly or anachronistic.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 13 13:56:30 PDT 1996
Article: 36703 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!imci3!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!lexis-nexis!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hebrew Numerology
Date: 13 May 1996 14:21:46 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 33
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4n7ujq$5v2@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <31976680.267814@news.pacificnet.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <31976680.267814@news.pacificnet.net>, tm@pacificnet.net (tom
moran) writes:

>Subject:	Re: Hebrew Numerology
>From:	tm@pacificnet.net (tom moran)
>Date:	Mon, 13 May 1996 16:42:44 GMT
>
>
>
>
>jal5266@is.nyu.edu (Jeremy A. Litt) wrote:
>
>>Well, since the major flaw in your mathematics has been posted 4 times,
>>and since you continue to psot the original error-filled caluclation
>>anyhow, what are you looking for?  If you cannot understand basic math,
>>and don't want to learn, why should he be your teacher?
>
>	"Four times" you say?
>
>
I would just point out for what it is worth that the 7.5 fold increase in
Jewish population as per Ruppin comes out to about 1% increase per year,
which is no big deal.  Again, I haven't consulted the statistics in some
time, but there were large population increases in the period 1650-1750
Europe wide (one of the contributing factors to urbanization and nascent
Industrial Revolution), several factors could be cited including the
increase in cheap staples (maize, potatoes) on the continent.

Another big increase comes in the first half of the 19th Century which can
be tilted to cheap staples, vaccines, and general growth of industrial
economies and associated trade (children are a function of marriage,
marriage is a function of economic prosperity, etc.)



From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 13 19:58:56 PDT 1996
Article: 36763 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!news.ece.uc.edu!babbage.ece.uc.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.flint.umich.edu!news.gmi.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: 960505: Jamie's response acked; Toronto conference on postwar occupation
Date: 12 May 1996 15:58:49 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 80
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4n5ftp$bls@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4n5aqo$57c@boris.eden.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Subject: Re: 960505: Jamie's response acked; Toronto conference on postwar
occupation
From: mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis)
Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 18:31:59 GMT
Message-ID: <4n5aqo$57c@boris.eden.com>

ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote:

>From: mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis)
>Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 13:23:31 GMT
>Message-ID: <4n4oof$1tj@boris.eden.com>

>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote:

: mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis)>> wrote:

>>Ehrlich606 surveys the crime scene and provides a rueful chronology:

>>1> Someone  says the Allies had “truth & justice” on their sides in WW2

>>2>Ehrlich606 is angered by this, because he thinks, in general, that the

>>Allies, and particularly the Soviets, were not THAT much better than the
>>Nazis.

> mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis)

>Please point out to us all what the allies did that was comparible to
>murdering 12 million non-combatants under a government program in WW2.

>Ehrlich606 responds:  Not to get into this again, but the Soviet Union
>murdered an approximate number of people, including perhaps 12 million
>ofits own citizens in the examined period, 1927-1947 (lucky for you I am
>not bringing up the Russian Civil War), but strangely, no one believes
>that the denial of this augurs the collapse of Western Civilization.

>>And how does this white wash the Nazis for invading borders outside of
>>her juristictions and cleaning those countries of those they found to
>>be untermench? You know Jews, Gypies and the like.

First of all, I am not whitewashing anything.  The uniqueness of the
Holocaust I articulated elsewhere.  The Soviets invaded borders outside
their jurisdiction, and cleaned those countries of class enemies.  The
only difference is that they defined their class enemies by economic
status and ideology rather than by race -- most of the time.

>> Sure the Russians
>>were stupid and insensitive to the conditions of certain of her
>>peoples. This was true before 1927. The 1921 famine was pretty
>>horrible, but it doesn't appear that this was done because they were
>>jews. It appears it was done, according to both Pipes and Heller &
>>Nekrich that there was a belief that the farmers were holding back for
>>themselves. 

Well, that sounds about two steps removed from the argument that the Nazis
were just stupid and insensitive and only killed the Jews because they
thought they were holding back for themselves.  That IS a whitewash.

>>What you are doing here is what deniers tend to do. What is done first
>>is to trivialize the Holocaust in all its aspects by trying to equate
>>it with another authoritarian regime. What is says is that the
>>authortian regimes are bad stuff and says nothing about the
>>anti-Semitism that brought about the Holocaust of the Nazis. 
>>Numbers is not the issue, Mr. Ehrlich606, but the government
>>involvement in the distruction of selected groups of people that has a
>>method and erroneous rational behind it.

Your sensitivity to "trivialization" means that you have no interest in
understanding the Holocaust in terms of Modern European history overall,
IMHO.  If you want to say that anti-semitism is bad, fine.  But if you
want to say that it is worse to murder millions because of anti-semitism
than to murder millions because they are "class enemies" you have not only
lost me, you have lost most others.

If numbers are not the issue, why did you bring them up?







From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 13 19:58:57 PDT 1996
Article: 36768 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: 960505: Jamie's response acked; Toronto conference on postwar occupation
Date: 13 May 1996 20:34:27 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 94
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4n8kej$div@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4n7qgd$r62@hackberry.zilker.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4n7qgd$r62@hackberry.zilker.net>, mike@aimetering.com (Mike
Curtis) writes:

>Subject:	Re: 960505: Jamie's response acked; Toronto conference on
postwar
>occupation
>From:	mike@aimetering.com (Mike Curtis)
>Date:	Mon, 13 May 1996 17:11:06 GMT
>
>yawen@enter.net (Yale F. Edeiken) wrote:
>
>>>   mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis) writes:
 
>>>  >Ehrlich606:  No, they sound like the words of someone who tells the
>truth
>>>  >as he knows it.  You cannot attribute denial to someone who does not
>>>  >explicitly engage the issue.  Otherwise in your attempt to acquire
>>>  >universal assent you violate my dignity.  I go out of my way not to
>>>  >ridicule others, attribute motives, or call people names.  Therefore
it
>is
>>>  >simply impolite and irrelevant for you to call me names.
>>>  
>>>  Oh bull corn. I've seen you attack the person many times here. But if
>>>  you noticed that I was commenting on the words Mr. ? 
>>  
>>>  Is this an attempt to play further games? Are we straddling the fence
>>>  here. What's the end to this means?
>
>>	I have had several e-mail exhanges with the anonymus Ehrlich606
and 
>>he is clearly not a denier of the Holocaust.  Rather he seems to me to
be an
>
>>extreme "functionalist;" that is a person like Arno Mayer who believes
that
>the 
>>program of murder carried out by the nazis was not an planned and
organized 
>>program but one that just grew, in an almost haphazard manner.  Although
>most 
>>of the posters here are "intentionalists" (although not all of the
extreme 
>>variety) there is much to be said for the "functionalist" position.
>
>And yet I should save off some of his more ridiculous statements.
>There are those suggesting that the gas chambers were showers. There
>are equating Soviet atrocities with the Nazis. If he doesn't want to
>be seen as a denier then he should be allowing us to guess his
>positions as you are doing here. I've seen the "functionalist"
>position put forth in a much better manner. It is also NOT made up of
>a bunch of fence riding. 

I can see in your frenzy to get me that you are starting to misrepresent
what I said.  At this point, with your bullying tone and your go-to-pieces
grammar and spelling because I won't utter whatever magic formula you
think I should, I can guarantee that on general principles alone I am not
going to say what you want me to say.

As for the showers: that is self evident.  In Dachau, and Auschwitz. 
According to the conventionalists, that is how the program proceeded. 
According to the revisionists, that is why the whole thing is a lie. 
Precisely because these rooms could serve as bomb shelters, showers,
morgues, and gas chambers -- maybe even all four at different times.  I am
not the one who created ambiguity here.

>
>Maybe I'm wrong for taking his posts as a whole and not reading him
>thread by thread. It is also true that I've dealt with this kind of
>"they all were guilty of war crimes so what makes the Nazis so bad"
>argument before. This isn't debating the actuality of the Holocaust
>either. It also leads to Hitler washing.

I have to admit that I don't see much difference between Stalinist Russia
and Nazi Germany.  Soviet historians make lots of excuses, the same
excuses that "revisionists" make for Germans.  The only difference is that
generally speaking Soviet historians get away with them.  I once read a
book that argued that the GULAG served an economic function, insofar as it
broke a labor bottleneck in the beginning and later acted as a spur to the
economy.  Imagine someone writing a book like that about the Nazi
concentration camp system!  Pandemonium!
>
>>	Overall, however, I feel that you are being unfair to the position
he has 
>>stated.
>
>Maybe. We will see. I've seen this tactic before and it is running
>true to form. I told what's his name that I would hold back. This was
>10 May 1996. Post prior to that time will be very sceptical. 
>
Don't hold your breath.  Your belligerent threats are wearing thin.  Call
me what you will.  Everyone else will consider the source.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 13 21:57:49 PDT 1996
Article: 36779 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: 960505: Jamie's response acked; Toronto conference on postwar occupation
Date: 13 May 1996 20:47:17 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 141
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4n8l6l$dub@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4n7rd1$rh8@hackberry.zilker.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4n7rd1$rh8@hackberry.zilker.net>, mike@aimetering.com (Mike
Curtis) writes:

>Subject:	Re: 960505: Jamie's response acked; Toronto conference on
postwar

>>>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote:
>
>>: mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis)>> wrote:
>
>>>>Ehrlich606 surveys the crime scene and provides a rueful chronology:
>
>>>>1> Someone  says the Allies had “truth & justice” on their sides in
WW2
>
>>>>2>Ehrlich606 is angered by this, because he thinks, in general, that
the
>
>>>>Allies, and particularly the Soviets, were not THAT much better than
the
>>>>Nazis.
>
>>> mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis)
>
>>>Please point out to us all what the allies did that was comparible to
>>>murdering 12 million non-combatants under a government program in WW2.
>
>>>Ehrlich606 responds:  Not to get into this again, but the Soviet Union
>>>murdered an approximate number of people, including perhaps 12 million
>>>ofits own citizens in the examined period, 1927-1947 (lucky for you I
am
>>>not bringing up the Russian Civil War), but strangely, no one believes
>>>that the denial of this augurs the collapse of Western Civilization.
>
>>>>And how does this white wash the Nazis for invading borders outside of
>>>>her juristictions and cleaning those countries of those they found to
>>>>be untermench? You know Jews, Gypies and the like.
>
>>First of all, I am not whitewashing anything.  The uniqueness of the
>>Holocaust I articulated elsewhere.  The Soviets invaded borders outside
>>their jurisdiction, and cleaned those countries of class enemies.  The
>>only difference is that they defined their class enemies by economic
>>status and ideology rather than by race -- most of the time.
>
>So what they did is equal to the Nazis in your view. I'm not familiar
>with soviet history so these generalizations need filling out for me.
>What economic basis and what ideology? What were these groups and how
>were they identified?
>
The Soviets generally defined their class enemies on ideological and
economic grounds.  For example, the first class marked at the time of the
1927 Five Year Plan were the 'kulaks'.  A 'kulak' etymologically is a
"fist" the semantic association being "tight fisted".  Basically, any
peasant who was successful (and there were several particularly after the
NEP period) was bound to be regarded as a 'kulak' by someone who was less
well off.  To the city dwellers, every peasant farmer was a potential
'kulak'.  During the full swing of the attempt to collectivize the
countryside, 'kulak' families were slaughtered indiscriminately, but what
that really meant was that anyone above subsistence level agriculture was
done in.  In the Ukraine, this encompassed millions.

The example of the 'kulaks' I think is very relevant to the persecution of
the Jews.  First of all, the cliches were the same: tight fisted, greedy,
hoarding, not community oriented.  Secondly, their economic positions were
such that they were both the easy target for economic resentment (compare
stereotypes of Jews controlling wealth in Germany).  The ONLY difference
between the two is that the kulaks were defined purely economically.  The
Jews were defined by RACE, but their socio-economic position USUALLY
coincided with one analogous to that of the kulaks.  It is for reasons
like these that  I look at Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union side by side.
 
In addition, the Soviets targeted "reactionaries" under several labels,
which usually meant middle class, or intellectual, or educated types. 
Compare also the socio-economic reality for many Jews.  Nationalists among
any subject nation also fell under this rubric, since any ideology other
than the one of "Soviet Man" was obviously not progressive and needed to
be expunged.

Finally, under the aegis of "cosmopolitanism" Stalin would turn against
his own Jews, and this was the stuff of the later party purges, and such
oddities as the Doctor's Plot which surfaced shortly before his death.

>
>>>> Sure the Russians
>>>>were stupid and insensitive to the conditions of certain of her
>>>>peoples. This was true before 1927. The 1921 famine was pretty
>>>>horrible, but it doesn't appear that this was done because they were
>>>>jews. It appears it was done, according to both Pipes and Heller &
>>>>Nekrich that there was a belief that the farmers were holding back for
>>>>themselves. 
>
>>Well, that sounds about two steps removed from the argument that the
Nazis
>>were just stupid and insensitive and only killed the Jews because they
>>thought they were holding back for themselves.  That IS a whitewash.
>
>That's not what I said. I resent you putting words in what I said. I
>was speaking ONLY of the RUSSIANS and only they are the subject of the
>sentence above. If you want to be treated with respect I suggest you
>refrain from such stupid tactics as the one you just performed here.
>You also failed to address the point. According the historians above
>there was a flurry of letters between the Governor of these farming
>areas and Stalin trying to inform him of the actual conditions and
>also to inform him that his insights were incorrect. This IS
>historical fact. Why don't you attempt to deal with those facts as
>reported by TWO sets of historians. 

First of all, you have never treated me with respect.  Secondly, I am not
interested in Soviet excuses.  I am not even particularly interested in
German excuses.  I am interested in explanations.  
>
>>>>What you are doing here is what deniers tend to do. What is done first
>>>>is to trivialize the Holocaust in all its aspects by trying to equate
>>>>it with another authoritarian regime. What is says is that the
>>>>authortian regimes are bad stuff and says nothing about the
>>>>anti-Semitism that brought about the Holocaust of the Nazis. 
>>>>Numbers is not the issue, Mr. Ehrlich606, but the government
>>>>involvement in the distruction of selected groups of people that has a
>>>>method and erroneous rational behind it.
>
>>Your sensitivity to "trivialization" means that you have no interest in
>>understanding the Holocaust in terms of Modern European history overall,
>>IMHO.  If you want to say that anti-semitism is bad, fine.  But if you
>>want to say that it is worse to murder millions because of anti-semitism
>
>This is a holocuast-revisionist conference. This is not a Russians are
>bad folks for they did the same things too. The tactic I see here is
>that you want to show that man can be cruel for various reasons. To
>me, the history shows that there differences between the Russians
>activities and the Nazis. But this is not an issue for alt.revisionism
>as I see it. Why you want to correlate soviet atrocities here in this
>conference is beyond me when that isn't even the purpose of this
>conference. If I'm wrong then I am clearly misunderstanding the
>purpose of this conference.
>
You can lie in wait and entertain your heroic fantasies about exposing
Nazis who are trying to hide underneath rocks, and I will try to write
posts that might lead to some THINKING around here.  In my three weeks
here, I have seen nothing original from you, only carping and baiting.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue May 14 05:03:19 PDT 1996
Article: 36796 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Hoess Memoir and 'Revisionist' Insanity
Date: 13 May 1996 20:20:38 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 82
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4n8jkm$d7q@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4n7qj3$i2l@panix2.panix.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4n7qj3$i2l@panix2.panix.com>, rakshasa@panix.com (Kevin Filan)
writes:

>Subject:	Re: The Hoess Memoir and 'Revisionist' Insanity
>From:	rakshasa@panix.com (Kevin Filan)
>Date:	13 May 1996 13:13:07 -0400
>
>In article <831753131snz@abaron.demon.co.uk>,
>Alexander Baron   wrote:
>
>>In article  dkeren@world.std.com "Daniel
Keren"
>writes:
>>
>>> 1) The Soviet POW's in Auschwitz behaved like a herd of animals.
>>>    Hoess writes that they practiced cannibalism, and often killed
>>>    each other for a piece of bread.
>>
>>This is the sort of thing a communist would like a Nazi to write. The
same
>>way certain Jews like to claim that I - and other Revisionists - deny
that
>>concentration camps existed, or the way that certain "anti-racists"
claim
>>that all white nationalists are vicious foaming at the mouth anti-black
>bigots.
>>One can find examples of this in the agents provocateurs Organised Jewry
and
>>their fellow travellers employ.
>
>	In other words, you believe that Ho"ss was forced to testify 
>about cannibalism among Soviet POWs so that the Soviet populace would get

>angry at Nazis? But wouldn't it make more sense for the Soviets to force 
>him to make flowery speeches about "the heroism of Soviet POWs when faced

>with all manner of degradation," etc.? 

As a matter of fact, Soviet POW's were viewed quite badly by the communist
authorities.  Remember?  The victorious Allies repatriated many, and many
of these were shot out of hand.  Therefore, on this particular point, a
characterization of Russian POW's as undisciplined cannibals would have
suited the Soviet leadership quite nicely.

>>> Hoess also writes that -
>>> 
>>> 2) The Polish inmates were constantly engaged in violent clashes
>>>    among themselves, while trying to reach a higher status in the
>>>    inmate hierarchy. He even says that many of them intentionally
>>>    infected others with spotted fever and typhus, which resulted
>>>    in the death of the infected person.
>>
>>Actually, Garlinski makes this claim too; I see no reason for Hoess to
have
>>known this.

>	Hard to imagine the Kommandant of a prison camp knowing anything 
>about conditions among the inmates, isn't it?  

Once again, while holding in abeyance the veracity of the ENTIRE Hoess
memoirs, the points above are not necessarily wrong.  First of all,
Russians hate Poles (and vice versa).  For a description of why this is
so, consult Freud's "Civilization and its Discontents" where he talks
about the "narcissism of minor differences."  Secondly, it is not
surprising that Polish-Russian Jews would hate Poles.  Indeed, on an
anecdotal level I have heard many anti-Polish remarks from Jews of East
European origin.  Beyond that, Garlinski is not a particularly reliable
author, IMHO.  

>
>	Mr. Baron: the Soviet propaganda I've encountered has, for the 
>most part, tried to _idealize_ the communists in every way.  Talking 
>about Polish inmates "fighting among themselves" and Russian inmates 
>"killing each other for crusts of bread" and practicing cannibalism -- 
>that's hardly something a Stalinist would come up with, unless he had a 
>secret craving to visit his relatives in Siberia.  

See above! Furthermore, the Polish inmates would not have been communists.
 They would have been anti-communists, like the ones who rose up against
the Germans in August 1944 only to have the Soviets stall on the far banks
of the Vistula.
>


From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue May 14 05:03:20 PDT 1996
Article: 36858 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: UFO and Cultural Anxiety
Date: 14 May 1996 07:25:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 177
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4n9qjl$o3u@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4n6fns$bph@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4n6fns$bph@Networking.Stanford.EDU>, rich@c2.org (Rich Graves)
writes:

>Subject:	Re: UFO and Cultural Anxiety
>From:	rich@c2.org (Rich Graves)
>Date:	12 May 1996 22:01:48 -0700
>
>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) writes:
>>But one thing that is clear to me is that Nazism has assumed a psychic
>>role in the general furniture layout of our culture analogous to
medieval
>>concepts of Evil.  I do not think it is an accident, for example, that
>>Darth Vader wears an oversized coal scuttle helmet.
>
>True, but I believe you're putting the cart before the horse. When
>something is evil, its symbology becomes synonymous with evil. Few can
>look at the swastika today without associating it with an evil purpose.
>This is how the swastika, which originally meant something else, is used
>today -- by all sides. It is no coincidence that Ernst Zundel and the
>Heritage Front choose symbols strongly reminiscent of the Nazi swastika.
>
Yes, as a matter of fact the swastika (Hakenkreuz, or hooked cross in
German) was a ubiquitous symbol in excavations of the original Aryans in
Northern India.  And of course you are familiar with the Indo-European or
Indo-Germanic family of languages.  Lithuanian bears a very close
phonology to Sanskrit (to a lesser extent: Ancient Greek), and in the late
19th C. it was believed that the "original" Aryans came from there.  You
can find large volumes from Lithuanian antiquarian societies from the time
with large swastikas on the binding -- they have nothing to do with what
we think of.  And, BTW, who came from the Baltic?  Alfred Rosenberg.

>>And of course there
>>is the standard fare of supermarket novels, which are always exploring
>>some kind of Devil-Nazi association.
>
>"Always"? Please. Name two in the last year, and cite sales figures.

Don't be pedantic.  Sales figures? Puh-leez.
>
>>Of course, it would follow that an
>>attempt to view National Socialism, and yes, its crimes, in a clearer
>>light would require suspension of judgment in what is now the socially
>>accepted locus of Evil.  It would also explain why the comparable crimes
>>of Stalinist Russia have no such impact on people s thinking overall:
the
>>sinister iconography is absent.
>
>Ehrlich606 would appear to have slept through the 1980's, or perhaps the
>entire Cold War. A certain two-term President of the United States
>regularly referred to the Soviet Union as "The Evil Empire" and paid a
>conciliatory visit to a cemetery where SS officers were buried. 

I'm on a roll now, Rich.  Why don't you let me finish my thought? 
Reagan's "Evil Empire" stuff never played in Peoria, and you know that as
well as I do.  However, if you want me to extend my thought, the Soviet
Union would be a player in Post-WW2 psychopathies, including the UFO
phenomenon, and so forth.  Up until about Dr. Strangelove, I would think
(1965).
>
>>If the latter hypotheses are correct, an attempt to regard National
>>Socialism as just another ideology, Hitler as just another politician,
>>Germany as just another country -- even with full acknowledgement of
their
>>crimes, and responsibility -- will likely be met with an irrational
anger
>>and fury comparable to challenging one s basic faiths.   
>
>Full acknowledgement of the crimes and responsibility of the Nazi regime
>includes an acknowledgement that Nazism was not "just another ideology,"
>and that Hitler was not "just another politician." Germany is "just
>another country," and it is largely treated as such.

That's the way it would appear to me, too.  Ordinarily.  But from a
historical point of view, name me one other ideology, or politician, that
was comparable to Hitler in earlier times.  If you cannot, then that's a
signal that we are being too time-bound.  Plus, I am curious about some
comments I have heard on this board expressing the idea that we have to
get past the "evil" part of Hitler or National Socialism.  I think it
might be worth looking into, even if just as Devil's Advocate.  Boy, that
would generate a lot of hate mail ...
>
>>This may seem
>>absurd: but we know that millions went to there deaths in earlier times
>>over questions such as the Thesaurus of Merit of the Procession of  the
>>Holy Spirit.
>
>No. Not millions. The comparison is absurd. The Albigensians were not
>Nazis.

Not millions?  The argument over the Thesaurus of Merit led to the
Reformation, and about 150 years of semicontinuous warfare.  The
Procession of the Holy Spirit divided Christendom in the 1000's, and
inaugurated centuries of warfare.
  
>
>>But the most fascinating aspect of all this as far as I am concerned is
>>the extent to which irrational fears over the rapid changes to Western
>>Society may have affected our basic view of the Holocaust.
Characteristics
>
>Well, put your mind at ease. I like modern society. Most people do. These
>notions of alienation were features of Communism and Nazism, not US
>libertarianism. Existential angst was in vogue for a time, but I don't
>believe that it permeated the culture nealy as deeply as certain windbags
>in university english departments would have you believe.

In the first place, if you have lived from say, 1850 to 1930 in an urban
environment you would have seen squalor and misery that only shows up when
there are inner city riots or when PBS does a special on people starving
in Asia.  Under such conditions, without being able to change the channel,
I would guess your perception would be different.  Surely you wouldn't
suggest with the American history of socialism, labor, the IWW, the
communist party, etc. etc. that American libertarian relieved all
anxieties of the working class.  You are also ignoring the entire
anti-technology movement from the 1960's.  Not to say I am an apostle of
that, moreover, I am one windbag who was never in an English Department.
>
>>of industrial society that were quite fearful to Western Societies were,
I
>>believe, at the root of the Yellow Peril.  Anonymity, loss of identity, 
>
>Huh? Though I disagree with it, I follow the rest of your argument, but I
>don't understand what "the Yellow Peril" has to do with anything.

Short answer:  Read the first chapter of "Captive Mind" by Czeslaw Milosz,
derived from a novel by Witkiewicz.  "Genghis Khan with a telegraph" was
the word of the day in pre-WW1 Russia, but I don't remember whether it was
Blok or Bely who said it.  Then go back and consult the history of the
Yellow Peril as far back as the end of the Boxer Rebellion.  When you do,
I am certain that you will pick up on something irrational here.  There
are even identities of the machine age and the Yellow Peril that are
adumbrated in Melville -- but dammit! -- I can't remember where.

>
>>serving the shapes  in Pirsig s well-known phrase, sinister machines
that
>>no one understood, but which one tended in a senseless and irrational
way,
>>a fundamental dissociation of function and responsibility, and giant
>>machines which remorselessly consumed people -- these were
characteristics
>>of many dystopias of the early 20th Century, and which were
magnificently
>>translated to film by Fritz Lang in his  Metropolis  (1925).  They are
>>also features of modern civilization that are troubling -- in less
>>spectacular language -- to many people.
>>
>>I do not think it is an accident that it is precisely these
>>characteristics of the Holocaust that are most often stressed, and
>>perhaps, over stressed.  After all, the Holocaust was a many faceted
>>reality.  This is clear to anyone who reads the testimony, and the
>>hundreds of survivor accounts that are available.  And yet the story
>>always comes back to Auschwitz, an archetypal factory that exists for no
>>other reason than to drain its workers and ultimately consume them in
>>fire.  I submit that it is for these reasons -- rather than any body
count
>>-- that Auschwitz holds such an important position in the mindset of
both
>>Jews and Gentiles.  It was a fact, but it is also an archetype and a
>>warning.   It is the secular Calvary of industrial civilization.
>
>No, I don't think so. It's the body count and the raw single-minded evil.
>The alienation argument above would get you called a Communist in many
>parts of the US. Here we believe in progress and industry.
>
Raul Hilberg recognized a long time ago that precisely because the body
count was being revised it was necessary to dwell on a significance to
Auschwitz that transcended the body count.  Consult his remarks thereon. 
If, like Reitlinger or Hilberg, IMHO the only real historical researchers
at book length, you accept the count as cca. 1 Million with 80-90 Jewish
victims, then you have about 15% of the six million, with no explanation
for the over-arching significance.

As to your closing comment, I assume you are either being sarcastic or you
have had relatively little contact with the working class.  However,
thanks for your thoughtful and detailed response!



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 16 12:09:55 PDT 1996
Article: 36877 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: 960505: Jamie's response acked; Toronto conference on postwar occupation
Date: 14 May 1996 10:48:13 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 55
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4na6fd$ru3@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4na12m$n8d@hackberry.zilker.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4na12m$n8d@hackberry.zilker.net>, mike@aimetering.com (Mike
Curtis) writes:

>Subject:	Re: 960505: Jamie's response acked; Toronto conference on
postwar
>occupation
>From:	mike@aimetering.com (Mike Curtis)
>Date:	Tue, 14 May 1996 13:15:43 GMT
>
>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote:
>
>>In article <4n7qgd$r62@hackberry.zilker.net>, mike@aimetering.com (Mike
>>Curtis) writes:
>
>>>Subject:	Re: 960505: Jamie's response acked; Toronto conference on
>>postwar
>>>occupation
>>>From:	mike@aimetering.com (Mike Curtis)
>>>Date:	Mon, 13 May 1996 17:11:06 GMT
>>>
>>>yawen@enter.net (Yale F. Edeiken) wrote:
>>>
>>>>>   mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis) writes:


>I'm asking you to back yourself up. I can make all kinds of claims
>here, sir. From my areas of expertise I can make the following claims:
>
>The Indians of Main and Massachusettes used the English to destroy
>their enemies. They told the Pilgrims who the bad tribes were.
>Naturally those telling the stories were good tribes.
>
>Buy it?
>
>The Constitution is an illegal document because it's making violated
>the Articles of Confederation. Many men walked out of the Convention
>from the very beginning. They claimed they were violating their
>credentials and would not stand for pulling the wool over the citizens
>of their States.
>
>Buy it?
>
>I'll bet you'll ask me to prove those assertions.
>
No, I wouldn't ask you to prove your assertions.  I would want to know --
to the extent you were able to tell me -- what the facts of the cases
were.  Then I would like to speculate on what the consequences of these
ideas might be, or what the historical associations and ramifications
might be.  And, I suppose, finally, we would want to dove-tail these
assertions with revisionism in general.  I am ready whenever you are.







From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 16 12:09:55 PDT 1996
Article: 36901 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Ehrlich606's "anonymity" (was Re: Nizkor searching)
Date: 14 May 1996 14:15:07 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 79
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4naijb$1n4@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4n8h5j$hfl@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4n8h5j$hfl@Networking.Stanford.EDU>, rich@c2.org (Rich Graves)
writes:

>Subject:	Ehrlich606's "anonymity" (was Re: Nizkor searching)
>From:	rich@c2.org (Rich Graves)
>Date:	13 May 1996 16:38:27 -0700
>
>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) writes:
>>The comments of Richard Schultz are a classic example of the kind of
>>projections that seem to find themselves festooned around my name.  I
will
>>now provide Enlightenment, since it is often claimed that it was a lack
of
>>same that caused the event that caused this board. (Is this starting to
>>sound like one of those Hebrew cumulative memory rhymes?)
>
>Gee, FE, not being Jewish, as many other posters here are not Jewish, I
>have no idea how it sounds. How does it sound to you? Tell me more about
>these Hebrew cumulative memory rhymes. 
>
Hebrew cumulative memory rhymes are a technique for teaching children how
to carry several things in their minds simultaneously.  I assumed my board
addressee, since he writes from Israel, would know what I meant.  And you
would too, if you have ever heard of  "The House that Jack Built" or "The
Twelve Days of Christmas" and were familiar with the derivations of these
that (some) have made to Hebrew cumulative memory rhymes.

>You have the right to be anonymous, but you don't have a right to pull
>sophomoric bullshit like this without being held accountable for it
>(with words, in this forum). If you wish to be taken seriously, either
>come out, or cut out the snide remarks. You have said much that is of
>value, but also much that is not.

Thank you for acknowledging my right to anonymity.  If what I post is
deemed by you "sophomoric bullshit"  then you have the right to be as
surly as you please.  What do I care?  I have things to say, I find a
place to post them, and that's it.  If something positive comes out of it,
fine.  I am, however, relatively certain of one thing:  no one takes
criticism seriously from someone who advertises their incivility and
rudeness.  Therefore, if you were really intent on persuading me one way
or the other, on any issue, including my self-indulgence, relevance, or
the value of my posts, you are going about it entirely the wrong way.

I think your energies would be better directed in attempting to construct
or create a post en seul which, whatever its intrinsic value, might
provide some insights.  For the most part, I am very generous and
encouraging of such gestures.  Unfortunately, the echt-revisionists and
the illiterate ignoramuses (Christ masturbating, Gay Jews in Alberta,
etc.) are practically the only ones who do this sort of thing.  The rest
of you seem content to lie in ambush.  I am sure you have more to
contribute than that!  If you insist on being constantly reactive then you
are selling your own intelligence and creativity short.

>
>>would certainly conclude that he does not think much of me!  But as is
the
>>case with most projections, his derivation of my name tells us more
about
>>him than about me.
>
>Likewise, I'm sure. Please explain how you came to the conclusion that I
>knew and cared nothing about historical atrocities other than the
>Holocaust. Please tell us who, other than the straw man dancing in your
>head, is denying Soviet atrocities, and explain the relevance to any
>discussion here.
>
Cutting through the gratuitous rudeness of this paragraph, I don't believe
I have ever said that anyone was denying Soviet atrocities.  The point I
am suggesting is that we can transpose explanatory frameworks from the one
field of history to clarify the other.  In other words, people ask "why"
in the case of the Germans, and the explanations seem to have come to a
dead end -- at least as far as originality is concerned.  So I am
suggesting this: let's look at the "why" for Soviet atrocities and maybe
we can find a connection between the two.  There are many many other
issues that we can explore on this board, which have, I believe, a
relevance to the Holocaust.  Do you want to pursue them amicably, or do
you enjoy fighting?




From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 16 12:09:56 PDT 1996
Article: 37074 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: two peas in a pod
Date: 15 May 1996 09:28:18 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 32
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ncm5i$h0u@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <31998803.14678816@news.txdirect.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <31998803.14678816@news.txdirect.net>, hmazal@txdirect.net
(Harry W. Mazal OBE) writes:

>Subject:	Re: two peas in a pod
>From:	hmazal@txdirect.net (Harry W. Mazal OBE)
>Date:	Wed, 15 May 1996 08:44:37 GMT
>
>On 14 May 1996 09:43:03 GMT, EEGG87E@prodigy.com (M Huber) wrote:
>
>>5/13/96
>>Abidjan, Ivory Coast
>>
>>A freighter teeming with more than 4 thousand sick and hungry Liberian 
>>refugees is still at sea. The passengers are fleeing the Holocaust being

>>inflicted on Liberian nationals by feuding warlords.  [text deleted for
>brevity.]
>
>>Israel has been conspicuous by her silence. We suggest Israel accept 
>>these pathetic refugees [text deleted for brevity]
>
>
>Germany is actually a bit closer to the African ship than is Israel.
>Employing Mr. Huber's twisted logic, one can safely argue that as the
>shipload of Jewish refugees was escaping from Mr. Huber's malicious
>Nazi heroes, it is now up to Germany to rescue all possible victims of
>attempted genocide regardless of their colour, creed, or ethnic
>origin.
>
I am replying to this post for two reasons.  First, because I am testing. 
Second, because the original post is a totally idiotic non sequiter.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 16 12:09:57 PDT 1996
Article: 37088 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Historians Debate: Goetz oder C moll?
Date: 15 May 1996 11:02:33 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 69
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ncrm9$iju@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

The following is documented:

Subject: Re: Historians Debate: Goldhagen a Schmuck? [snip]
From: gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord McFee)
Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 20:45:32 EDT
Message-ID: <4nb5sl$ro4@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>

In article <4n5vuo$6p5@grivel.une.edu.au>, ibokor@metz.une.edu.au (ibokor)
said:

>
>In article <4mqltt$m0b@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, 
>Alles andere als offen und ehrlich606@aol.com

Ein Wortspiel.....ein Wortspiel!

Eh606: Kennen Sie denn auch das Wort der Goetz von Berlichingen?

>: (Ehrlich606) said:
>: 
>: There is probably a lot to be said for the idea that "Eliminationism" :
>INCLUDING assimilationism was regnant in 19th Century Germany.  But look
:
>around: isn't it regnant EVERYWHERE?  You see, one of the reasons the
East
>: European Jewish community flourished for so long is because the Polish
:
>State was pre-industrial and the reins of social order were accordingly :
>lax.  

>It is interesting to note that the period of flourishing of 
>the Eatern European Jewish communities coincides with the period in which
>there was no Polish State, but Poland was divided between three colonial
>masters.

::Was meinst Du vom "ehrlichen" Kerl?

Eh606:  That depends on what you mean by "flourishing".  According to
Solomon
Grayzel, admittance into the societies of the three colonial/imperial
masters
meant abandoning the traditional way of life. (cf. Grayzel's "History of
the
Jews', p. 473, p. 548f for Austrian impact, p. 498f, p. 516ff, p. 528, p.
547
for the Russian impact, p. 502 and esp. 550ff for the German impact.)

The point I was trying to make was that traditional Jewish society was
threatened by the partitions, because in order to "flourish" (by any
number
of objective indices) meant assimilating away from traditional Jewish
life.
But the "flourishing" of individual Jews is not equivalent to the
"flourishing" of the traditional communal Jewish way of life.  THAT way of
life was continuously eroded from the time of the first partitions, until
the
German Nazis (and, to a lesser extent, other East Europeans including the
Soviets) completed the process.  And I STRESS that the Holocaust is part a
reference to the six million as well as a reference to this Jewish
community
that is no more.

Please note that I am not even talking about violence against Jews which
became quite promiscuous throughout the Russian Empire especially after
the
assassination of Alexander II, the famous Blood Libel trials of the time
(even up to 1908!), or the development of anti-semitism in Germany.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 16 12:09:58 PDT 1996
Article: 37212 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!bofh.dot!news.thenet.net!trellis.wwnet.com!nntp.coast.net!sgigate.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Review of Goldhagen
Date: 15 May 1996 05:29:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 31
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nc865$e7t@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article ,
Marty Kelley  writes:

>Subject:	Re: Review of Goldhagen
>From:	Marty Kelley 
>Date:	Tue, 14 May 1996 12:02:21 -0700
>
>Since some of this is ground I've covered before, I'm going to be 
>snipping chunks of both Mr. Power's and Mr. "Ehrlich606's" comments.
>
>On 10 May 1996, Ehrlich606 wrote:
>
>> 
>> Ehrlich606 notes: karlpov@access5.digex.net (Charles R.L. Power)
searched
>> out my original review of Goldhagen, and wrote the following review,
which
>> I quote a few excerpts and bracket my reactions thus >> (from the
original
>> review is still: >).  I would UNDERLINE that I think that this and
other
>> articles are precisely what this board needs more of;  Mr. Power has
done
>> an excellent job, and although he is ad hominem here and there he is
also
>> witty.
>
Well, Marty, you and Charles have really impressed me with the nature of
your arguments.  These are fruitful exchanges. If I was not busy with
other things and other topics I would engage the issue again.  For the
time being I will simply hold off until the time is ripe.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 16 12:09:58 PDT 1996
Article: 37213 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!bofh.dot!news.thenet.net!trellis.wwnet.com!nntp.coast.net!sgigate.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: UFO and Cultural Anxiety
Date: 15 May 1996 05:29:04 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 104
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nc850$e7n@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4naq94$osr@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4naq94$osr@Networking.Stanford.EDU>, rich@c2.org (Rich Graves)
writes:

>Subject:	Re: UFO and Cultural Anxiety
>From:	rich@c2.org (Rich Graves)
>Date:	14 May 1996 13:26:12 -0700
>
>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) writes:
>>>>of industrial society that were quite fearful to Western Societies
were,
>>>>were, I believe, at the root of the Yellow Peril.  Anonymity, loss
>>>>of identity, 
>>>
>>>Huh? Though I disagree with it, I follow the rest of your argument, but
I
>>>don't understand what "the Yellow Peril" has to do with anything.
>>
>>Short answer:  Read the first chapter of "Captive Mind" by Czeslaw
Milosz,
>>derived from a novel by Witkiewicz.  "Genghis Khan with a telegraph" was
>>the word of the day in pre-WW1 Russia, but I don't remember whether it
was
>>Blok or Bely who said it.  Then go back and consult the history of the
>>Yellow Peril as far back as the end of the Boxer Rebellion.  When you
do,
>>I am certain that you will pick up on something irrational here.  There
>>are even identities of the machine age and the Yellow Peril that are
>>adumbrated in Melville -- but dammit! -- I can't remember where.
>
>It's funny you mention Czeslaw Milosz. I had been about to cite him
>making the opposite argument. In Native Realm, he says something like,
>"Those who expound on the back-breaking alienation of modern industial
>society should try a 16-hour day in the fields some time." There was
>something about Tolstoy, too, but that was a long time ago. My
>prejudice is that this "Yellow Peril" argument is a load of bull, but
>I'll check it out.

I don't recall the quote from Native Realm, I have it somewhere.  "The
Pill of Murti Bing" touches on the point I raised.  Tolstoy also said,
"The more technology increases, the more individual freedom decreases" cf.
Huxley, A. "Science, Liberty, & Peace" (1948), which is an excellent essay
which I would love to locate again.

As to the Yellow Peril argument being a "load of bull", perhaps! 
Associations are like that, sometimes they click, sometimes they don't.
>
>Btw, if you think I have no familiarity with the "working classes," 
>you've got another thing coming -- though most of what I know is based
>on the Latin American experience. Hernando de Soto's "El Otro sendero,"
>Gabriel Zaid's "La Economia presidencial," or anything by Mario Vargas
>Llosa would give you some idea of where I stand.

I made that remark because of your tone which was either sarcastic or
exuding triumphalism in modern society.  Coming from a working class
family, and living in a working class neighborhood, I only meant to point
out that even today there is alienation at a certain hopelessness and
disengagement in modern life.  You are right: I did not phrase myself
politely.
>
>ObRevisionism: _Native Realm_ talks quite a good bit about what it was
>like to be in Poland and Lithuania at the time of the Soviet and Nazi
>invasions. All here would learn something from it. I wonder if Ingrid
>ever read it?
>
Milosz has had a fascinating life, but he is looked askance at by many
Poles because of his activities in the Communist Party.

>Milosz also wrote a few poems specifically about the Holocaust.

Yes. A wonderful poet.  
>
>I'll probably respond to your article in greater depth when I find the
>time. Some of us are still working, you know...

I work, and I only assume an air of leisured life under the heading
"Nizkor Searching".  But by all means, let's develop the dialogue.  For
example, I found a book today that seemed to confirm some of my ideas.  I
will comment on that ASAP.


>
>-rich
> http://www.c2.org/~rich/Press/Swedish/
>
>
>------------------- Headers --------------------
>Path:
>newsbf01.news.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!news-e2a.gnn.com!howland.rest
on.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news.Stanford.EDU
!not-for-mail
>From: rich@c2.org (Rich Graves)
>Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
>Subject: Re: UFO and Cultural Anxiety
>Date: 14 May 1996 13:26:12 -0700
>Organization: Uncensored Internet, http://www.c2.org/uncensored/
>Lines: 43
>Sender: llurch@Networking.Stanford.EDU
>Message-ID: <4naq94$osr@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
>References: <4n6fns$bph@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
><4n9qjl$o3u@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: networking.stanford.edu
>
>



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 16 12:09:59 PDT 1996
Article: 37259 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!news.nstn.ca!news.dal.ca!torn!n3ott.istar!istar.net!n1ott.istar!uniserve!news.sol.net!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!nntp.coast.net!sgigate.sgi.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Historians Debate: Goldhagen a Schmuck? [snip]
Date: 15 May 1996 19:43:19 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 80
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ndq6n$us@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nb5sl$ro4@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nb5sl$ro4@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord
McFee) writes:

>Subject:	Re: Historians Debate: Goldhagen a Schmuck? [snip]
>From:	gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord McFee)
>Date:	Mon, 13 May 1996 20:45:32 EDT
>
>In article <4n5vuo$6p5@grivel.une.edu.au>, ibokor@metz.une.edu.au
(ibokor)
>said:
>
>>
>>In article <4mqltt$m0b@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, 
>>Alles andere als offen und ehrlich606@aol.com
>
>Ein Wortspiel.....ein Wortspiel!

Yeah, how 'bout that?  I prefer clever insults.
>
>>: (Ehrlich606) said:
>>: 
>>: There is probably a lot to be said for the idea that "Eliminationism"
:
>>INCLUDING assimilationism was regnant in 19th Century Germany.  But look
:
>>around: isn't it regnant EVERYWHERE?  You see, one of the reasons the
East
>>: European Jewish community flourished for so long is because the Polish
:
>>State was pre-industrial and the reins of social order were accordingly
:
>>lax.  
>
>>It is interesting to note that the period of flourishing of 
>>the Eatern European Jewish communities coincides with the period in
which
>>there was no Polish State, but Poland was divided between three colonial
>>masters.
>
>Was meinst Du vom "ehrlichen" Kerl?
>
I disagree with the assertion, at least insofar as traditional Judaism is
concerned.  I have found at least one Jewish historian I have found buys
my assessment that assimilation was not good for the "social" aspect of
Judaism.  However, I am researching this point now (not too thoroughly,
because that is beyond my means) and I will report back when I can.


>
>--
>Gord McFee
>
>
>
>.. I'll write no line before its time(gmcfee@ibm.net)
>-- MR/2 2.26 #331
>
>              
>
>
>------------------- Headers --------------------
>Path:
>newsbf01.news.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.
ans.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!usenet
>From: gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord McFee)
>Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
>Subject: Re: Historians Debate: Goldhagen a Schmuck? [snip]
>Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 20:45:32 EDT
>Lines: 35
>Message-ID: <4nb5sl$ro4@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
>References:

><4mqltt$m0b@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <4n33i6$41cc@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
><4n5vuo$6p5@grivel.une.edu.au>
>Reply-To: gmcfee@ibm.net
>NNTP-Posting-Host: slip129-37-167-82.pq.ca.ibm.net
>X-Newsreader: MR/2 Classic v2.26 - An OS/2 QWK reader
>
>



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 16 12:10:00 PDT 1996
Article: 37315 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: BEHOLD THE LIE
Date: 16 May 1996 11:28:08 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 58
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nfhi8$joi@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <319b3474.3002804@news.pacificnet.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <319b3474.3002804@news.pacificnet.net>, tm@pacificnet.net (tom
moran) writes:

>Subject:	BEHOLD THE LIE
>From:	tm@pacificnet.net (tom moran)
>Date:	Thu, 16 May 1996 13:58:18 GMT
>
This post is actually pretty good as far as revisionist posts go.  The
problem, Tom, is that I have already seen so many outrageous things come
out of your mouth about Jews that it is hard to take this post in good
faith.

As to why you insist on venting at Jews, I do not know.  Maybe one of the
functions of cyberspace is that it is like the wall of a men's room. 
There one sits, and there is this big blank wall just waiting to be
written on ....  I can accept that at times people will say nasty things
about individuals and groups.  I don't think that is bad, necessarily. 
But if you use this board for what is essentially graffiti, you can't turn
around and use it for something serious later on.  It would be like
leaving a turd on the dining room table, and then using it as the
centerpiece for a six course meal.

As to your point.  You are quite right.  Common sense would dictate that a
reduction in the A-B death tolls would lead to a reduction in overall
numbers.  But you don't go far enough.  You should observe, by consulting
your sources, that the calculus of victims by individual authors usually
hinges on balancing out to six million, with the Einsatzgruppen taking up
the numerical slack.

Your opposite posters, as well as the Wiesenthal Center and the Nizkor
FAQ, seem either ignorant of this or unwilling to concede the point.  In
the meantime, the two authors who -- in my day -- researched this topic
seriously both arrived at figures of about 1 Mill or less for AB: Hilberg,
who came out to cca. 5 million overall, and Reitlinger, who came out
between 2 and 4 million.  So, if it makes you feel better, you can say
that 2 million died in the Holocaust and still be within the mainstream --
although, you will still take heat.

You may ask -- why don't we just say 2 million?  Answer:  because the
people from Nizkor, and most conventionalists on the Holocaust are holding
onto a memory.  They are afraid to openly consider upsetting the memory,
for fear that they will lose it all.  That's why -- among other reasons --
they don't trust revisionists.  I consider this symptomatic of a certain
failure to yet digest this terrible event, coupled with an uncertainty as
to the future.

I don't have a problem with six million.  If there were 4 million less
dead, that wouldn't change Germany's responsibility.  So I stick with the
high number.  There are other details I don't accept -- but I keep that to
myself.  Why bother?  You have to distinguish between things you can
discuss and things you can't discuss because your opposite number
considers it a threat to discuss those things.

One final thing.  Ask you friends about Auschwitz?  You have got to be
kidding.  Most people don't really care.  There is myopia among those of
us fascinated by this topic.  We cleave to an event over 50 years old, and
chew it over again and again.  In a way, all of us, conventionalists,
revisionists, and deniers are -- as you say -- "holohuggers."


From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri May 17 14:33:12 PDT 1996
Article: 37484 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Giwer & His Phanthom Al Gentile
Date: 17 May 1996 02:11:16 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 27
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nh5a4$636@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <319B4880.27E7@gryn.org>
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <319B4880.27E7@gryn.org>, Alec Grynspan  writes:

>Subject:	Re: Giwer & His Phanthom Al Gentile
>From:	Alec Grynspan 
>Date:	Thu, 16 May 1996 11:23:44 -0400
>
>Chuck Ferree wrote:
>
>> Grynspan, says he is a "Holocaust Victim." He was in some DP camp
>> after the war ended.
>> Question: where was Grynspan during the time the war was being fought?
>> 
>> Fact: Most people who were released from Nazi concentration camps
>> spent some time in DP camps. But I never heard of someone just being
>> placed in  DP camp for no reason.
>
Chuck:  Over the years, I have known several people who were in DP camps. 
All nationalities, and displaced Jews too.  The parents of a guy I worked
with were in a DP camp:  he had been in the Red Army (dragooned in Soviet
advance), she had been a partisan in the vast Pripyat Marsh region. 
Forgive the analogy, but they were sort of like homeless shelters.  Also,
people kept streaming into them for some time after the war was over, or
so I have heard.  Research, anybody?



 


From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri May 17 14:33:13 PDT 1996
Article: 37510 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: 17 May 1996 07:52:43 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nhpab$br2@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ngbtg$2n9u@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4ngbtg$2n9u@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord
McFee) writes:

>
>Don't ever come to my home town, Moran.  Ever.  Take that any way you
like,
>but don't ever come near my town. 
>
>--
>Gord McFee
>

Uh ... Don't you think you better tell him where that is?

On a lighter note, the many many posts on the autoerotism of Christ has
reminded me of a wonderful book that I read about 30 years ago entitled
"The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross" by John M. Allegro, who argued that JC
was lead singer in a mushroom munching psychedelic band (sort of), and who
set forth the fascinating ur-Aramaic etymology of "Messiah" as meaning
"smeared with semen"!! That certainly puts a different spin on the
expression, "blow s.o. to Kingdom Come"   :)





From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat May 18 07:35:37 PDT 1996
Article: 37622 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!news.nstn.ca!news.dal.ca!torn!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: German WWI Atrocity Update!
Date: 17 May 1996 16:01:56 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 71
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nilvk$j9h@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

To clarify the subject of German Atrocity Stories from WWI:

>From  "The First Casualty" by Phillip Knightley, HBJ, 1975.  (paraphrasis,
direct quotes in quotes, comments [] bracketed.)

Story of corpse factory began in The Times 4/16/17, with a story claiming
that the Germans were "distilling glycerine from the bodies of their
dead."  Soon after, the story grew, and soon word began to appear of the
"Kadaververwertungsanstalt" or "Corpse Exploitation Establishment".  The
issue was discussed in the House of Commons on 4/30/17.  The Germans
protested, claiming that they were not distilling glycerine from bodies
for munitions, but that they were boiling dead animals from the
battlefield.

Lord Robert Cecil, Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, said:  "... in
view of other actions by German military authorities there is nothing
incredible in the present charge against them."  (all of above, p. 105)

[Lord Cecil's formulation sounds very familiar.  Perhaps the entire
concept is a parody on the known German deficiency in raw materials for
munitions, the known breakthroughs in the German chemical industry prior
to the war, and legendary German efficiency.]

Further atrocities contributed to Germans:

The Financial News, in an editorial, 6/10/15, claimed, inter alia, that
German submariners got extra pay for sinking ships with women and
children, and that "the Kaiser had personally ordered the torturing of
three year old children, specifying the tortures to be inflicted" (p. 83) 
[Yes, but where is the Kaiser-Order?]

The Bryce Commission (under the Lord of that name) convened and produced a
report, that contained further allegations:  German officers and men
raping 20 Belgian girls in the town square in Liege, eight German soldiers
who bayoneted a two year old, and a peasant girl who had her breasts
sliced off in Malines [this story goes back to the 30 Years War, at least,
to the Siege of Magdeburg].  The report was thrown out in 1922, because
none of it could be corroborated -- and for among other reasons because
"hearsay evidence was accepted at full value." (p. 83f)

The "best" French effort, according to Knightley, concerned the famous
baby without hands episode, although it was begun by the London Times in
August 1914, viz., "One man whom I did not see told an official of the
Catholic Society that he had seen with his own eyes German soldiery chop
off the arms of a baby which clung to its mother's skirts."  This would
later evolve in the French press, so that by 1915 a photograph appeared [I
have seen this -- arms in the air, no hands, airbrushed]. Reference "La
Rive Rouge" (periodical) 9/18/15, along with a drawing "showing German
soldiers eating the hands.  No one asked how long a baby could live if its
hands were hacked off." (p. 107)

[My theory is that these rumors -- which were spread all over occupied
Belgium and France, can be traced to activities in the Belgian Congo,
where mercenaries were paid extra by providing the hands of their kills as
proof.  Consult, e.g., Twain's "King Leopold's Soliloquy"]

The book is mostly silent on atrocities alleged in WWII, and subsequently
proved by the series of trials that ensued at war's end.  The author does,
however, point out that when German civilians were given a tour of
Buchenwald after its liberation, they "fainted, wept, were sick, went
white and turned away in horror." (p. 330)  [Nor does he mention that
several Germans committed suicide after viewing the camps.  Tell it to
Daniel Goldhagen!]

Further reading:  JM Read, "Atrocity Propaganda, 1914-1919", (Yale
UP:1941), HD Lasswell, "Propaganda Techniques in the World War"
(London:1927), Arthur Ponsonby, "Falsehood in Wartime" (London: 1928)

  




From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat May 18 07:35:38 PDT 1996
Article: 37640 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!loki.tor.hookup.net!nic.wat.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!news.sol.net!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Giwer & His Phanthom Al Gentile
Date: 17 May 1996 22:45:15 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 18
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4njdjr$r1m@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <319C9135.7E93@gryn.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <319C9135.7E93@gryn.org>, Alec Grynspan  writes:

>> 
>
>No. As I said when I mentioned the numbers and letters, I'm uncertain as
>to the designations. US army designations are not something very
>familiar to me. I think that Division is bigger than Battalion, but I'm
>not even sure of that!
>
>
>
Oh, man!  3-4 battalions (cca. 1,000) equals a regiment; 3-4 regiments
equals a division. Therefore, division equals cca. 12 battalions. 
Battalions in USA usually numbered 1-2-3-4, regiments, however, can have a
very complicated numbering system because they can be traced back to units
that are (in Europe, especially) up to 250 years old.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat May 18 07:35:38 PDT 1996
Article: 37729 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!sgigate.sgi.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: BEHOLD THE LIE
Date: 18 May 1996 00:25:38 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 58
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4njjg2$aj@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article , mvanalst@rbi.com
(Mark Van Alstine) writes:

 The full passgae, in context, from the
>center's "Responses to Revisionist Arguments" page (URL:
>http://www.wiesenthal.com/resource/revision.htm#13) is:
>
>"13. For years, the death statistics at Auschwitz-Birkenau had been put
at
>well
>over 3 million. Recently, however, a memorial plaque at the former death
camp
>estimates Jewish losses closer to 1 million. Shouldn't the new figures
>imply that Jewish losses for the Holocaust are much lower than previously
>thought? 
>
>   "The figure of 3-4 million murdered at Auschwitz-Birkenau was an
invention
>
>   of communist officials in Poland (and the former U.S.S.R.) which
sought 
>   to blur the uniqueness of Jewish suffering at Auschwitz. To do this, 
>   they purposely overstated the number of non-Jewish casualties at 
>   Auschwitz-Birkenau by many times their true numbers. In a clever
attempt 
>   to disguise the subterfuge, the figures for Jewish losses were
inflated 
>   by nearly double, so that their losses would still be larger than
those 
>   of non-Jewish victims,though now by a much smaller ratio. With the end
of 
>   communism in Poland and the former Soviet Union, officials at the
>Auschwitz 
>   museum finally lowered the casualty figures in line with the estimates
of 
>   historians who, for years, have insisted that between one and 1 1/2
>million 
>   people perished at Auschwitz-Birkenau, 80 - 90% of them Jews.
>
>   "The figure of 6 million Jewish losses during the Holocaust has always
>been 
>   in line with the lower Auschwitz figures.

Mark: I don't see how you can re-quote this passage so complacently! 
Where is the proof of the myriad assertions that it contains? "invention
of communist officials", "sought to blur the uniqueness", "clever attempt
at subterfuge" etc. etc.!  There is absolutely no substantiation provided
here, and the Wiesenthal Center (and Nizkor) make themselves look bad by
repeating it as such.  I mean, I made a similar observation in a post a
week or so ago, but at least I didn't pretend it was FACT!







>


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:07 PDT 1996
Article: 37770 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: BEHOLD THE LIE
Date: 18 May 1996 12:20:57 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 76
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nktd9$d1s@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4njr4t$su5@atlas.uniserve.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4njr4t$su5@atlas.uniserve.com>, hostrov@uniserve.com (Hilary
Ostrov) writes:

>
>Mr. Ehrlich606, I don't see how you can take issue on this particular
>point since Mr. Van Alstine was merely demonstrating (as would have
>been clear to all had you not deleted the text which precipitated his
>quote) Moran's selective editing in composing his post (which you so
>complacently praised.)

IF you had been following traffic on this Board, you would have known that
I already criticized the nature of the Nizkor/Wisenthal response in public
posts to Rich Graves.  Not to be taking sides at this instant, I must
insist that it is an extremely lame text.

>
>You question the lack of "substantiation".  Is it your contention that
>the information found at the SWC site and/or on Nizkor on this issue
>is _not_ factual?  If so, kindly provide some "substantiation" to
>support this claim.

I am contending that this text in support of the four million number
change is totally inadequate.  It mentions communist officials who are not
named, and then it attributes motives ("blur uniqueness") to these unnamed
communist officials.  Even if Nizkor and/or Wiesenthal could name these
officials I doubt that they could provide any substantiation as to their
motivations outside of guessing, which should be specified as such. 
Further, the four million number is characterized as "a clever attempt at
subterfuge" but the use of "clever" is an obvous imputation of subjective
judgment, and the "attempt at subterfuge" is also an attribution of motive
without substantiation.  This is ONE case where it is up to you people to
substantiate what YOU are saying, since you are vaguely naming names and
attributing motives without any support.  Otherwise it has about as much
substance as "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!"

A better formulation would be:

The Soviet Commission stated on [date] that four million died
at Auschwitz Birkenau.  At the same time, The Soviet Commission did not
specify the number of Jewish victims, although it did specify a number of
victims most of whom were calculated as coming from areas in Eastern
Europe under Soviet control.

The statement of the Soviet Commission, although it has been frequently
repeated in the West, has no bearing, and in fact makes no attempt to have
bearing, on the number of Jewish victims who were killed at Auschwitz
Birkenau.  Holocaust historians, OTOH, have generally arrived at a
calculation of about 1 million Jewish dead for Auschwitz Birkenau
consistently over the past 50 years.  They have also arrived at an overall
death count of about six million.

The recent revision of Auschwitz death tolls therefore has no bearing on
the number of its Jewish victims, or on Holocaust death totals overall,
but it does have bearing on discrediting the claim that millions of
non-Jews were killed there. 

My advice would be to take the above paragraph, edit it to fit, and
substitute.  It is not entirely true, as far as I am concerned, but it
does not make the leaps that the original post does.  

>
>I don't recall seeing your "similar observation" post.  Perhaps you
>would be kind enough to re-post it - assuming that it was (unlike many
>of your erudite self-indulgences that I _have_ seen) related to the
>topic of this newsgroup.

I made similar observations about the high A-B numbers in my post, "Evil
German Baby Goulash" or something like that which you can find by
searching your top window.  As to the provenance of the topic in this
newsgroup, it is obvious that I see much wider ramifications than you do. 
As to the erudite self-indulgence of my posts, I don't think it is any
more self-indulgent than mastering the craft of constipated sentence
structure.
>
>



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:08 PDT 1996
Article: 37826 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Holocaust?
Date: 18 May 1996 19:30:54 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 25
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nlmje$ktu@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nlbi9$q3t@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nlbi9$q3t@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com
(Matt Giwer) writes:

>	Holohuggers also substitute mantras for reason, pretend their
>documentation is in fact documentation when it is mere repetition
>of hearsay, and generally act like sanctimonious creationists
>with as little regard for reason and honesty.
>
Yeah, and the Nizkor FAQ is not far removed from the Q & A that I used to
get in catechism, if I may speak openly!  Nizkor Catechism .... hmmm

I am going to come out on Matt's side THIS TIME, because the
conventionalists are acting like True Believers with the constant
repetition of the Nizkorite Creed as revealed by the Prophet McVay. 
Reminds me of a bunch of kids trying to break a kid who is different by
repeating the same silly rhyme.  Maybe they think that Matt will start to
cry and go home.

Even though I think some his posts are junk, the man deserves to be heard,
ESPECIALLY here.  I will watch his posts, too, and if I catch him screwing
around I will say so, just to be fair.  And in return, his opposite
numbers should try to answer his arguments without extended invective. 
That means everybody, please?




From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:08 PDT 1996
Article: 37903 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: 19 May 1996 07:28:32 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 99
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nn0l0$2fe@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nmcmq$kmp@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hillary Ostov has reminded me that I am new here, so I am going to
discover America by responding to Giwer's Manifesto in two parts.  I am
going to be fair and call them as I see them.  -- Ehrlich606

In article <4nmcmq$kmp@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com
(Matt Giwer) writes:

>If it is all this simple why are these stories preserved?
>
Your analysis here recapitulates characterizations of Jews and
attributions of motives that could be easily described as anti-semitic.
>     
>Have you not implied that conditions had to have been better than
>reported?
>
Here you describe the case of Anne Frank and her father.  The fact that
they survived Birkenau, and that Mr. Frank survived the war IS an
inconsistency, IMHO.  That is why an absolute intentionalism, i.e., "All
Jews must perish whatever the cost!" kind of imperative is rarely offered
these days.  Clearly, there were competing imperatives.
>
>So what is your interest in all of this?
>     
You may be involved in debunking nonsense, but your approach to your
subject is unnecessarily abrasive not to say cruel and disrespectful. 
People are not going be persuaded by this, which suggests that your method
is partly inspired by vanity.  If there ARE further adjustments to the
Holocaust story you can be certain that you will not be credited. 
Furthermore, there is nothing you mention that has not been mentioned
before.
>
>What gas was used?
>     
Here you discuss Zyklon B.  You are right, Zyklon may release lethal
poison in a short duration, but the pellets continue to release gas for
several hours.  Therefore, when used, the remaining pellets would have had
to be cleaned up at some point.
>
>Why all the emotion over this subject?
>
>     There has grown up a category of true believers around every
>detail of the holocaust as it has become codified over the years.
>They literally see themselves as defending the truth.  As such
>any aspect of it that is questioned brings an emotional response.
>However, rather than acting as defenders they respond by
>attacking.  They do not respond by defending the questioned
>details, rather they respond by calling names like anti-semitic
>and neo-nazi.

But this gets us back to the issue of "why bother?"  When I was a kid,
books about what happened to the Jews were cheek by jowl to books about
Stalingrad, Hitler, or whatever.  Now I can only find them in bookstores
under "Judaica".  Except for the media, and I don't care about the media,
history books about WW2 usually say little or nothing about the Holocaust.
 Sometimes no more than two or three sentences, a big treatment might get
two paragraphs with very few concrete details.  The event has become
marginalized and segregated, and meanwhile, by attacking the FACTS, you
are attacking core attitudes and beliefs that Jews have.  Why do you want
to do that?
>
>Are there any particular problems with Zyklon-B having been used?
>
The main problem with Zyklon is as discussed above, in my view.  It is not
an insurmountable problem, but, in practice, would probably slow projected
gassing rates.

>But has not all of this been cut and dried from the beginning?
>
No, it has taken some time.  Although here you are making an error, among
other things, by maintaining that 2 million died at Treblinka.  Current
estimate is 800,000 -- that is an estimate.

>
>Did not Hoess confess his crimes?
>
Hoess did confess his crimes, and was hanged two years not one month
later. Another error.  Stay on top of what you are saying.
>
>Are there other problems?
>
Here you go into witness inconsistencies.  Yes, they are there.  If you
don't believe them, and since the world isn't hanging in the balance, let
them go.
   
>
>Did not so many of the SS members confess?
>
It is quite true that some SS testimony seems coerced.  Gerstein's
testament is quite suspicious to me.  People are holding onto something
here that has a deep and abiding meaning to them -- and you are asking
them to admit to details being false.  OK -- after that, are you going to
leave them alone, or are you going to keep coming back asking for more and
more concessions?  And, meanwhile, you are not respecting the significance
this whole thing has for Jews and for many non-Jews as well.  In other
words, you are not respecting the symbol or the CONCEPT of the Holocaust. 
This is your weak link: your task is entirely destructive.

PS: it is spelled "Solzhenitsyn"



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:09 PDT 1996
Article: 37904 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: 19 May 1996 07:28:37 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 75
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nn0l5$2ff@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nmcmq$kmp@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Hillary Ostov has reminded me that I am new here, so I am going to
discover America by responding to Giwer's Manifesto in two parts.  I am
going to be fair and call them as I see them.  -- Ehrlich606

In article <4nmcmq$kmp@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com
(Matt Giwer) writes:

>Subject:	Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
>From:	mgiwer@ix.netcom.com (Matt Giwer)
>Date:	Sun, 19 May 1996 05:45:27 GMT
>
> What was the holocaust?

You describe three concentric circles: deaths in WW2, civilian deaths in
East Europe under Nazi supervision, and Jewish deaths.  The last of these
is what we commonly mean by "Holocaust."  It has many layers of uniqueness
that I have been trying to get at in my posts -- not that anyone reads
them.

It is also true that survivors could have told something less than the
objective truth for a variety of reasons, none of which would involve a
Zionist plot.

>
>What was the plan for the Holocaust?
>
Unfortunately, the Wannsee minutes are not as benign as you make them,
assuming that population transfers are "benign". Read the document: sex
segregation, natural diminution, compulsory sterilization, etc. it is a
horrific document, a disgrace to the German language in which it was
written and a disgrace to Western Civilization, IMHO.
Furthermore, you got the date wrong.

>
>What is the basis for stories about the Holocaust?

I agree that testimony about the Holocaust should not contravene the laws
of nature.  That may, and I repeat MAY, conceivably lower death totals at
this or that location, or even overall death totals, but it doesn't change
the overall picture, IMHO.

>
>What is the physical evidence for the holocaust?
>
You are right, there is little physical evidence. And, because there is no
knife, OJ is innocent, right?  Your suggestion about a bomb shelter at
Birkenau is confused.  The door is a "gas tight" not air tight door.  It
is CONCEIVABLE that the Leichenkeller were actually morgues and that
Zyklon was occasionally used to disinfest vermin, blowflies, or other
possible disease vectors.  That is the only benign explanation for the
door I can CONCEIVE, and since it runs counter to all testimony then we
are left with a gas chamber.

You then go into a long discussion about Treblinka.  There do seem to be
some problems here, but whatever problems there are they would seem to
affect only the scale of the enterprise.  The existing mass graves are
enough.

>
>So why would these stories be similar in major features?
>
Two reasons: a) they are generally true, b) the parts that are true become
mixed in with other things.
>
>So how could so many die so quickly?
>
Here you talk about disease and other things.  Suffice to say that, even
if there were no gas chambers, the entire National Socialist leadership,
and by extension, the German people, have to pay a price for the terrible
care extended to the people that they uprooted and essentially enslaved
during WW2.  At minimum, slavery implies a contract that the slaveowner
will take care of his slaves.  At minimum, the National Socialist
government, which was a German government, failed to do this.  At minimum,
it is qualitatively worse than anything the Western Allies did in WW2.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:10 PDT 1996
Article: 38085 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Holocaust?
Date: 19 May 1996 21:12:15 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 66
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nogtf$gic@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nod0m$3vt4@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nod0m$3vt4@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord
McFee) writes:

>Subject:	Re: Holocaust?
>From:	gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord McFee)
>Date:	Sun, 19 May 1996 13:21:12 EDT
>
>In article <4nlmje$ktu@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ehrlich606@aol.com
>(Ehrlich606) said:
>
>>>	Holohuggers also substitute mantras for reason, pretend their
>>>documentation is in fact documentation when it is mere repetition
>>>of hearsay, and generally act like sanctimonious creationists
>>>with as little regard for reason and honesty.
>>>
>>Yeah, and the Nizkor FAQ is not far removed from the Q & A that I used
to
>>get in catechism, if I may speak openly!  Nizkor Catechism .... hmmm
>
>>I am going to come out on Matt's side THIS TIME, because the
>>conventionalists are acting like True Believers with the constant
>>repetition of the Nizkorite Creed as revealed by the Prophet McVay.
>>Reminds me of a bunch of kids trying to break a kid who is different by
>>repeating the same silly rhyme.  Maybe they think that Matt will start
to
>>cry and go home.
>
>Moving quickly over to the other side, Mr. Ehrlich?  You are so
*reasonable*
>and all.  

No, I am just getting irritated at the way conventionalists are ending all
of their posts to Matt with the same mantra, which, as I understand,
derives from a statement from McVay.
>
>The assumption that people who accept the truth do so because of
revelations
>from the "Prophet McVay" is laughable.  Many of the people on the true
side
>of the story are there because they have researched these things
themselves,
>in some cases, over many, many years.  Mr. McVay's site, as useful as it
is,
>came along pretty late in the game.  And, in passing, I note you are not
>disputing one fact that is posted there--just muttering banal
generalities
>about creeds.

No more banal than the usual closing invective directed against Giwer,
IMHO!

>
>>Even though I think some his posts are junk, the man deserves to be
heard,
>>ESPECIALLY here.  I will watch his posts, too, and if I catch him
screwing
>>around I will say so, just to be fair.  And in return, his opposite
>>numbers should try to answer his arguments without extended invective.
>>That means everybody, please?
>
>You obviously do not know (do you?) the Giwer-troll in his glory.  He has
>ranged from the most base slander and vulgarity to outright libel.  Any
>invective slung his way is richly earned.
>
I am keeping my eyes open.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:10 PDT 1996
Article: 38129 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: 20 May 1996 11:04:38 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 13
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nq1m6$p56@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4np3tm$ou9@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4np3tm$ou9@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com (Matt
Giwer) writes:

>	
>	But our killfile challenge attorney knows a patent attorney who
>would consider you position laughable.  Considering that both are
>from Pennsylvania, it gives a new meaning to Philadelphia lawyer.
>The last I heard it is the same as shyster.
>
>
>
Perfect example of a comment that is easily taken as anti-semitic.  That's
one.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:11 PDT 1996
Article: 38173 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: which buildings for gassing
Date: 20 May 1996 10:31:53 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 13
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4npvop$ojt@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4noiol$8vs@dfw-ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4noiol$8vs@dfw-ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com
(Matt Giwer) writes:

>
>	It is sort of like Pilate asking What is truth and turning before
>he received an answer.  
>
>
>-

What is Truth? said jesting Pilate, and would not stay for an answer.

-- Sir Francis Bacon


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:12 PDT 1996
Article: 38245 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.his.com!news.frontiernet.net!news.texas.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: 20 May 1996 16:01:05 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 53
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nqj21$5q@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nq8np$qj7@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

Note: Matt and DT have been discussing Strategic Bombing, that’s where I
come in.

The main reason the British and Americans sent waves of bombers over
Germany is that they could not politically afford to suffer casualties at
the rate the Soviets did.

Shirer’s “Berlin Diary” makes it clear that from Summer ‘39 through Summer
‘40, there was a lot of fantasizing about bombing cities.  But the fact is
that German bombing policy was tactical, not strategic.  Warsaw was bombed
in the context of the siege of the city and the Polish Army forces
defending it.  Rotterdam was bombed -- by mistake -- in concert with
Student’s paratroop invasion (characteristically, the 900 dead was
inflated to 10,000).  The German Blitz of London and other English towns
was largely reactive to British bombings of German cities, especially
after it became clear that Germany would not win the Battle for Control of
British Airspace (Battle of Britain). (consult Max Hastings’ Bomber
Command, also relevant titles and articles by AJP Taylor, Irving’s Dresden
book is also good here.)

Remember that after 1940, even after the US got in, there was no way to
get on the field with the Germans because they controlled the continent. 
An index of the problem: the US got into the war in December, 1941, but
the US and Britain weren’t able to fight the Germans in open country until
Summer, 1944.  That is over two and a half years.  Meanwhile, the Soviets
were losing millions in frontal assaults, and so forth.

It was a classic scenario of collective responsibility.  The US and
Britain couldn’t get the ones they wanted, i.e., the Wehrmacht, so they
got who they could, namely, the cities.

It’s not that the US and British were cowards either.  The Canadians were
wasted at Dieppe in 1942.  The US was wasted all the way up the Italian
Peninsula from 1943 onwards.  But the Germans had terrain advantages,
armament advantages, experience advantages.  Meanwhile, neither US or
British public opinion would have stomached WW1 body counts.  That
explains a lot about Allied strategy, including the Broad Front strategy
of Ike.

For lack of anything better, the Allies (mostly the British) started
bombing cities.  This involved using thermite to start fires to set a
beacon for successive waves.  This in turn, involved firing the wood parts
of town, which were the old medieval centers.  It grew from there. 
Dresden was an attempt to show Stalin how tough and committed the Allies
were.  Stalin was already angry with the Allies.  He had suffered maybe 7
million battle deaths alone by that point.  Total deaths in the ETO by the
US and Britain were probably only a couple hundred thousand.   So Dresden
was sacrificed.







From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:12 PDT 1996
Article: 38315 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!icarus.lon.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Alternate Introductory Systems
Date: 21 May 1996 06:20:43 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 23
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ns5dr$f7u@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nr77v$23k0@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nr77v$23k0@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord
McFee) writes:

>
>What it is, of course, is intellectually dishonest and spiritually
bankrupt. 
>Racially motivated.  An attempt by the losers in life to try to elevate
>themselves to the level of the decent people, or more accurately, an
attempt
>by the losers to bring the decent people down to their level.  It won't
work
>of course, but the desperate alienation and loneliness that drives these
>types will impel them on.  The Giwer-troll will continue to try to demean
>and degrade decent people and to sacrilege the dead.  But it won't work. 
>The decent people have seen through him.  And all he has left for
"comfort"
>is the losers like himself.  Poor, pathetic old Giwer-troll.
>
>

I like this, Gord.  I don't agree 100%, I don't even agree 100% with
myself, but I like this.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:13 PDT 1996
Article: 38325 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The shy, retiring Giwer-troll
Date: 21 May 1996 06:04:00 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 15
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ns4eg$f36@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nqvfq$1k3@dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nqvfq$1k3@dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com
(Matt Giwer) writes:

>  You must be Jewish to do such a
>think.
>
>
>

Totally unnecessary remark, that could easily be construed as
anti-semitic.  Although in this case you were not the first to cast
stones.  That makes two.

PS:  When are you going to realize that making anti-semitic comments is
not going to persuade anyone?


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:14 PDT 1996
Article: 38326 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!loki.tor.hookup.net!hookup!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: 'Jews who are not fit for work can be eliminated without qualms'
Date: 21 May 1996 08:02:56 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nsbdg$h8i@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nqvg5$ml3@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nqvg5$ml3@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com (Matt
Giwer) writes:

>
>>Giwer, does it ever accure to you to wonder why some innocent little 
>>girl like Anne Frank had to die like that?
>>Chuckles
>
>	Did it ever occur to you that you are senile?
>
>-

Matt, this is a grotesque insult.  Chuck asked you an honest question
about a girl who got screwed over just because she was Jewish.  Your
rejoinder is just to ask him if he has lost his mind.  This does not help
your credibility.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:14 PDT 1996
Article: 38334 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Survivors's story decries GOLDHAGEN's
Date: 21 May 1996 07:18:49 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ns8qp$g4o@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nqc8o$jm@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nqc8o$jm@Networking.Stanford.EDU>, rich@c2.org (Rich Graves)
writes:

>>German society and the indignities heaped upon them figure prominently
in
>>Klemperer's journal entries from the years 1933-1945, which were 
>>published last fall by the
>>Berlin-based Aufbau Verlag under the title Ich will Zeugnis ablegen bis 
>>zum letzten ( I Want to Give Witness to the End ).
>
>Thanks. I'll check it out.
>
>

Just for my information, is this guy any relation to Otto Klemperer the
conductor/composer or his son Werner Klemperer, aka Colonel Klink?


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:15 PDT 1996
Article: 38360 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!news.nstn.ca!news.dal.ca!torn!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: My Complaint About Matt Giwer
Date: 21 May 1996 06:36:29 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 14
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ns6bd$fbn@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nqu9j$2bf@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nqu9j$2bf@Networking.Stanford.EDU>, rich@c2.org (Rich Graves)
writes:

>unprofessional boeotians. Today, it's prudish adolescents who reward
>mediocrity. It may seem to many people, maybe even the majority, that
>he has become increasingly ostentatious ever since childhood. He uses
>his influence to give me reason to have a nervous breakdown. I would
>like to close by saying that I don't think it would be unfair to say
>that I by no means claim to know everything about unsophisticated
>conservatives. 
>
>

Uh huh.  Anf you accuse ME of sophomoric bullshit?  Well written, anyway.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:16 PDT 1996
Article: 38386 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: How Anne Frank Died (was Re: A little Q&A on the holocaust)
Date: 21 May 1996 14:47:36 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 27
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nt348$o0m@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article ,
Marty Kelley  writes:

>
>The _Critical Edition_ of the diary makes no mention of Anne and her 
>sister being ill when they were evacuated from Auschwitz as the Germans 
>attemprted to close down the camp in advance of the approaching Soviet 
>Army.  

OK, so you are saying that they were sent to Bergen Belsen because A-B was
trying to shut down in the face of the advancing Soviet Army.

While the records of transports from Auschwitz do not list names 
>of individual prisoners evacuated, it seems likely that Anne and Margot 
>were among a transfer to Bergen-Belsen on October 28 1944 (_Critical 
>Edition_ p. 52). The fact that both died sometime in late February or 
>early March 1945 suggests that they did not 
>contract typhus until *after* their arrival at Bergen-Belsen, which 
>experienced a massive typhus epidemic near the *end* of the winter of 
>1944-45 (_Critical Edition_ p. 54-55).

This does not follow.  The Soviets didn't get to A-B until the end of
January, 1945, that is, three months later.  Therefore the contention that
they were sent to Bergen Belsen to get away from the Red Army closing in
does not follow.  Furthermore, none of this explains why they weren't
killed in one of Goldhagen's famous "death marches."



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:16 PDT 1996
Article: 38393 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: 'Jews who are not fit for work can be eliminated without qualms'
Date: 21 May 1996 15:50:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 21
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nt6qh$p4f@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nsnni$761@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nsnni$761@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com
(Matt Giwer) writes:

>
>>Matt, this is a grotesque insult.  Chuck asked you an honest question
>>about a girl who got screwed over just because she was Jewish.  Your
>>rejoinder is just to ask him if he has lost his mind.  This does not
help
>>your credibility.
>
>	What makes you think I care about your opinion?
>
>
>
Well, if you had posed an argument, and I had rejected it, and I had
previously shown that I was evasive, or obtuse, then I wouldn't care,
either.  But I am neither a true believer nor a flat out denier, and if
you don't care about my opinion, then you don't care about communicating
with anyone.  Which means that your posts are written mostly for yourself.
 Which means that your posts are essentially masturbatory.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:17 PDT 1996
Article: 38399 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Holocaust?
Date: 21 May 1996 08:03:45 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 27
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nsbf1$h97@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nr78c$2jcc@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nr78c$2jcc@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord
McFee) writes:
[quoting Matt Giwer]
>
>To follow the rule that has been applied to me, quote them or the do not
>exist.
>
>>    As Sara has said, "go away little man."
>
>It is only what she dreams her cunt were like.
>
>[end quote]
>
>This was posted May 18.  Did you notice it?
>
>

Whoa!  That's -- well, I was going to say that's pretty hairy, but never
mind.  I agree, such comments are out of bounds.  And, true, in the 36
hour period in which I have actually been reading his posts -- rather than
just ignoring them -- I can say that I am getting a feel for his modes of
expression.

But then let me ask you a question:  WHY DON'T YOU JUST IGNORE HIM?  The
only thing that caught MY EYE were these paragraphs of ritualized
condemnation that all of you started ending your posts with.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:17 PDT 1996
Article: 38402 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!imci3!imci4!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: revise those damn museums
Date: 21 May 1996 10:21:07 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nsjgj$jfs@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nrlod$h78@dfw-ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nrlod$h78@dfw-ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com
(Matt Giwer) writes:

>>the
>>memorial with her proposal to build a huge tombstone-like structure
>>inscribed with the names of the Jews who died in the Holocaust, but many
>>supporters of the project, including Chancellor Kohl and his cabinet, 
>>voiced
>>reservations about her design (cf. TWIG 7/7/95,        p.6; 7/21/95,
p.7).
>> A
>>new choice is now to be made from the seven best submissions to the 
>>original
>>competition.
>
>	But only the names of Jews.  What was that I was saying about the
>other six million only being a footnote?
>
>

Now just stop and think: how many non-Jews would have been deported from a
railroad station in Berlin?


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:18 PDT 1996
Article: 38404 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: BEHOLD THE LIE
Date: 21 May 1996 16:17:05 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 67
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nt8c1$pg9@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nt3pg$3k8@hackberry.zilker.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nt3pg$3k8@hackberry.zilker.net>, mike@aimetering.com (Mike
Curtis) writes:

>
>>Mark: I don't see how you can re-quote this passage so complacently! 
>>Where is the proof of the myriad assertions that it contains? "invention
>>of communist officials", "sought to blur the uniqueness", "clever
attempt
>>at subterfuge" etc. etc.!
>
>Then your duty is to provide detailed citations and documentation that
>it is clearly false. The ball is in your court and not Mark's. 

Oh no you don't!  You get off scot free with the IMT and the NMT.  This
comes later, and it has to be backed up.  
>
>>  There is absolutely no substantiation provided
>>here, and the Wiesenthal Center (and Nizkor) make themselves look bad by
>>repeating it as such.  I mean, I made a similar observation in a post a
>>week or so ago, but at least I didn't pretend it was FACT!
>
>And in the same vain you make yourself look silly and bad for you are
>guilty of the same lack of substantiation.

In the same vein, I am not attempting to argue consistently one side of
the board or the other.  My comments must needs be suggestive: I do not
have access to sources anymore.
>
>You should also realize that most of these FAQs do come with citations
>that are at time too combersome to provide here in this forum. If you
>such a problem with the citation why don't you visit the cite itself
>and complain. 

OK, so I posted a suggested replacement later in this string.

PS:  Thanks for being the only one who reads all my stuff!

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------- Headers --------------------
>Path:
>newsbf01.news.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.
ans.net!n3ott.istar!istar.net!n1ott.istar!uniserve!news.sol.net!uwm.edu!cs.
utexas.edu!zilker.net!usenet
>From: mike@aimetering.com (Mike Curtis)
>Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
>Subject: Re: BEHOLD THE LIE
>Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 18:58:40 GMT
>Organization: Zilker Internet Park, Inc.
>Lines: 74
>Message-ID: <4nt3pg$3k8@hackberry.zilker.net>
>References: 
><4njjg2$aj@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: mike.aimetering.com
>X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
>
>



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:19 PDT 1996
Article: 38405 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: BEHOLD THE LIE
Date: 21 May 1996 16:17:06 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 47
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nt8c2$pga@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nsg99$ojt@hackberry.zilker.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nsg99$ojt@hackberry.zilker.net>, mike@aimetering.com (Mike
Curtis) writes:

>Subject:	Re: BEHOLD THE LIE
>From:	mike@aimetering.com (Mike Curtis)
>Date:	Tue, 21 May 1996 13:25:30 GMT
>
>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote:
>
>>In article <4njr4t$su5@atlas.uniserve.com>, hostrov@uniserve.com (Hilary
>>Ostrov) writes:
>
>
>>A better formulation would be:
>
>>The Soviet Commission stated on [date] that four million
died
>>at Auschwitz Birkenau.  At the same time, The Soviet Commission did not
>>specify the number of Jewish victims, although it did specify a number
of
>>victims most of whom were calculated as coming from areas in Eastern
>>Europe under Soviet control.
>
>>The statement of the Soviet Commission, although it has been frequently
>>repeated in the West, has no bearing, and in fact makes no attempt to
have
>>bearing, on the number of Jewish victims who were killed at Auschwitz
>>Birkenau.  Holocaust historians, OTOH, have generally arrived at a
>>calculation of about 1 million Jewish dead for Auschwitz Birkenau
>>consistently over the past 50 years.  They have also arrived at an
overall
>>death count of about six million.
>
>>The recent revision of Auschwitz death tolls therefore has no bearing on
>>the number of its Jewish victims, or on Holocaust death totals overall,
>>but it does have bearing on discrediting the claim that millions of
>>non-Jews were killed there. 
>
>>My advice would be to take the above paragraph, edit it to fit, and
>>substitute.  It is not entirely true, as far as I am concerned, but it
>>does not make the leaps that the original post does.  
>
>Why? If you are so concerned why don't you present an alternative. I'm
>sure the volunteers at Nizkor would be grateful.
>
If you read the post carefully, you would see that THE ABOVE IS MY WRITTEN
ALTERNATIVE!


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:19 PDT 1996
Article: 38445 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: 21 May 1996 18:00:38 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 25
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ntee6$rd0@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nsqs4$ku4@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nsqs4$ku4@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com
(Matt Giwer) writes:

>
>dkeren@world.std.com (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>
>>mgiwer@ix.netcom.com (Matt Giwer) writes:
>
>># Give it up. You have no technical background much less any
>># experience with patents.  
>
>>Ok. Let's go over it again.
>
>>The naziboys claim that it took a very long time for the
>>HCN to evaporate from the Zyklon. The Zyklon patent and
>>the book by Dr. Peters, the leading scientist of the firm
>>that used to manufacture it, give a much shorter time.
>
>
Now let's get this straight: the HCN is not 100% exhausted from the
carrier material in 10 minutes. No one says this: neither Peters nor
Keren. That means the carrier material continues to be a risk.  I can
accept that the Zyklon was lethal in 10 minutes, but to claim that it was
inert in 10 minutes does not follow.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:20 PDT 1996
Article: 38453 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: 21 May 1996 21:55:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 2
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nts5l$38h@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ntom0$12u@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>
Reply-To: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com

Read my stuff for an inkling of Jewish uniqueness.  I will keep re-writing
until I get it right.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:21 PDT 1996
Article: 38469 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: How Anne Frank Died (was Re: A little Q&A on the holocaust)
Date: 21 May 1996 23:09:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 27
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nu0gd$50u@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article ,
Marty Kelley  writes:

>
>The _Critical Edition_ of the diary makes no mention of Anne and her 
>sister being ill when they were evacuated from Auschwitz as the Germans 
>attemprted to close down the camp in advance of the approaching Soviet 
>Army.  

OK, so you are saying that they were sent to Bergen Belsen because A-B was
trying to shut down in the face of the advancing Soviet Army.

While the records of transports from Auschwitz do not list names 
>of individual prisoners evacuated, it seems likely that Anne and Margot 
>were among a transfer to Bergen-Belsen on October 28 1944 (_Critical 
>Edition_ p. 52). The fact that both died sometime in late February or 
>early March 1945 suggests that they did not 
>contract typhus until *after* their arrival at Bergen-Belsen, which 
>experienced a massive typhus epidemic near the *end* of the winter of 
>1944-45 (_Critical Edition_ p. 54-55).

This does not follow.  The Soviets didn't get to A-B until the end of
January, 1945, that is, three months later.  Therefore the contention that
they were sent to Bergen Belsen to get away from the Red Army closing in
does not follow.  Furthermore, none of this explains why they weren't
killed in one of Goldhagen's famous "death marches."



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:22 PDT 1996
Article: 38560 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads
Subject: Re: Comparing cultures
Date: 22 May 1996 05:07:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 46
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nulft$b8f@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ntjgf$dvo@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:29685 alt.politics.nationalism.white:20632 alt.discrimination:47357 alt.revisionism:38560 alt.skinheads:24434

In article <4ntjgf$dvo@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU>, msimons@scws37.harvard.edu
(Marco Simons) writes:

>Subject:	Re: Comparing cultures
>From:	msimons@scws37.harvard.edu (Marco Simons)
>Date:	21 May 1996 23:27:11 GMT
>
>Alexandre Kotov (akotov1@umbc.edu) wrote:
>: would inevitably involve the bias on the part of "judges". I have shown
>that
>: anything requires a value judgment. Otherwise, we would have to
consider
>: chimpanzees an equals of ourselves. Chimpanzees have quite an elaborate

>: "culture". Yet we feel perfectly qualified to deem them our primitive
>distant
>: cousins.
>
>There is no scientific position that would deem chimpanzees to be
>"primitive;" such designation is indeed a value judgment.  They are our
>distant cousins.  More of their expressed characteristics are ancestral. 
>If we apply a system in which we value capacity for abstract thought,
then
>chimpanzees are considerably more primitive.  Such a system, however,
>tells us nothing about human cultures, unless you want to suppose that
one
>culture evidences a qualitatively greater capacity for abstract thought
>than another. 
>
>Barring that, it is indeed very easy to separate out human culture from 
>Pan spp. "culture", on the basis of primitiveness, without being able to 
>separate out any two human cultures on the same basis.
>
>What, then, is the value system being used to judge human cultures?  And 
>why?  Your turn.
>
>--marco
>
"I refute it THUS!" said Dr. Johnson, and kicked the stone across the
road. Fundamental philosophical point:  bootstrap problems don't exist
unless you insist.

Figure out your desired consequences.  Keep a close eye on tradition. 
Make no leaps. There is your culture, and because it is yours, and you
can't escape it, value judgments about your culture or any other are moot.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:22 PDT 1996
Article: 38573 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The shy, retiring Giwer-troll
Date: 22 May 1996 13:19:24 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 14
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nvias$jr7@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4nu7f9$bvk@sjx-ixn2.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4nu7f9$bvk@sjx-ixn2.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com (Matt
Giwer) writes:

>
>	It is an amusing fantasy you folks are creating, that I was
>"retired."  Want to try to back up your claim?  
>
>	How very Jewish of you.
>
>
>
>
Number three in a series of comments which could be easily construed as
anti-semitic.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:23 PDT 1996
Article: 38574 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: 22 May 1996 13:19:52 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 52
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nvibo$jrc@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <31a2a484.29499668@news.txdirect.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <31a2a484.29499668@news.txdirect.net>, hmazal@txdirect.net
(Harry W. Mazal OBE) writes:

>
>Mr/Ms  Erlich606 is kind enough to accept that sufficient hydrogen
>cyanide can escape from the substrate on to which it has been adsorbed
>to reach lethal levels in ten minutes.  One can argue this point.

At this juncture Mr/Ms Mazal, OBE proceeds to argue the point, even though
I concede it and am not interested in arguing it.

>How
>much Zyklon-B is needed to render a room deadly in a ten minute
>period? This will depend on several factors: temperature, the size of
>the room, even the levels of humidity, and, of course the number of
>people that are placed in the room.  The point is moot, however as
>most reliable witnesses have confessed that up to 40 times the lethal
>dose required was introduced into the chambers.

I would prefer to say that the point is moot because it is not in dispute.
 Not with me, anyway.

>
>How much was left in the pellets after ten minutes?  Perhaps the
>lady/gentleman would make the effort to search out the original
>patents on Zyklon-B.  Perhaps he/she should take the solubility of HCN
>into account. There are many such factors. They are also moot. 

Here the distinguished lady/gentleman suggests that I go to the effort to
locate the original patents for Zyklon, study chemistry so that I might
become knowledgeable about the solubility of HCN, references many other
factors, and then tells me that they are all moot.  That's a hoot.

>Most
>descriptions of those who have entered the chambers after a gasing
>admit to wearing gas masks.  There are drains in many of the chambers
>connected to sewer lines.  There are descriptions of hosing down the
>chambers (and the corpses) with water from a tap just outside one of
>the chambers. There are even descriptions of white-washing the walls
>of some of the chambers after each gasing.

Without answering the point I raised, which concerned the point at which
the substrate became inert, the distinguished gentleman/lady has at least
managed to impressively answer a question that I did not ask.
>
>If the gentleman/lady wishes a more in depth view of this subject, it
>is available to him/her or anyone else on the Nizkor pages.

The response from the gentleman/lady posted here is not, in my humble
masculine opinion, a particular good advertisement for either the cogency
or pertinence of the materials available from Nizkor, a site that I have
already visited with pleasure.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:24 PDT 1996
Article: 38589 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Testimonial Fiction
Date: 22 May 1996 14:49:39 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 39
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nvnk3$lgs@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <31a31339.3502127@news.pacificnet.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <31a31339.3502127@news.pacificnet.net>, tm@pacificnet.net (tom
moran) writes:
>
>kmcvay@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca (Ken McVay OBC) wrote:

>>                            EXCERPT 
>>               From Interrogration of Defendant
>>
>>February 21, 1945. Lieutenant EPPEL', Investigator of the Fourth
>>Department of the "SMERSH" Directorate of Counterintelligence of the
>>Second Belorussian Front interrogated as defendant -
>>
>>      LELEKO, Pavel Vladimirovich, born in 1922, native of the village
>>      of Chaplinka, Chaplinka District, Nikolayev Region, Ukrainian,
>>      citizen of the USSR.
>
>	This report like all the rest lacks a certain detail that one
>might expect from a real hearing. It is more like some tale with a few
>questions inserted. A question is asked and then Leleko goes off with
>a extended comment and the interogator never poses any thing for
>clarification. Even UFO story writers cover their stuff more
>carefully.

If this is all we had, then I would agree that there are some obscurities
in this text.  OTOH, a better witness to refute would be Suchomel, whose
interview with Lanzmann covers most of the essentials cited here.  Since
you don't even MENTION Suchomel, then I submit that your deconstruction of
this text is basically dishonest.  This ruins your credibility on this
topic.

There is a tendency to Either/Or the testimony.  Either it is always all
true, or else it is always all false.  I can understand the motivations,
and they need not be evil.  But surely even you would not deny, Tom Moran,
that many Jews were put to death just because they were Jews.  As far as I
am concerned, that is the point here.






From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:24 PDT 1996
Article: 38593 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!admaix.sunydutchess.edu!ub!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Diesel exhaust that looks like steam
Date: 22 May 1996 13:19:38 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nviba$jra@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <31a2a00c.28356239@news.txdirect.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <31a2a00c.28356239@news.txdirect.net>, hmazal@txdirect.net
(Harry W. Mazal OBE) writes:

>
>Dr. Keren is wasting his breath and energy trying to convince Mr.
>Giwer with documented proof. Mr. Giwer is a professional (and thus a
>sad and hopeless) chain-puller.  No proof will ever convince Mr. Giwer
>except that which is posted on a label as "90 Proof." 
>
>
Mr/Ms Mazal, OBE -- Now you gave me a straight answer, and now you have
given him one straight up.  This is not right.  I could as easily say that
Mr. Giwer's favorite musical composition is Beethoven's 9th Symphony,
because it begins with open fifths.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 22 23:43:25 PDT 1996
Article: 38670 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Jews for Faggots in Alberta
Date: 22 May 1996 19:20:59 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 18
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4o07gr$qj6@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <832710527snz@abaron.demon.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <832710527snz@abaron.demon.co.uk>, Alexander Baron
 writes:

>
>The point I was making is that some people in this group - whom I will
not 
>name - have claimed or insinuated that the Jewish religion is using 
>homosexuality as a weapon to subvert Western society. The reality is that
>the organised homosexual movement has made great strides in subverting
the 
>Christian religion, and is now attempting to do the same to Judaism.
>
>Once Jesus only wanted your soul; now he wants your arsehole as well.
>
>

Would this be according to the Proctocols of the Elders of Zion?



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 23 00:04:37 PDT 1996
Article: 29685 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads
Subject: Re: Comparing cultures
Date: 22 May 1996 05:07:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 46
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nulft$b8f@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ntjgf$dvo@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:29685 alt.politics.nationalism.white:20632 alt.discrimination:47357 alt.revisionism:38560 alt.skinheads:24434

In article <4ntjgf$dvo@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU>, msimons@scws37.harvard.edu
(Marco Simons) writes:

>Subject:	Re: Comparing cultures
>From:	msimons@scws37.harvard.edu (Marco Simons)
>Date:	21 May 1996 23:27:11 GMT
>
>Alexandre Kotov (akotov1@umbc.edu) wrote:
>: would inevitably involve the bias on the part of "judges". I have shown
>that
>: anything requires a value judgment. Otherwise, we would have to
consider
>: chimpanzees an equals of ourselves. Chimpanzees have quite an elaborate

>: "culture". Yet we feel perfectly qualified to deem them our primitive
>distant
>: cousins.
>
>There is no scientific position that would deem chimpanzees to be
>"primitive;" such designation is indeed a value judgment.  They are our
>distant cousins.  More of their expressed characteristics are ancestral. 
>If we apply a system in which we value capacity for abstract thought,
then
>chimpanzees are considerably more primitive.  Such a system, however,
>tells us nothing about human cultures, unless you want to suppose that
one
>culture evidences a qualitatively greater capacity for abstract thought
>than another. 
>
>Barring that, it is indeed very easy to separate out human culture from 
>Pan spp. "culture", on the basis of primitiveness, without being able to 
>separate out any two human cultures on the same basis.
>
>What, then, is the value system being used to judge human cultures?  And 
>why?  Your turn.
>
>--marco
>
"I refute it THUS!" said Dr. Johnson, and kicked the stone across the
road. Fundamental philosophical point:  bootstrap problems don't exist
unless you insist.

Figure out your desired consequences.  Keep a close eye on tradition. 
Make no leaps. There is your culture, and because it is yours, and you
can't escape it, value judgments about your culture or any other are moot.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 23 07:32:41 PDT 1996
Article: 38705 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Ehrlich
Date: 23 May 1996 02:09:30 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 47
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4o0veq$3vv@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4o09vm$h03@boris.eden.com>
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4o09vm$h03@boris.eden.com>, mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis)
writes:

>ate:	Thu, 23 May 1996 00:03:06 GMT
>
>Okay, I've been tough on Ehrlich. Although I think it is fair to ask
>the individual to back up some of his strange opinions, I'll try to be
>gentler since everyone thinks I'm to tough. So I'll be a kindler
>gentler Mike. Better?
>
>I still want my questions answered by Ehrlich.
>

Mike, you just have some crazy idea that I am a stealth denier who is
going to trick people into trusting him, and then is going to lead folks
into the pit of denial.  IMHO, you'd do better to keep your eyes on that
Prozac guy or whoever he is who wrote that monster book a few years ago.

The reason I can't back up a lot that I say is that I am at least 13 years
away from the sources.  This subject has dominated my thinking for too
many of my years, and I don't want to get back in the pits again.  I am
doing all of this by memory.

The other thing is that after pondering this stuff for many years I have
concluded that the details are not that important, at least in terms at
arriving at a correct appraisal of the uniqueness of the Jewish Holocaust,
German Responsibility, and so forth.

I am enough of a historian (indeed, I was trained to be one, and taught
other and related topics for several years) to know that things change.  I
expect that there will be lots of detail fine tuning in the next couple of
decades.  Since I am not going to be in any archives, then I amuse myself,
and hopefully contribute, by offering suggestions.  But my suggestions are
not leading ideas designed to corrupt.

Another thing.  Since I was trained as an intellectual historian, my
approach to documents might seem a bit weird at times.  Also, because I
know this story very well, I like to let both sides know when I catch them
fudging issues.  Finally, I like the play of ideas.  Maybe this is not the
most appropriate forum for it, but that is my nature.  It is not my
intention to offend or hurt.

I will keep my nom de cyber to make my wife happy.  I will tell my
interlocutors on a need to know basis, as I already have with several.





From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 23 07:32:42 PDT 1996
Article: 38729 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: 23 May 1996 06:10:39 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 36
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4o1div$6p6@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4o09vf$h03@boris.eden.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4o09vf$h03@boris.eden.com>, mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis)
writes:

>
>>	Yes.  It marginalizes and compartmentalizes one of the major
issues: the 
>>effect of modern war on civilian populations.
>
>I disagree. I've seen many valuable books on how the civilian
>population was influenced by war. The ones I have in my library that a
>pointed in this kind of discussion are:
>
>

and so forth.  But I think Yale makes a very good point, or rather, two
good points, namely, that the Second World War was a Total War, and you
cannot, for example, discuss battlefield heroism without discussing the
suffering of civilian populations.  For example, Rommel's brilliancy in
firing the houses along the Meuse to provide smoke cover for his river
crossing in May, 1940 always makes me think if the people who lived in
those houses appreciated Rommel's art.  Discussions of heroism in the
Normandy campaign tends to ignore the fact that several towns (notably,
Caen) were wasted in the process. And so forth.  Defenseless men, women,
and children were being slaughtered on all sides while guys in spiffy
uniforms were doing brave things. 

As per the Jewish Holocaust, if we do not grant that the Holocaust was
accelerated by the war, we must admit that it was aggravated by the war. 
Since the Holocaust was by far the worst atrocity against civilians in the
War (other, not exactly comparable ones arguably came before the War or
after), and was besides inarguably the worst atrocity against civilians in
war since the time of Genghis Khan, it really should not be separated from
the course of the rest of the war.

I am sure that there are ways to fine tune my point but I will leave it at
that for now.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 23 07:32:43 PDT 1996
Article: 38731 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Down with the nazis! Down with the hate mongers!!! - H
Date: 23 May 1996 06:26:14 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 19
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4o1eg6$77a@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4o09vn$h03@boris.eden.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4o09vn$h03@boris.eden.com>, mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis)
writes:

>
>Sarah Gordon suggests that the anti-Semitism was a soft sell at first.
>She asserts that it was there in various degrees. It didn't really
>come out in full bloom until after the fire. I believe my memory is
>correct in this.
>
>>
>
>
>

The interesting thing about Gordon's book is that she was criticized for
putting so much faith in post war polls.  Different method, different
result than Goldhagen, and criticized by the other side.  People believe
what they want to believe.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 23 07:32:43 PDT 1996
Article: 38732 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: 23 May 1996 06:27:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 19
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4o1ehl$77m@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4o09vb$h03@boris.eden.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4o09vb$h03@boris.eden.com>, mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis)
writes:

>
>>	In fact there is nothing unique about the Jews in this matter.
>>But you still have the mindset that the Jews were in some manner
>>unique. That only shows you what constant repetition will do. 
>
>You are right. The only problem is that that is where most of the
>denial concerns are. They deny the Jewish aspect. That is the only
>uniqueness here, Giwer. 
>
>
>

I disagree.  The uniqueness of the Jewish Holocaust is that it was the
last line of the Ashkenazy world.  That is the bottom line.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 23 07:41:02 PDT 1996
Article: 24434 of alt.skinheads
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads
Subject: Re: Comparing cultures
Date: 22 May 1996 05:07:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 46
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nulft$b8f@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ntjgf$dvo@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:29685 alt.politics.nationalism.white:20632 alt.discrimination:47357 alt.revisionism:38560 alt.skinheads:24434

In article <4ntjgf$dvo@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU>, msimons@scws37.harvard.edu
(Marco Simons) writes:

>Subject:	Re: Comparing cultures
>From:	msimons@scws37.harvard.edu (Marco Simons)
>Date:	21 May 1996 23:27:11 GMT
>
>Alexandre Kotov (akotov1@umbc.edu) wrote:
>: would inevitably involve the bias on the part of "judges". I have shown
>that
>: anything requires a value judgment. Otherwise, we would have to
consider
>: chimpanzees an equals of ourselves. Chimpanzees have quite an elaborate

>: "culture". Yet we feel perfectly qualified to deem them our primitive
>distant
>: cousins.
>
>There is no scientific position that would deem chimpanzees to be
>"primitive;" such designation is indeed a value judgment.  They are our
>distant cousins.  More of their expressed characteristics are ancestral. 
>If we apply a system in which we value capacity for abstract thought,
then
>chimpanzees are considerably more primitive.  Such a system, however,
>tells us nothing about human cultures, unless you want to suppose that
one
>culture evidences a qualitatively greater capacity for abstract thought
>than another. 
>
>Barring that, it is indeed very easy to separate out human culture from 
>Pan spp. "culture", on the basis of primitiveness, without being able to 
>separate out any two human cultures on the same basis.
>
>What, then, is the value system being used to judge human cultures?  And 
>why?  Your turn.
>
>--marco
>
"I refute it THUS!" said Dr. Johnson, and kicked the stone across the
road. Fundamental philosophical point:  bootstrap problems don't exist
unless you insist.

Figure out your desired consequences.  Keep a close eye on tradition. 
Make no leaps. There is your culture, and because it is yours, and you
can't escape it, value judgments about your culture or any other are moot.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 23 07:54:23 PDT 1996
Article: 1184 of alt.fan.ernst-zundel
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.ernst-zundel
Subject: Re: NAZIS
Date: 21 May 1996 15:24:11 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 18
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nt58r$olf@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <31A15B25.489B@ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <31A15B25.489B@ix.netcom.com>, Geoff Cooper
 writes:

>
>> THere is a very strong possibility that his father was Jewish. His
mother
>> was a maid working for a Jewish family named Schickelburger (sp).
>
>Schickelgruber, I believe.  What a slander to imply that the Jewish guy 
>committed adultery and also produced Adolf baby.  Actually, he looked 
>pretty much like a classical south German (Bavarian) ethnic type IMO.
>--

I can't believe this stuff is still being dished out. Adolf's father,
Alois Hitler, was apparently born to an unwed mother, nee Schicklgruber,
who eventually married Alois' legal father, named Heidler.  Hitler's
mother, who he strongly resembled, BTW, was born Clara Poelzl.  I haven't
checked this stuff in ages, but that is basically the way it goes.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri May 24 07:18:31 PDT 1996
Article: 38828 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.his.com!news2.cais.net!news.cais.net!bofh.dot!van-bc!news.rmii.com!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: 23 May 1996 05:20:29 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 50
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4o1akt$66k@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4o09vg$h03@boris.eden.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4o09vg$h03@boris.eden.com>, mcurtis@eden.com (Mike Curtis)
writes:

>
>rich@c2.org (Rich Graves) wrote:
>
>>mike@aimetering.com (Mike Curtis) writes:
>>>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote:
>>>>It is also true that survivors could have told something less than the
>>>>objective truth for a variety of reasons, none of which would involve
a
>>>>Zionist plot.
>>>
>>>Ewww. A zionist plot! And what was this plot? Was EVERY Jew involved?
>>>Is every Jew a Zionist? Ewwww. 
>
>>Mike, I'm not sure what you're saying. I read "Ehrlich606" (Mr. Syphilis
>>for short) to be saying that the so-called revisionist allegations of a
>>Zionist Plot (tm) were ludicrous.

That is exactly what I was saying.  Call me MISTER Syph!
>
>>The stories of the survivors are not all consistent. This is not
>>controversial. "Less than the objective truth" is a rather unkind way to
>>speak of this inconsistency, but I'll give Ehrlich a little slack. A
>>little.
>

I USED that formulation to be polite.  I do not want to speculate here on
motivations or possible explanations for these inconsistencies, unless I
am confident in my logic and the consequences of my logic.  It is not
otherwise appropriate for a public forum cruised by anti-semites looking
for ammo.

>>We* all agree that despite these inconsistencies, which are to be found
in
>>any series of eyewitness reports of any crime, the general pattern of
Nazi
>>genocide against the Jews is absolutely clear. I'd like Ehrlich to tell
us
>>what specific minor inconsistencies in survovor stories bother him, so
>>that he can get the answers.
>
>Well, okay. His books are in the attic, however.
>
>
Yes, and they will be there for awhile.  But I do not expect to get into
deep discussions of denier/revisionist nuts and bolts issues here, either.
 I refuse to get stuck on that road.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri May 24 09:20:50 PDT 1996
Article: 20632 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads
Subject: Re: Comparing cultures
Date: 22 May 1996 05:07:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 46
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4nulft$b8f@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ntjgf$dvo@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:29685 alt.politics.nationalism.white:20632 alt.discrimination:47357 alt.revisionism:38560 alt.skinheads:24434

In article <4ntjgf$dvo@decaxp.HARVARD.EDU>, msimons@scws37.harvard.edu
(Marco Simons) writes:

>Subject:	Re: Comparing cultures
>From:	msimons@scws37.harvard.edu (Marco Simons)
>Date:	21 May 1996 23:27:11 GMT
>
>Alexandre Kotov (akotov1@umbc.edu) wrote:
>: would inevitably involve the bias on the part of "judges". I have shown
>that
>: anything requires a value judgment. Otherwise, we would have to
consider
>: chimpanzees an equals of ourselves. Chimpanzees have quite an elaborate

>: "culture". Yet we feel perfectly qualified to deem them our primitive
>distant
>: cousins.
>
>There is no scientific position that would deem chimpanzees to be
>"primitive;" such designation is indeed a value judgment.  They are our
>distant cousins.  More of their expressed characteristics are ancestral. 
>If we apply a system in which we value capacity for abstract thought,
then
>chimpanzees are considerably more primitive.  Such a system, however,
>tells us nothing about human cultures, unless you want to suppose that
one
>culture evidences a qualitatively greater capacity for abstract thought
>than another. 
>
>Barring that, it is indeed very easy to separate out human culture from 
>Pan spp. "culture", on the basis of primitiveness, without being able to 
>separate out any two human cultures on the same basis.
>
>What, then, is the value system being used to judge human cultures?  And 
>why?  Your turn.
>
>--marco
>
"I refute it THUS!" said Dr. Johnson, and kicked the stone across the
road. Fundamental philosophical point:  bootstrap problems don't exist
unless you insist.

Figure out your desired consequences.  Keep a close eye on tradition. 
Make no leaps. There is your culture, and because it is yours, and you
can't escape it, value judgments about your culture or any other are moot.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri May 24 11:00:08 PDT 1996
Article: 38991 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: 24 May 1996 10:39:48 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 78
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4o4hnk$a15@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4o3hng$cl5@sjx-ixn5.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4o3hng$cl5@sjx-ixn5.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com (Matt
Giwer) writes:

>
>>> Kimberley Ahlf  wrote:
>>>
>>> >Matt,
>>>
>>> >Your abrasiveness is mystifying.  I have professed to be nothing more
>than
>>> >ignorant of the facts surrounding the holocaust, a confession you
have
>>> >chosen to treat as pretension.  I will admit that I have not been
>unbiased
>>> >in my view of your positions, however, no true scholar who approaches
his
>>> >scholarship seriously would approach any audience, especially a
critical
>>> >audience, with the obvious hostility and siege behavior you have
shown me
>>> >and everyone else with whom you communicate.
>>>

Kimberley, let me give you some free advice. This board has nothing to do
with a critical examination of the Holocaust.  It has to do with peeing on
fire hydrants.

Revisionists, or, if you prefer, Deniers, come here and vent about
inconsistencies in the standard Holocaust story, but more often than not
they just look for opportunities to insult Jews who they expect (rightly)
will browse this board.  Their inventiveness in abuse is slightly better
than there conventionalist counterparts, but not by much.

Conventionalists, or, if you prefer, Holohuggers, are basically here to
ensure that any statement by the revisionists is swamped, usually by
hectoring that chops up the flow of an argument, vague counterfactuals to
known chemical and scientific facts, blanket appeals to unsubstantiated
testimony, brain-numbing extracts that frequently wander off the point,
unctuous appeals to sensitivity and humanity, and occasionally, name
calling, character assassination, and veiled threats.  Personally, I have
not been subjected much to the last three categories of abuse, but I know
of people who have.

My private correspondence with revisionists indicates that they know they
are not going to make any headway, but that isn't going to stop them. 
Hence their labor becomes Sysiphean in nature, which is just a step
removed from self indulgence.  OTOH, my private correspondence with
conventionalists indicates that they are not averse to serious analysis,
but (a) this is not the place to do it, (b) there has to be a reasoned
discussion of evidence, and (c) the main purpose here is to expose
revisionists as the anti-semites that they think they are.  Of course, (b)
falls before (a) and (c), even assuming that one could gather the
individuals here seminar-like to go over the evidence.

If you really want to learn something, you will have to do it yourself. 
Visit the Nizkor site, (search: Nizkor) and look at their information. 
They have a wealth of mostly unabridged testimony and documents.  Then
visit the revisionist sites, including Greg Raven's IHR materials (search:
Revisionism, Raven), which also has hot links to Ernst Zuendel's site (you
should go there and read the complete summary of his 1988 trial), as well
as other revisionist sites.  You should also go to a library and read the
books on the subject by Reitlinger, Hilberg, Butz, and you should also
read the books of Isaiah Trunk, Lucy Dawidowicz, or any other books that
provide unvarnished survivor testimony, as well as any books dealing with
WW2 in Eastern Europe (e.g., Dallin's "German Rule in Occupied Russia"
(sic!).

This board is mainly useful for those who have pursued this topic at one
point or another and want to know how things have changed over the years. 
Answer: not much.  It is a good place for Germanophiles to track and
attack anti-German slurs, and Judophiles to track and attack anti-semitic
slurs.  It is also a good place to find links to other sites where you can
actually learn something, and it is also a good place to find other people
interested in the subject that you can discuss the topic with via e-mail. 
It serves no other useful purpose.

  
 


From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri May 24 11:00:10 PDT 1996
Article: 38999 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: The Very Very Best of Nizkor
Date: 24 May 1996 12:26:37 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4o4nvt$c75@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4o4jnl$234@hackberry.zilker.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4o4jnl$234@hackberry.zilker.net>, mike@aimetering.com (Mike
Curtis) writes:

>
>>	If you knew better you should not have done it.
>
>Where does he say that he knew better? It is a moronic idiot that must
>add words to the post of others.
>
>



From ehrlich606@aol.com Sun May 26 17:34:23 PDT 1996
Article: 39484 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: The Redemption of the Giwer-troll
Date: 26 May 1996 19:07:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 38
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4oao7t$n7o@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4o8jvj$3j3m@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4o8jvj$3j3m@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>, gmcfee@ibm.net (Gord
McFee) writes:

>
>>
>>hmazal@txdirect.net (Harry W. Mazal OBE) writes:
>>>Mr. Stein is quite right. It is one thing to be retired because one
>>>has the financial ability to maintain a high style of living; another
>>>to be retired because one's business has collapsed.  Evil tongues hint
>>>that the gentleman in question is hampered by  a severe disability.
>>>Can this  brought upon by the less than moderate consumption of
>>>certain ethanolic beverages? 
>
The above is, apparently, a reference to Matt Giwer, and not a reference
to anyone affiliated with Nizkor.

I WAS JUST ABOUT TO DISMISS GIWER when I came across a reference that is
very interesting. Miklos Nyiszli, "Auschwitz", Fawcett:1960, pb, p. 97 --
according to "revisionist" source Dr. Nysizli (a Hungarian) claims that
the gas chamber was used as a bomb shelter during an Allied bombing raid. 
In the "Who, Me?" vein, I would also point out that Monsieur Pressac
deliberately wrote his book around Dr. Nyiszli's memoirs, although I
personally find them unbelievable and would never use them in a history of
the Holocaust.  But as a result of Pressac's usage, Nyiszli's memoirs have
been reissued and should be consulted, and if the reference is correct,
everyone, starting with Mark van Alstine, IMHO, owes the Giwer an apology.

Someone should check this reference and report back here.

Further along these lines, with regard to the emission time of Zyklon,
let's recognize first that to say "most" is not "all" -- I have found no
one saying that it is all emitted in 10 minutes.  That's the point.  A
reference to Dr. Peters' book claims 1/2 hour for "most".  Corrections and
refutations welcomed.






From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 27 12:17:34 PDT 1996
Article: 39504 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: 26 May 1996 20:34:15 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 31
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4oata7$pgc@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4o6v5m$c4i@boris.eden.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


>
>Kimberley Ahlf  wrote:
>
>>[Previous text deleted for brevity]
>
>>To: Erlich606,
>
>>Thank you for your advice and cautions.  I will assume that you have
>>provided the above list of references in good faith, setting aside
>>whatever agenda(s) you may otherwise possess in your participation in
the
>>alt.revisionism conference.
>
>>I must confess that my initial interest and amusement while lurking and
>>participating in the conference is turning to disappointment.  I have
not
>>given up yet, though.

IMHO, you are generally wasting your time here.  I may develop and post
some theses on this board, but frankly reasonable posts or
non-confrontative posts never get responses, except accusations of
irrelevance from tunnel visioned types who think that the entirety of
German and Jewish interaction over a thousand years comes down to a 7 x 7
meter gas chamber.

What my agenda would be, if I direct you to both sides of the issue, is
hard for me to grasp.  The truth is there for you to see, but you must do
it on your own, and you must be skeptical of both sides.  One final
precaution: if you find yourself hating, you would do better to just drop
the subject.  You don't study history to hate.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 27 12:17:35 PDT 1996
Article: 39560 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!news.sover.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.bc.net!unixg.ubc.ca!van-bc!uniserve!n2van.istar!n1van.istar!van.istar!n3ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Holocaust without Gas Chambers
Date: 26 May 1996 13:50:11 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 51
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4oa5kj$fce@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <25MAY199615301685@cmi.arizona.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader



I find that this newsgroup seems to spend all of its time debating whether
or not there were gas chambers, or more precisely, how many people died in
them.  Frankly, I don't dwell on the extermination aspect very much
because it is vitriolic and not just on this board, it is in the
literature also (Sorry, Mike, no titles.)

Let's just suppose there were no gas chambers.  What would change?  The
fact that the Germans had a systematic plan for expelling all Jews from
Europe? No.  The fact that the Germans escalated that policy to one of sex
segregated work camps where (according to Goebbels' Diary) at least 60%
were expected to die from "natural"causes? No.  Read the Wannsee minutes. 
The fact that perhaps hundreds of thousands of Jews were killed under the
aegis of the Commissar Order, because, since some Jews were Communists,
the Nazis assumed that ALL Jews were communists, and therefore fell under
the Commissar Order rubric?  No.  

The fact that tens of thousands of Jews were shot out of hand in the
general anomie that accompanied the German invasion of the Soviet Union,
particularly in Moldavia and the Baltics? No.  The fact that tens of
thousands of German Jews, many of whom who had risked their lives for the
Fatherland 20 years before were deprived of their property and standing,
and in many cases their lives?  No.  The fact that probably hundreds of
thousands died from mass shootings, famine, disease, overwork, and so on?
No.  

The fact that hundreds of thousands were exposed to the havoc of war and
died therefrom?  No.  The fact that hundreds of thousands of deeply rooted
families were torn apart, separated, and strewn all over a continent, so
much so that reunions between family members have been delayed for fifty
years in some cases?  No.  The fact that there was no East European Jewish
COMMUNITY after WW2 even though there may have been an indeterminate
number of people of Jewish ethnic or religious affiliation? No.

The suffering of the Jewish people in WW2 deserves respect.  It is not
respected by pretending that it hinges on whether there were or were not
gas chambers.  Nor is it respected by pretending that it hinges on how
many CAN be crammed into gas chambers.

Gas Chambers have nothing to do with German reparations, the State of
Israel, or any other aspect of the current political reality.  Gas
Chambers have nothing to do with Zionism, or a Jewish conspiracy. 
Consider:  The Holocaust Museum tested several bars of soap to see if they
were human.  They were not.  But the fact is that they tested them.  Why? 
Because they thought that they might be!  What does that tell you?  It
tells you that Jews, too, can be the victims of propaganda, and can
agonize and torture themselves for decades.

Gas Chambers are not good for anybody, and are largely irrelevant.  This
issue will be settled when that is realized.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 27 15:50:19 PDT 1996
Article: 39614 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: j*w invented revisionism
Date: 27 May 1996 00:04:57 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 17
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ob9l9$2ma@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4oa2mh$cls@useneta1.news.prodigy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4oa2mh$cls@useneta1.news.prodigy.com>, EEGG87E@prodigy.com (M
Huber) writes:

>------------------------------------------------------------
>It would be well to note that the j*wish conspiracy invented the idea of 
>revisionism, particularly as it applies to the curriculum being taught in

>our nation's schools. An example of their revisionism is the undermining 
>of traditional beliefs previously taught in this country such as honoring

>Christopher Columbus. To scatter our heritage, they teach Columbus was a 
>purveyor of genocide against the indigenous American Indians, raping, 
>stealing and killing.

You are of course, familiar with the idea, not without substance, that
Columbus was a Jew?  You may wish to address this!



From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 27 15:50:19 PDT 1996
Article: 39637 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!bofh.dot!insync!news.io.com!arlut.utexas.edu!geraldo.cc.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: 27 May 1996 00:08:55 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 20
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ob9sn$2qk@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4o8ouk$hog@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4o8ouk$hog@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com (Matt
Giwer) writes:

>
>	And just who in the hell is Dr. Peters?  Does he have a doctorate
>in theology? chemistry, letters, honorary?  in what?  
>
>

Dr. Peters was the guy at Degesch who used to push Zyklon as a miracle
cure.  His book states 1/2 hour for most of the substance to be released,
>from  the reference I saw.  I have also heard a six hour max emission time.
 Release is apparently a function of the size of carrier substance 
(higher the ratio of surface area to total area) plus temperature. 
Interestingly, forcing air through a delousing chamber can expedite
release also.  The problem with all of this is that I have never read a
survivor account on the usage of Zyklon (not to say that there are that
many, there aren't) that describes gathering up the Zyklon detritus, which
common sense dictates would have to be done.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 27 15:50:20 PDT 1996
Article: 39648 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!lamarck.sura.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Holocaust a Riddle Without Soviet Union
Date: 27 May 1996 01:29:35 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 72
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4obejv$55l@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4oaf3r$c9v@boris.eden.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader



In many posts, I have tried to argue that the Holocaust has to be viewed
within a variety of contexts, including the history of the Soviet Union. 
This argument usually meets with a great deal of hostility because the
idea is that I am "whitewashing" or "relativizing" National Socialist
crimes.  I don't think I am, however, if "whitewash" means that I don't
think we should get any more excited about Nazi crimes than Soviet crimes.
 I don't expect conventionalists here to cast opprobium on the systematic
slaughter of 14.5 million peasants, mostly of Ukrainian or Russo-German
ethnicity, (consult Robert Conquest's "Harvest of Sorrow", p. 306), who
were also killed in the service of a terrible ideology.  And I am not even
talking about the purges or the GULAG.

I find it amusing that no one engages in heavy-duty value judgments about
the homicidal nature of Russian culture, or talks about the Russian
"responsibility" to its victims.  OTOH, such judgments about Germans are
common.  Reason: such comments about Germans sell books.

But I must insist that the Holocaust is incompletely understood without
reference to the Soviet Union, and here's why:

1)  The Holocaust is about the destruction of the East European Jewish
community.  Up until a few years ago, and particularly since 1939, most of
the area where the East European community traditionally dwelled was under
Soviet control  (BTW:  Conquest's "Great Terror", scope index under "Jews"
itemizes executions and labor camps for Jews, who, either from their
Polish background and/or Yiddish language are clearly part of the World
That Was Lost.)  I consider it obvious that the Soviet Union played a role
in the disappearance of this community, even if their homicidal intent was
not as pronounced as the German Nazis.

2)  The Holocaust is about the victimization of the Jewish people at the
hands of the Nazi ideology.  The crimes of Stalin are about the
victimization of many, including many Jews, at the hands of the Soviet
ideology.  The manner in which millions were liquidated to make the kind
of the social and political order the ideologies demanded seem roughly
similar, although the Germans appear to have been a little bit more high
tech.  It seems to me that there is a similarity that should not be
discounted:  it is called TOTALITARIANISM and is worth review.  (the
classic text is of course, Brzezinski and Carl Friedich,
"Totalitarianism"). 

3)  Most of the areas where the Holocaust took place ended up under Soviet
control at the end of WW2.  These areas were generally restricted for
decades.  I hope I am not saying something original when I point out that
the post WW2 governments in Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and others
were Soviet puppet governments.

4)  The Soviet Union was a main participant at the International Military
Tribunal, where most of the Holocaust evidence first came to light.  Not
to say "that the Holocaust never happened" it seems to me that one should
be skeptical about Soviet generated evidence, especially since some of the
confessions and affidavits look, well, not too convincing (cf. Leleko's
testimony).  It is also well known that the Soviets perpetrated at least
ONE fraud at Nuremberg, i.e., the Katyn Forest business, and there has not
been any extensive forensic backup for a variety of Soviet claims, e.g., 4
million dead at Auschwitz, 2 million dead at Treblinka, 1.5 million dead
at Majdanek, etc.

5) My position on the Holocaust is that it was a happening that resulted
>from  social and economic breakdown, the idelogy of murder was a child of
the breakdown, not the other way around.  If that doesn't work with
someone out there, because they prefer a perception of the Holocaust that
allows them to point moralistic fingers at people, then I can only say
that such an approach will definitely do nothing to stop future
Holocausts. Indeed, nothing stopped China, Cambodia, Biafra, or even
Bosnia.



  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 27 17:44:15 PDT 1996
Article: 39684 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.his.com!news.frontiernet.net!news.texas.net!news1.best.com!sgigate.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: 27 May 1996 01:59:15 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 24
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4obgbj$5vg@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4oaa60$ipq@useneta1.news.prodigy.com>
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4oaa60$ipq@useneta1.news.prodigy.com>, EEGG87E@prodigy.com (M
Huber) writes:

>
>>Which is it:  Should we be ashamed for killing too many Jews or ashamed
>>for letting too many of them live?
>>
>>-Ahlf
>
>The latter would seem to be appropriate. The alleged survivors are meting

>out punishment to Americans via social degeneration in a manner unheard 
>of throughout history. Be assured their beloved '6,000,000' can become a 
>reality tomorrow.
>
>
>
>
Now, H*ber, this is dangerous murderous garbage.  This is why revisionism
does not get a fair hearing.  This is why conventionalists are so
reactive.  But don't worry, your stupid ravings will never take.  And if
the push ever comes to the shove, Bub, da sollst du mich kennenlernen!




From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 27 20:47:10 PDT 1996
Article: 39713 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!news.sover.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: 27 May 1996 08:57:38 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 64
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4oc8s2$cag@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4o5a0q$g5d@sjx-ixn5.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4o5a0q$g5d@sjx-ixn5.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com (Matt
Giwer) writes:

>
>Kimberley Ahlf  wrote:
>
>>[previous text editted for brevity, see above postings for complete
text]

[Another huge cut]
>
>	Let us look as the Wannsee Protocol.  This is one of the very few
>documents that exist.  And you will find that it has been claimed
>to support every aspect of all of the holocaust stories.
>However, if take the time to read it in its entirety, it is
>clearly one of the most "revisionist" documents around.
>
>	It contradicts almost every major claim about the holocaust YET
>people will still read it and claim that is supports every major
>claim.  You may read it for yourself and see what I am talking
>about.  
>
>	You will note this is a high level conference that discusses both
>the pre and the post conference plans.  Before the conference
>there were not even plans for work camps.  After the conference
>there were plans for work camps from which they would not return
>alive.  But there were thousands perhaps tens of thousands of
>Jews that would have qualified for the exceptions contained in
>the new plan.  
>
>	The document is damning as to ultimate intent but it is
>completely "revisionist" if it is to be accepted as true and
>genuine.  But as you should have read by now, people will read
>into anything they want to read into it.

This is a fair analysis of the Wannsee Protocols as several historians
have read it for years.  That doesn't mean these historians have published
on it, however.
>
[Big cut]

>	I am doing something that has not been done in the holohugger
>movement, critical analysis.  What areas of "scholarship" would
>you suggest?  Reading the credulous work of "scholars" who have
>clearly accepted testimony contrary to science?  What value are
>they?  
>

Again, you give youself too much credit.  Critical analysis of documents
and witness testimony has been around for a long time; at least 30 years
in the revisionist movement.

>
>	Excuse me, I AM THE ONLY ONE citing physical law in this matter
>and it appears that other than a chemist who deliberately
>misleads people, the only person with the credentials to back up
>citation of physical law.  

Again, your references to analysis of physical law are not as singular as
you seem to think.  As far as I know, Butz was the first to inject a small
part of technical analysis into his work, and in the meantime, there has
been Leuchter, Lueftl, and even Pressac, to an extent, although he is not
officially a revisionist.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Mon May 27 21:26:47 PDT 1996
Article: 39727 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Holocaust without Gas Chambers
Date: 27 May 1996 22:48:00 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 337
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4odph0$qld@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ocoqb$qo2@atlas.uniserve.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4ocoqb$qo2@atlas.uniserve.com>, hostrov@uniserve.com (Hilary
Ostrov) writes:

>Subject:	Re: Holocaust without Gas Chambers
>From:	hostrov@uniserve.com (Hilary Ostrov)
>Date:	Mon, 27 May 1996 17:26:35 GMT
>
>In <4oa5kj$fce@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
>wrote:
>
>Mr. Ehrlich,
>
>As you will have noticed in another thread, Dr. Mittleman very
>cogently described the history, "culture" and raison d'etre of this
>newsgroup.  With this in mind, I hope you will appreciate that I tend
>to view the posts here, not only through my own eyes, but also through
>those of a lurker who might have no knowledge of the facts of the
>Holocaust. 

If you insist.  But that goes to the discussion between Dan and Mike over
the extent to which free speculation should be allowed here.

>
>I could be mistaken, but I seem to recall an earlier post, in which
>you posited the view that productive discussion of the Holocaust
>cannot take place until we set aside the perception that Hitler was a
>"bad guy".  I would think that David Irving might well agree with you.
>But, from my perspective, it is difficult to imagine what possible
>"redeeming" characteristics Hitler might have had which could in any
>way add to our understanding of the Holocaust.  

I have no interest in rehabilitating Hitler, and I seriously doubt that I
ever expressed myself thus.

>
>I trust you would grant that in order for a "productive discussion" to
>proceed amongst reasonable people, it would be helpful to have some
>common ground vis a vis the "basics."  To be honest, I must confess
>that in your posts I have found  ambiguity - but, to the best of my
>recollection, no clear statement of your positions vis a vis the
>"basics"
>
>>I find that this newsgroup seems to spend all of its time debating
whether
>>or not there were gas chambers, or more precisely, how many people died
in
>>them.  Frankly, I don't dwell on the extermination aspect very much
>>because it is vitriolic and not just on this board, it is in the
>>literature also (Sorry, Mike, no titles.)
>
>Indeed it does.  But, are you now suggesting that productive
>discussion of the Holocaust on this N.G. requires that we simply
>ignore the false contentions of those who are quite persistent in
>their (to date unsubstantiated) claim that there were no gas chambers?
>
On the contrary, deal with the counter-claims and deal particularly with
the technical aspects of the counter-claims.  By all means!  What I am
saying, however, is that the claim of, e.g., Robert Faurrison, "No Holes,
No Holocaust" is patently untrue.


>>Let's just suppose there were no gas chambers.  What would change?  The
>>fact that the Germans had a systematic plan for expelling all Jews from
>>Europe? No.  
>
>I'm not sure why we would want to suppose that there were no gas
>chambers.  However ... Expulsion does sound somewhat benign does it
>not? Definitely more so than "extermination" which, if I understand
>your view correctly, is too vitriolic to warrant discussion.
>
>>The fact that the Germans escalated that policy to one of sex
>>segregated work camps where (according to Goebbels' Diary) at least 60%
>>were expected to die from "natural"causes? No.  Read the Wannsee
minutes.
>
>Ah, Goebbels' Diary.  Would it be his _actual_ diary - or David
>Irving's _book_ on same - to which you refer?   Are there not
>references in the Wannsee minutes (I think about 13 of them, not to
>put too fine a point on it) to the term "Final Solution"?  How would
>you explain this term to a newcomer of this newsgroup, Mr. Ehrlich?

As a matter of fact, I am referencing a very well known passage from the
Goebbels' diaries which some denier types have claimed was forged.  David
Irving, OTOH, has conclusively proved that it was not a forgery in his
book.

How would  I explain "Endloesung" to a newcomer?  A policy of expelling
all Jews from Europe that was promulgated by the Nazi party and which was
extremely popular throughout Europe.  The policy descended into mass
murder at some point during the Russo-German war.  Clear enough?

>
>And "sex segrated work camps"  certainly don't sound like such a "bad
>thing" especially when compared to the reality of "concentration
>camps" or "death camps", do they?

I didn't create the euphemisms.  I also didn't create the cacophemisms.  I
am being deliberately neutral in my characterizations here.

>
>But that aside, for the record, Mr. Ehrlich,  in your view, how might
>we most appropriately describe these "natural" causes of which you
>speak?  And would it be permissible to discuss the planned disposition
>of the other 40%?

By all means.  Only nail it down with documents!  I have posted elsewhere
what my understanding of "natural causes" must have meant to Globocnik, et
al.

>
>And perhaps you could put aside, for a moment, your professed aversion
>(I hope that's not too strong a word) to discussing numbers.   But
>some  newcomers to this group (who may not be familiar with the
>details of the Wannsee minutes) may find it somewhat odd to see "60%"
>(or 40%) without any reference to the total number.  I believe we are
>talking about a European Jewish population of approximately 11
>million, are we not?

How many times to I have to say six million?  And how many times until you
realize that six million is not the point?

>
>>The fact that perhaps hundreds of thousands of Jews were killed under
the
>>aegis of the Commissar Order, because, since some Jews were Communists,
>>the Nazis assumed that ALL Jews were communists, and therefore fell
under
>>the Commissar Order rubric?  No.  
>
>Why the "perhaps", Mr. Ehrlich?  Sorry, but I'm confused.  Wannsee
>does refer to 5 million Jews in the USSR (no mention of any
>Communists, though)  Is it your contention that these Jews might not
>have been killed if some Jews had _not _ been Communists?

Because I don't know how many within several hundreds of thousands, and
neither does anybody else.

>
>>The fact that tens of thousands of Jews were shot out of hand in the
>>general anomie that accompanied the German invasion of the Soviet Union,
>>particularly in Moldavia and the Baltics? No.  The fact that tens of
>>thousands of German Jews, many of whom who had risked their lives for
the
>>Fatherland 20 years before were deprived of their property and standing,
>>and in many cases their lives?  No.  The fact that probably hundreds of
>>thousands died from mass shootings, famine, disease, overwork, and so
on?
>>No.  
>
>Why "probably", Mr. Ehlich?  There's that "ambiguity" again, I'm
>afraid. And again, I certainly don't dispute "famine, disease and
>overwork".   But we also know that those in the "sex segregated work
>camps" were subjected to deliberate starvation, preventable disease
>and forced labour under intolerable conditions, do we not?
>

Sure, uncertainty is a function of not knowing.

>Do you see the difficulty I have, Mr. Ehrlich?  Do you not think that
>an innocent newcomer to this group, seeking reasonable discourse on
>the facts, would have a very different picture of the Holocaust if
>s/he were to have encountered only this post of yours (without my
>interruptions!)

OK, now you are saying that I might corrupt newcomers? OK.  Then I will do
the balance of this discussion via e-mail.

>
>>The fact that hundreds of thousands were exposed to the havoc of war and
>>died therefrom?  No.  The fact that hundreds of thousands of deeply
rooted
>>families were torn apart, separated, and strewn all over a continent, so
>>much so that reunions between family members have been delayed for fifty
>>years in some cases?  No.  The fact that there was no East European
Jewish
>>COMMUNITY after WW2 even though there may have been an indeterminate
>>number of people of Jewish ethnic or religious affiliation? No.
>
>And to complete _your_ picture, already clouded by ambiguity and
>"lightened" by relatively benign descriptions, you now postulate that
>"there *may* have been an indeterminate number of [Jewish people]".
>Does this "indeterminate number" refer to survivors - or to the East
>European Jewish population _prior_ to WW2?

Obviously, post war.

>
>>The suffering of the Jewish people in WW2 deserves respect.  
>
>Indeed.  And to that I would add that our society's collective memory
>of almost 12 million civilians - of whom approximately half were
>Jewish - all of whom who perished at the hands of the Nazis, cannot be
>permitted to fade by our failure to acknowledge this heinous example
>of man's inhumanity to man.

I submit that more than 12 million non-combatants died in WW2 and its
aftermath.  But here I am discussing the Jewish fate.

>
>It is not
>>respected by pretending that it hinges on whether there were or were not
>>gas chambers.  Nor is it respected by pretending that it hinges on how
>>many CAN be crammed into gas chambers.
>
>And with all due respect, Mr. Ehrlich, I would add that it is not
>respected by suggesting (as I think you did) that one not "dwell on
>extermination because it is vitriolic".

No, I am saying THAT I DO NOT LIKE TO DWELL.  But you accuse me of self
indulgence if I do not.  You may do what you like.

>
>>Gas Chambers have nothing to do with German reparations, the State of
>>Israel, or any other aspect of the current political reality.  Gas
>>Chambers have nothing to do with Zionism, or a Jewish conspiracy. 
>
>I certainly can't dispute these statements!  But I am somewhat
>puzzled.  We have been talking about the Holocaust, have we not?  Why
>would you even mention such extraneous topics?  "German reparations,
>the State of Israel, current political reality (whatever that might
>be), and Zionism?"  

Because this is what deniers do!  They say 1) no gas chambers, 2) no
Holocaust, 3) no reparations, no Israel, etc!  I am saying: NOT AT ALL!

>
>Well, they certainly have nothing to do with gas chambers - nor do
>they have anything to do _any_ of the facts of the Holocaust.  They
>are, however, topics of interest on which debate no doubt rages in
>other forums.  

That is correct.

>
>But "a Jewish conspiracy"?!  Please do enlighten us as to your
>position vis a vis "a Jewish conspiracy."  

Because deniers always blame inaccuracies on a Jewish conspiracy.  I do
not.
>
>And while you are at it, perhaps you could share with us just a brief
>precis of your position with respect to gas chambers and the Holocaust
>- apart from the fact that, as you succinctly conclude below, they are
>"not good for anybody and are largely irrelevant."

My version of the null hypothesis is well known. 1) six million, 2) German
responsibility, 3) some usage of lethal gas.  The question turns on 3):
how much?  I don't know.

>
>>Consider:  The Holocaust Museum tested several bars of soap to see if
they
>>were human.  They were not.  But the fact is that they tested them. 
Why? 
>>Because they thought that they might be!  What does that tell you?  It
>>tells you that Jews, too, can be the victims of propaganda, and can
>>agonize and torture themselves for decades.
>
>I see that you have actually mentioned the word "Holocaust."  Was it
>simply coincidence?  I found that throughout _your_ "picture" it was
>somewhat conspicuous by its absence.  

Now that is an insinuation I do not think is fair.  Perhaps you would like
to gainsay the content of my many other posts?  The point is that Jews can
be victims of inaccuracies about the Holocaust too.

>
>So in essence, our innocent newcomer would have been given a "picture"
>of the Holocaust by a person who believes that productive discussion
>can not really take place until we can find something good to say
>about Hitler.   

This is a faulty premise that goes back to the beginning: I never said
this.

>
>Mr. Ehrlich proffers a version of the "null hypothesis" during the
>course of which he puts the case that we don't need to talk about gas
>chambers, nor about numbers, nor about Nazis (except in the context of
>an assumption they made because some Jews were foolish enough to be
>communists), nor about extermination.  No concentration camps, no
>practice of starvation, nor of withholding treatment of preventable
>disease and no forced labour.  

This a good summary but it is not what I said.  Or don't you read what I
write?
Are you more interested in rhetorical display for newcomers, than in
engaging what I actually said?  What is this BS about Jews foolish enough
to be communists?  Etc!

>
>But he does manage to weave in mention of German reparations, Israel,
>Zionism, current political reality and a Jewish conspiracy.  And for
>his coup de grace, he asks us to "consider" the implications of that
>favourite denier strawman, "the soap myth".

For the reasons specified!  I am trying to undercut deniers.

>
>>Gas Chambers are not good for anybody, and are largely irrelevant.  This
>>issue will be settled when that is realized.
>
>Are you, by any chance, David Irving in disguise, Mr. Ehrlich?!

No I am not David Irving, thank you very much.

>
>Posted/emailed
>
>hro
>=======================
>Hilary Ostrov
>e-mail: hostrov@uniserve.com
>http://haven.uniserve.com/~hostrov/
>Co-Webmaster - The Nizkor Project http://www.almanac.bc.ca/
>
>
>
>------------------- Headers --------------------
>Path:
>newsbf01.news.aol.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.
ans.net!n3ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!n1ott.istar!uniserve!usenet
>From: hostrov@uniserve.com (Hilary Ostrov)
>Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
>Subject: Re: Holocaust without Gas Chambers
>Date: Mon, 27 May 1996 17:26:35 GMT
>Organization: myssiwyg*
>Lines: 207
>Distribution: world
>Message-ID: <4ocoqb$qo2@atlas.uniserve.com>
>References: <25MAY199615301685@cmi.arizona.edu>
><4oa5kj$fce@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: van0300.tvs.net
>X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
>
>



From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue May 28 06:58:54 PDT 1996
Article: 39753 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Holocaust a Riddle Without Soviet Union
Date: 28 May 1996 02:06:04 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 149
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4oe54c$2hm@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <17794F35CS86.BOROWSKY@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <17794F35CS86.BOROWSKY@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>, BOROWSKY@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU
(borowsky) writes:


>In article <4obejv$55l@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) writes:
> 
>>
>>I find it amusing that no one engages in heavy-duty value judgments
about
>>the homicidal nature of Russian culture, or talks about the Russian
>>"responsibility" to its victims.  OTOH, such judgments about Germans are
>>common.  Reason: such comments about Germans sell books.
> 
>Of course, more often people speak of "the homocidal nature" of the Nazis
>rather than the Germans.  Judgments against Germans are usually specific
>to the historical conditions of the time.
> 
>No anti-Soviet books?:  Robert Conquest? Jean-Francois Revel?  Or other
>authors
>like them during the Cold War?  I suppose you can say I'm missing the
>difference between `Soviet' and `Russian', but I notice that `Nazi' and
>`German' are virtually interchangeable to you.  And in the Cold War, many
>Americans made little distinction between the `Soviets' and the
`Russians'.

The fact of the matter is that Russian artists and composers have never
been slandered for their complicity with the Soviet regime, as was the
case with very many German artists.  And this still goes on today.
> 
>And I don't think the anti-German bias is as strong as you lead on:
>Helmut Kohl was greeted warmly in Milwaukee a day or two ago.  A small
>example, but relevant.  Who, Mr. Erlich, are making these judgements
>against Germans today?  (Ignatz Bubis, for example?)

Perhaps you have never heard of Daniel Goldhagen?  Where is the book,
"Stalin's Willing Executioners" and where is the readership for such a
book?
> 
>>  [ . . . . ]
>>1)  [edited]
>>
>>2)  The Holocaust is about the victimization of the Jewish people at the
>>hands of the Nazi ideology.  The crimes of Stalin are about the
>>victimization of many, including many Jews, at the hands of the Soviet
>>ideology.  The manner in which millions were liquidated to make the kind
>>of the social and political order the ideologies demanded seem roughly
>>similar, although the Germans appear to have been a little bit more high
>>tech.  It seems to me that there is a similarity that should not be
>>discounted:  it is called TOTALITARIANISM and is worth review.  (the
>>classic text is of course, Brzezinski and Carl Friedich,
>>"Totalitarianism").
> 
>What exactly do you conclude from this lengthy parallel?

I argued many years ago that the totalitarian thesis had the ideas running
the intention. In other words, the Totalist model held out the prospect of
power for its own sake, using rapid industrialization to achieve it.  I
pointed out that it was the reverse: a desire for industrialization, which
requires homogeneity, and which requires direction from the top -- or as
the Russians say, Revolution from above.

> 
>>3-4) [edited]
>>
>>5) My position on the Holocaust is that it was a happening that resulted
>>from social and economic breakdown, the idelogy of murder was a child of
>>the breakdown, not the other way around.  If that doesn't work with
>>someone out there, because they prefer a perception of the Holocaust
that
>>allows them to point moralistic fingers at people, [ . . . . ]
> 
>The collapse of the Weimar Republic help establish Nazi control in
Germany--
>that's what you mean?  How is this a new idea?  

No, rather I am much more interested in the sociology of ideas as it was
developed in Germany at this time by way of explaining lower middle class
angst and resentment in the face of industrialization.

>Further, you seem to say that
>if this explanation does not sit well with some people, it's because they
are
>merely self-righteous.  But Mr. Erlich, most historians--  and almost all
>high
>school textbooks in world (or European) history-- acknowledge, describe
and
>repeat the historical conditions that led up to the rise of the Nazi
Party.
>If anything, many, like yourself, have labored to explain the Holocaust
>without emotion or prejudice.

I am very happy to hear this.  But you won't find it in most books on the
subject, and certainly on this board it is a rarity.

> 
>"A perception of the Holocaust that allows them to point moralisitic
fingers
>at
>people":  and yet above, you've gone to great length at least in showing
why
>the Russians (or Soviets) deserve the same scrutiny-- a scrutiny that
must
>lead
>to some kind of judgement.  What I'm confused by is what your parallels
lead
>to exactly.  Are you saying, "OK, enough of one; now for the other," as
if
>we were talking about some psychotic top-seed we can award an individual
>ethnic group?

On the contrary!  The explanation for the Soviet Union has been
"conditions", the explanation for Nazism has been "evil" -- simplistic
enough, but there it is.

> 
>Your post seems to assert that we parcel out our sympathy like sugar-- 
only
>so
>much to the bag.  It isn't to me clear that it works that way.  Surely,
if
>the
>West thinks less of Soviet atrocities, it thinks nothing of Japanese
>atrocities
>at the Rape of Nanking where some twenty million died;  or, in our
country,
>in
>which we have virtually forgotten the deaths from the Middle Passage.
> 
>The reasons for the rememberance of one and not another, is, as you
strive to
>suggest, political.  Granted.  But I'm at a loss to understand who or
what
>you
>believe has caused this so-called imbalance.

I really don't know why Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany are perceived so
differently: but I can tell you where they meet -- Eastern Europe which
once boasted large Jewish and German minorities, and which now has none of
either, and which was the battle ground for two Russo-German wars.  An
area that was going to be homogenized by either the Germans or the
Russians, and in either case with extreme brutality.
> 
>In fact, much of my frustration in reading your post, which I began with
>interest, was in the way you drew parallels that seemed to have no clear
>point.

Please ponder the telegraphic responses and I will try for the sake of
your honorable response to articulate my position better soon.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue May 28 06:58:55 PDT 1996
Article: 39757 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Seeking the first time
Date: 28 May 1996 02:05:06 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 15
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4oe52i$2g2@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <31A854AD.30B4@rio.com>
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <31A854AD.30B4@rio.com>, Chuck Ferree  writes:

>
>"Crucifixion" may be the wrong word here, but the persecution of Jews, 
>and every other group by the bigots should certainly stop. Moran and 
>all of the other bigots around should be ashamed of themselves. 
>
>
>

I agree with you Chuck, 100%.  You know, it occurred to me in the course
of reading/writing today that antisemitism -- of some kind, not
necessarily the murderous kind -- used to be very common 50 years ago.  It
is something to keep in mind.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue May 28 09:38:00 PDT 1996
Article: 39816 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!loki.tor.hookup.net!nic.ott.hookup.net!hookup!gatech!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Holocaust without Gas Chambers
Date: 27 May 1996 23:00:36 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 17
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4odq8k$r43@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article ,
jamie@voyager.net (Jamie McCarthy) writes:

>
>> I find that this newsgroup seems to spend all of its time debating
whether
>> or not there were gas chambers, or more precisely, how many people died
in
>> them.
>
>Not "this newsgroup" -- Holocaust-deniers bring up the issue
consistently.
>It is one of the three tenets of Holocaust-denial, the other two being
>that there was no Nazi policy to exterminate Jews, and that nowhere near
>six million died.

The point of this post is to say that it doesn't have to be that way.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Tue May 28 11:03:36 PDT 1996
Article: 39819 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Prima Facie Extermination
Date: 28 May 1996 11:29:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 43
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4of655$c1l@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ob1lr$tpb@Vir.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


The other day I put up a post entitled "Holocaust w/o Gas Chambers" which
touched on some points, including 1) the ultimate futility of denialism,
2) the obsessive focus, IMHO, on gassings,by both sides,  3) and my own
discomfiture with the evidence of mass gassings.

Of course, I could have been a lot less strident but then I would not have
gotten a full box of mail.

Most of the responses were predictable from both sides, but two struck me
in particular: one, from Gord McFee, which claims that without gas
chambers there is no extermination policy, and two, from Rich Graves,
which basically dismisses me as a drooling, paretic elderly uncle with
eccentric ideas.  That's ok!

BUT THERE IS PROOF OF AN EXTERMINATION POLICY, PEOPLE, RIGHT UNDER YOUR
NOSE

1)  The Wannsee Protocols state clearly that all of the Jews of Europe
must be gathered, and split into single sex work gangs, whereby a number
may be expected to perish from natural causes, and then we have to think
really hard about letting the survivors go, because they will represent
the hardiest element [this is a paraphrase,  but an accurate paraphrase]. 
Now, this may not be a plan for extermination outright, but I don't see
how anyone can say that it is not a plan for ultimate extermination for,
if not all, then certainly, most of the Jews who fall under Nazi control. 
As far as "proof of extermination" goes, this is good enough for me. 
Comments?

Monsieur Beaulieu dismisses the document.  Sorry, not this one.  I will
grant that there is a high probability that some black propaganda slipped
into the records, but if someone wanted to hoax the Wannsee Conference
they would not have been as ambiguous or as incomplete as the above.

2)  Goebbels' Diary.  There is a famous passage from the Spring of '42
(which is when I figure it really started to get out of hand) that says
that deportations are underway and perhaps 60% will have to be liquidated
(implication: because they are "useless mouths").  David Irving, and give
the man credit, has CONFIRMED that this is no forgery.  "perhaps 60% will
have to be liquidated" sounds like extermination to me.  Comments?





From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 29 06:02:19 PDT 1996
Article: 39917 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: From Whence 12 Million?
Date: 28 May 1996 23:04:43 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 5
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ogesb$aev@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <26MAY199612551595@cmi.arizona.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader


It is customary to bandy about a figure of 12 million victims of Nazism. 
I would like to know the derivation of this figure, and I would like to
know how it is allocated.  Of course, I am assuming that 6 million refers
to the Jewish Holocaust.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 29 06:02:20 PDT 1996
Article: 39933 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!ub!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Seeking the first time
Date: 28 May 1996 22:48:53 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 21
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ogdul$9q4@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <31ab0aac.953113@news.pacificnet.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <31ab0aac.953113@news.pacificnet.net>, tm@pacificnet.net (tom
moran) writes:

>>
>>Recently, BTW, even the most well-known "revisionist", David Irving,
>>stated that 4 million Jews died at the hands of the Nazis. This
>>is still lower than the true figure, but it probably means
>>that even he realised the figures peddled by the Nazi rabble
>>cannot be defended any more.
>>

I can understand the embattled frame of mind of conventionalists, but this
is really out of line, IMHO, if Dan Keren said this.  Gerald Reitlinger
made a case for 2-4 million in his book in 1954, and even if we grant
"British understatement" the fact is that we did not know and still do not
know the exact disposition of people in the Soviet Union after 1945
(hence, Reitlinger's range).  I stick with six million, because I am not
that concerned about the number, but it certainly is within a range of
reasonableness to say four million.  That is NOT a "figure peddled by the
Nazi rabble."  Chill out, My man!



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 29 06:02:20 PDT 1996
Article: 39944 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-feed.iguide.com!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!sgigate.sgi.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Holocaust without Gas Chambers
Date: 29 May 1996 00:07:41 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 114
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ogiid$cm0@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ob5if$3e8@Vir.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4ob5if$3e8@Vir.com>, Jean-Francois Beaulieu 
writes:

>ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606) wrote:
>>
>
>
>>Let's just suppose there were no gas chambers.  What would change?  The
>>fact that the Germans had a systematic plan for expelling all Jews from
>>Europe? No.  The fact that the Germans escalated that policy to one of
sex
>>segregated work camps where (according to Goebbels' Diary) at least 60%
>>were expected to die from "natural"causes? No.  Read the Wannsee
minutes.
>
>   Up to now, I have serious doubts about Goebbel's Diary but no
certanty.
> For the Wannsee minutes, it is a typewritten document which is not
signed
> so I consider it as a forged document. I have several reasons but the
best
> I could see, some revisionnist consider it as genuine just because the
bulk
> of it speak about an evacuation policy.

Sure! evacuation to work camps where it is expected that many will die of
natural diminution.  OK: sex segregation.  Already you have negative
population growth.  Then you have oldsters and kiddies: maybe if the kids
were "aryan" looking enough they might be "adopted" by the State in some
cases.  The rest are either shot right away or crammed into ghettoes,
where mortality is high.  In any case, there is no hint of breaking up the
labor gangs, and that is assuming that they were able to survive the war. 
My money says they didn't.  Now that is the best possible interpretation
you can get from this document.   
>
>>
>>Gas Chambers are not good for anybody, and are largely irrelevant.  This
>>issue will be settled when that is realized.
>
>  There you are wrong. The real issue is not the gas chambers, indeed,
but
>  the existence or not of an extermination policy. However, if there was
>  no gas chambers, than there was no extermination policy.
> Without those
>  gas chambers, the Jews who were deported in Auschwitz, Treblinka and
who
>  were not registered could just have vanish in the Eastern territories
>  as the German document described. My common sense tell me that if the
>  Nazis had liquidate those Jews in the Eastern territories in a
systematic
>  way then the allied and especially the Russians would have accused the
>  Nazis of this crime for all the missing Jews rather than to have take
>  the huge risk to create this fishy story with gas chambers. There was
>  no extermination policy, and this make a big difference. If you differ
>  in your opinion on that point, than I can't do anything for you.

Again, you are seriously wrong.  Do you have any idea how big European
Russia is?  And how much of Belarus is essentially wasteland?  1,000 man
massacres, spread out over 6,000 acre plots, in a territory the size of
the original 13 US colonies.  That would give you six million in a minute.
 Why gas chambers?  Why the persistence of gas chambers in the public
imagination?  I am still approaching that one.

But the argument, via Butz, that the Soviets would have just pointed to
all of these mass graves is ridiculous.  First of all, the Soviets had a
ton of their own mass graves.  If they start talking about mass graves,
people are going to want to inspect the ground and -- oops!  -- here's a
big pit of dead kulaks.  Don't forget that Katyn only came to light
because the Germans found it by accident.

>   I will not cry like you for the Jews who died during the war. Not
because
>  I'm happy of that, but because we could fill oceans with the tears
>  that have been yet shed. Jews were not the only one who suffered.

No, No, No.  The Jews were the only nationality who lost their presence in
Europe.  What's more, most of Europe was happy to see them go.  That
doesn't mean that more than a fraction knew they were being killed and
dying, but that was the overriding sentiment.  In that respect, it WAS a
shame on all of us (meeting you halfway, Gord McFee?).  BTW, the passivity
of Europe in all of this -- not just Germany -- has to be remembered in
terms of how Jews feel about it today.  Insecure is a very mild way of
putting it, IMHO.

I will say something else that will get me in hot water with Nizkor, no
doubt.  MAYBE three million Poles and 12 million Soviets and 2.5 million
Germans, non-combatants, died either in the war or thereafter.  I am not
sure.  But none of these had a Wannsee conference held about their
destruction.  (Don't give me hyperbole about Potsdam either:  I'll defend
German suffering another time, as well as the Poles and Soviets.) 
THEREFORE the suffering of Jews was UNIQUE, and IMHO, the reference to 12
million is strictly charity on Nizkor's part.

>
>    So without gas chambers there's no difference? This is probably what
>  the pigs who support censorship will say when the myth will be
overthrown.
>  No difference? why then is there jail sentence in Germany and other
coun-
>  tries for the revisionnist? why so much intimidation, murder attempt,
>  careers broken, lobbying? Because the majority of the revisionnist are
>  far-rightist? It his the historical opinion on this matter that is
submit
>  to censorship, not just the favorable opinions to a dictatorship.

I absolutely and totally agree with you about the censorship!  We do wrong
to stand idly by. Bad speech is NOT defeated by censorship.  It is
defeated by Good speech.

>
>   I've rarely attack Jews here, but you can be sure that I won't cry an
>  apologize for my revisionist opinion in my case.

At this point, mon frere, you have gone over the side.  Bon voyage!


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 29 09:56:54 PDT 1996
Article: 40003 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Cultured McVay
Date: 28 May 1996 18:11:57 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 11
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4oftnd$55k@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <31ab0ee0.2029753@news.pacificnet.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <31ab0ee0.2029753@news.pacificnet.net>, tm@pacificnet.net (tom
moran) writes:

>	Giving us the warm human side of McVay we can click up "trivia"
>where we are given the following life interests of the person. 
>
>
>

I can't fault you on this one, Moran.  As an ex-Marine from California, I
would only add that we are not all like that.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 29 09:56:55 PDT 1996
Article: 40021 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Seeking the first time
Date: 28 May 1996 23:03:03 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ogep7$ad7@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4off00$cg2@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4off00$cg2@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>, mgiwer@ix.netcom.com
(Matt Giwer) writes:

>
>Also given short shrift was the ridiculous Oswald Pohl affidavit,
>Document 4045-PS, in which Funk was accused of discussing the use
>of gold teeth from dead Jews to finance the war at a dinner party
>attended by dozens of people, including waiters (XVIII 220-263
><<245-291>>). 
>
>This affidavit is in German and is witnessed by Robert Kempner.
>Pohl was later convicted of"steaming" people to death in 10
>"steam chambers" at Treblinka, and making doormats out of their
>hair (NMT IV 1119-1152) (Fourth National Military Tribunal,
>Nuremberg). 
>
>

Excuse the expression, Matt, but you have him by the short hairs on this
one.  And that is why at some point we have to recognize that we cannot
accept everything generated at Nuremberg.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 29 14:23:47 PDT 1996
Article: 40061 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: From Whence 12 Million?
Date: 29 May 1996 13:01:10 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 64
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ohvsm$g3@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ohs4h$929@access5.digex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4ohs4h$929@access5.digex.net>, mstein@access5.digex.net
(Michael P. Stein) writes:

>>>It is customary to bandy about a figure of 12 million victims of
Nazism. 
>>>I would like to know the derivation of this figure, and I would like to
>>>know how it is allocated.  Of course, I am assuming that 6 million
refers
>>>to the Jewish Holocaust.
>>
>>	Both were invented.
>
>    Because!  I!  Say!  So!
>
>    The number of Jewish victims was computed by comparison of the prewar
>Jewish population of Europe with those who could be accounted for after
>the war.
>
>    The non-Jewish victims include Gypsies, homosexuals, political
>prisoners, and (the largest group) Soviet prisoners killed through both
>active execution and deliberate mistreatment for political reasons.  One
>could, I suppose, quibble over such things as whether the Stalingrad
>prisoner deaths were avoidable, given the brutality of the conditions
>under which the battle was fought. 
>
>
>>	The interesting point is that the more the holocaust is
>>judeaified the less room there is for anyone else.  The more all
>>the camps become Jews Only the less room for anyone else.
>
>    But Jews were disproportionately represented in the camps.  The other
>group picked on for racial reasons, Gypsies, was not as large and
>prominent.
>
>
>>	Of course if the published camp numbers are everyone then the
>>Jewish numbers are reduced by more than half.  
>
>

Actually, this is not what I am getting at all.  I am granting that Jews
were in many cases killed just because they were Jews.  I many be wrong on
this, but I don't think that can be said about any other group in WW2. 
This is not to say that perhaps 3 million Poles died, and some shot; or
that 12 million Soviets died, and some shot; or that 3.5 million Soviet
POW's died, and some shot (not counting Red POWs shot after repatriation),
or that 2.5 million German civilians died in flight or in the expulsions,
and some shot, or that 500 K Germans died in bombing raids, or that
several hundred thousand German POWs disappeared into the Gulag, and some
shot; or tens of thousands of Gypsies or whatever.  What I am getting at
is that the Jews were the only group who _would_ be killed just because of
their ethnicity/religion.  So it seems to me. Another index of Jewish
uniqueness, IMHO.

I know it is fashionable these days to say that gays are born that way,
and therefore if a homosexual was shot that puts the matter on par with a
Jew being shot -- both were killed just because of what/who they were.
Forgive me, I don't buy it.  The similarity does not go.  Besides, Rudolf
Hess was a bisexual.
  



  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Wed May 29 16:52:56 PDT 1996
Article: 40083 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: From Whence 12 Million?
Date: 29 May 1996 15:17:57 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 22
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4oi7t5$2u7@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4oi12v$d99@access5.digex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4oi12v$d99@access5.digex.net>, mstein@access5.digex.net
(Michael P. Stein) writes:

>>Actually, this is not what I am getting at all.  I am granting that Jews
>>were in many cases killed just because they were Jews.  I many be wrong
on
>>this, but I don't think that can be said about any other group in WW2. 
>
>    Huh?  Gypsies were killed just because they were Gypsies, and due to
>the same racial ideology.
>
>
OK, so cite me the documentation on Gypsies analogous to the Wannsee
document.  The hostility towards gypsies had to do with the fact that they
were wanderers, I would think.  After all, if we even begin to accept the
thesis of an equivalence of Aryan language and Aryan ethnicity, the Romani
were more Aryan than anybody else in Europe.  Don't forget, they come from
Northern India and their language is closer to Sanskrit than any European
language except maybe Lithuanian.





From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 30 07:33:16 PDT 1996
Article: 40110 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: 29 May 1996 19:49:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 12
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4oinpd$7rn@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article , mvanalst@rbi.com
(Mark Van Alstine) writes:

>
>Actually, no. It is DvdThomas being dishonest in his trying to imply
>something that is not there. It is _your_ utter lack of integrity, Moran,
>that allows you blindly second DvdThomas dishonesty. 
>
>

I think Thomas is calling them as he sees them, Mark.  And I think that is
not called for.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Thu May 30 07:33:17 PDT 1996
Article: 40173 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Holocaust without Gas Chambers
Date: 29 May 1996 11:50:29 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 79
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ohro5$se6@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4ohk9l$a5v@hackberry.zilker.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4ohk9l$a5v@hackberry.zilker.net>, mike@aimetering.com (Mike
Curtis) writes:

in response to Monsieur Beaulieu, who begins:
>
>> Without those
>>  gas chambers, the Jews who were deported in Auschwitz, Treblinka and
who
>>  were not registered could just have vanish in the Eastern territories
>
>Where in the Eastern territories? Why didn't they return to their
>families? Why weren't the areas they went to complaining about this
>influx of mouths to feed? Where are they now? Where are the relsitves
>of these people? There ought to be stories they ought to tell.

There is evidence that indeed West European Jews as well as Reich Jews as
well as Polish  and Slovak Jews were sent to work camps near Riga,
Smolensk, Minsk, etc. and other areas east of the claimed "line" of
extermination camps.  We know this because there are orders complaining
about fraternization between Germans and Jews in occupied Russia, because
Kube complained about orders to liquidate Reich Jews and other Western
Jews sent to the Minsk ghetto, but at the same time submitted orders
listing where liquidated Jews came from, and we know this because of some
survivor literature pertaining to these areas (cf. The Kovno Diary, and
Alexander Dallin's "German Rule in Russia, 1941-1944", are the only two
titles that come to mind immediately.)  In fact, there were complaints
about dumping Jewish expellees in the East at the time.

As to why they did not return to their families, and where are they now,
the fact is that most -- maybe 85% -- of the Jewish victims of the
Holocaust were natives to 1939 Poland, 1939 Baltic States and 1939 Soviet
Union.  This is where the Soviet Union becomes a player.  Aside from the
obvious considerations, i.e., that the Germans shot any Jews who were
left, there is the fact that many Polish Jews were deported to Siberia
(consult Conquest's "Great Terror"), there is also the fact that during
the war (consult any general history of WW2, and focus on Eastern
campaign)  the Soviets routinely dragooned any able bodied males into the
Red Army whenever they retook a region, and we can presume that such
unskilled soldiers (which I further assume included some Jews -- I knew a
guy that this happened to) would die in combat very quicky given the known
crudity of Soviet tactics (human wave assaults, etc.) 

Beyond that, we must not forget that the Soviet Union did not allow free
passage all the time.  Some people returned from the East in any case,
many did not.  Whether those that did not were already dead, or whether
they were being used by the Soviets is hard to know.  Let's not forget the
"Iron Curtain" aspect.  Documents on the expulsions of Germans indicates
that many Germans were dragooned for labor requirements in the Soviet
Union after the war.  I don't find it hard to believe that Jewish
survivors -- especially non-Soviet Jewish survivors -- could have ended up
in the GULAG.

As to Soviet survivors, let's not forget that as a result of the
Hiter-Stalin intrigues, Stalin took over the Baltic States, a large piece
of 1939 Poland, and Moldavia from Rumania.  All three of these regions had
large 1939 Jewish populations.  We know that many were massacred, of
course,  but we don't know much more than that.  This is why Reitlinger in
his book (1954 or 1968) has ranges of Holocaust victims that are less than
six million.  That is why Hilberg has a total of 5.1 million.  Nobody
really knows.  The Soviet Union has generally been a closed book on
demographics since 1945.  The issues of Soviet Jewish emigration have not
helped matters in recent decades.  Cases of Jewish families separated by
the the Iron Curtain did happen.  Many years ago, I helped translate
letters for a woman in New York from her father in the Soviet Union --
these were in Yiddish in Cyrillic characters. They were "Galitzianers",
i.e., Polish Jews from Galicia.  Again, I recognize that anecdotes are not
absolute, but there it is.

Free travel in the Baltic states, Belarus, Ukraine, and indeed anywhere in
"Great" Russia was generally unheard of until very recently.  While
revisionists scour archives for Soviet held papers on Auschwitz, etc.,
others should go over there and seek out what continuities they can in
places like Minsk, Smolensk, Riga, Kovno, Kiev, Odessa, Kishinev, etc. 
You could probably compile some intensely interesting personal statements
about surviving first Nazi persecution and then Soviet persecution
(because the Stalinist dictatorship became more antisemitic as time went
on).  IMHO, this would all be extremely relevant to expanding our
understanding of the Holocaust, even if it doesn't involve gas chambers.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Fri May 31 20:07:46 PDT 1996
Article: 40352 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!xmission!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!sgigate.sgi.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Holocaust a Riddle Without Soviet Union
Date: 28 May 1996 23:44:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 16
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4ogh7c$bt8@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4offok$io7@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4offok$io7@Networking.Stanford.EDU>, rich@c2.org (Rich Graves)
writes:

>
>On the contrary, every history book I've read argues that the
>Versailles settlement, the fall of the Weimar Republic, and
>hyperinflation created the conditions for the rise of Hitler. If
>anything, the racism and antisemitism and racism at the heart of
>Hitler's ideology were glossed over at the schools I attended, while
>the evil menace of Communism was stressed.
>
>

I think we read different books, Rich.  But I appreciate and laud your
free speech advocacy just the same.



From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Jun  1 05:53:54 PDT 1996
Article: 40389 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Picture File: SS-Women in Belsen Camp
Date: 31 May 1996 16:19:44 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 12
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4onk90$cmq@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <31AC3348.3FBA@rio.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <31AC3348.3FBA@rio.com>, Chuck Ferree  writes:

>
>The SS had many sworn women members. Some were tried, convicted of War 
>crimes and executed. Most had been prostitutes or criminals. Some of 
>the meanest bitches they SS could round up. Even Hoess, Commandant of 
>Auschwitz, tells us that they were scum, and sloppy broads. Most were 
>so ugly, the horny SS troopers wouldn't even have sex with them.
>
>

I guess this means that SS men DID masturbate.


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Jun  1 05:53:55 PDT 1996
Article: 40391 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Antisemitism as class resentment? (was Re: GOLDHAGEN's book & H*ber's lies)
Date: 31 May 1996 16:21:58 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 50
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4onkd6$co0@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article ,
Marty Kelley  writes:

>
>While I'd agree that much antisemitism is due to the scapegoating you 
>discuss here, it's an inadequate explanation of the virulent antisemitism

>that was also common among the midle and upper classes in Germany of the 
>early part of this century.  The professional classes also, for the most 
>part, were well-represented in the Nazi party and in institutions such as

>medicine and the law (Lifton's _The Nazi Doctors_ is an outstanding 
>discussion of the role that such ideology played in German medicine).
>

I am focussing on the incidents described in the passage, because I think
they are very revealing and bear comparison for a typical activity of
communist revolutions.  I make no claim that such comparisons embrace the
entire scope of European antisemitism.  Secondly, I would like to know how
"virulent antisemitism" is characterized among the middle and upper strata
of pre-1933 German society.  By advocacy of certain exclusions?  These
were common in Germany, and everywhere else, including the USA.  By
forbidding intermarriage?  But intermarriage was common.  By wishing to
limit immigration from Poland?  But no country wanted these poor people. 
That is part of the tragedy of the Holocaust.  By identifying Jews with
communism?  But this was a common European sentiment.  By advocating mass
murder or contemptible riots? Surely you don't claim that doctors and
lawyers led these displays!

I have not inspected Lifton's book to this extent, however, it would be
instructive to know the social and economic background of those doctors
and lawyers who were the most committed Nazis.  In the army at least,
Nazism was equivalent to a certain egalitarianism, because it provided an
ideology for middle class school teachers' sons like Rommel and Model to
climb to the highest ranks among the tradition junker milieu of Manstein
and Guderian.  In other words, Nazism was not only an antisemitic ideology
but an ideology of social advancement for ethnic Germans.  This should be
kept in mind.  I wonder how many of these doctors and lawyers came from
classes that would have been excluded from the professional classes in
Wilhelmine Germany?  Also, compare the usually lower socio-economic
background of most of the Nazi leadership.

Finally, it should be pointed out that it was the promise of social
advancement that attracted many East Europeans to the communist ideology. 
But in this case as well, attraction to an ideology that would eventually
murder and enslave tens of millions does not necessarily does not make
individual adherents evil, IMHO.


  


From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Jun  1 05:53:55 PDT 1996
Article: 40408 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Small details and "big pictures"
Date: 31 May 1996 16:49:09 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 137
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4onm05$d2d@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <4om4j1$rfv@atlas.uniserve.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <4om4j1$rfv@atlas.uniserve.com>, hostrov@uniserve.com (Hilary
Ostrov) writes:

>In <4okkbe$rf2@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
>wrote:
>
>
>>[In response to the quote posted by McVay:]
>
>>>>The Austrians' hearty celebrations included immediate symbolic
>>>>acts of revenge upon the Jews, who in Austria, no less than in
>>>>Germany, were believed to have exploited and injured the
>>>>larger society.[cut] This was the purest form of
>>>>'non-instrumental' labor, and the purest expression of its
>>>>ideational and psychological sources." (Goldhagen, 286-7)
>>>
>>>>                         Work Cited
>>>
>>>>Goldhagen, Daniel Jonah. Hitler's Willing Executioners. New
>>>>York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1996
>
>[Giwer's trolling interruption snipped along with Mr. Ehrlich's mild
>remonstration]
>
>>Goldhagen interprets this as the evolution of antisemitism.  I don't see
>>it that simply.  I see it as antisemitism that has been wedded to lower
>>middle class prejudice and resentment against those who are better off
in
>>society.  The difference, here, is that in Austria and Germany the rest
of
>>the upper middle class and the wealthy were protected because all of the
>>heat was deflected on to the Jews.  
>
>Mr. McVay has provided us with a very telling picture - and the
>context - of an event in which Jews (of all classes) were subjected to
>unspeakable dehumanizing indignities.
>
>Mr. Ehrlich does not dispute the occurrence of event - nor, OTOH, does
>he seem to think it warrants discussion.  

I don't know what is meant by "not warranting discussion"

>
>I think he is offering us his interpretation as to the cause, i.e.
>lower middle class prejudice and resentment against those who are
>"better off" - which happens all the time, but in this case was
>selectively applied to Jews.
>
>Your view is interesting, Mr. Ehrlich. I'm sure you were not
>suggesting that if there were _no_ Jews amongst the upper middle class
>and the wealthy that the Nazis would have been less inclined to single
>them out - and subject them to such dehumanizing actions.  And I'm
>sure you were not suggesting that there were _no_ Jews amongst the
>other classes.

Since you  are _sure_ that I am not making the suggestions that _you_
make, then it is difficult to respond thereto.  Nor did I  _say_  that
Jews exclusively occupied these stations.  I merely said that by targeting
them, the gentile upper middle classes and wealthy classes escaped the
_lumpenproletariat_ wrath.

The passage makes it clear that Jews are being forced to perform the most
menial tasks because, according to the passage before my cut, "because
they were believed to have exploited ... the larger society."  A common
focus of Austro-German antisemitism was to make just this claim.

By the same token, in the other countries mentioned, Russia, China, and
Cambodia, the same claim of exploitation was made about groups who were
_also_ degraded in such public displays.  In these latter cases, and
indeed according to the official ideologies in those countries, there were
class motives at play here, that this was a case of the "hand-workers"
forcing the "brain-workers" to do manual labor.

Goldhagen describes these displays as "purest form of non-instrumental"
labor. I gather that you, and he, consider these displays unique to an
evolving antisemitism.  I do not, I consider _these incidents_ as being
characteristic of actions that are taken in modern revolutionary
situations, and that the fuel for these actions is lower class and lower
middle class resentment.

To ask whether _in fact_ the Jews were situated in these classes is not
the point.  Certainly, the balance of Nazi propaganda portrayed the Jews
of Germany and Austria in this way.
>
>>But what we have here is a not unusual phenomenon in societies where
there
>>is poverty and resentment.   It is the concept of "permanent revolution"
in Marxist
>>terms.  It was the root of the massive murders in those societies as
well.
>
>But what of the many, many Jews who were _not_ part of the "upper
>middle class and the wealthy" in these countries, Mr. Ehrlich?  A good
>many of them were even "manual labourers" (or if not, then at least of
>the same class) 
>
>How do you account for the Nazis' actions against _these_ Jews, Mr.
>Ehrlich?  I'm not sure I understand how this "not unusual phenomenon"
>quite applies.  Unless of course, it is your contention that the Nazis
>assumed they were all communists.

To repeat:  Nazi propaganda used a bundle of prejudices and laid them all
on the Jews. Identifiable lower middle class resentment was focussed on
the Jews in Germany and Austria. Xenophobia, rooted largely among the
poorer classes, as it is in most countries, because of the labor
competition, was focussed on the immigrants from Poland.  Anti-Bolshevism,
or anti-communism, common throughout Western Europe, was focussed on the
Jews, because of the identifiable Jewish background of several prominent
Bolsheviks (Kurt Eisner, Bela Kun, Leon Trotsky, Ezhov, etc.).

Certainly you can stand back and collapse all of these distinctions under
the rubric of antisemitism.  That is what Goldhagen does to a large
extent.  This, I believe, is also what you are getting at in your long
extract from the book about Poland.  But going back to _the incidents
described here_ we are discussing public displays common to the
sociological background I have described.

We also have to bear in mind that the German people, and the Jewish
people, were, historically, the urban classes and the middle classes for
most of Eastern Europe up until relatively recent times.  Both peoples no
longer exist in this region, both being extirpated by the war and its
aftermath, and yes, by deliberate Nazi policy.  This is something to
ponder, since by their disappearance we have seen in this region _de
facto_ what far reaching communist revolutions have achieved in Russia,
China, and Cambodia.

Therefore I do not think that concepts from sociology, the sociology of
knowledge, communist ideologies, or other social sciences can be so easily
dismissed as "small details."  Especially since the proposed substitute,
"antisemitism" is so vaguely defined.  Indeed it must be, unless it claims
to have some root in empirical reality, in which case it become
sociological by default.  I do not accept that the "big picture" of the
Holocaust is that antisemitism *just is* although certainly that argument
can be made, but surely more effectively than by asking leading rhetorical
questions.




From ehrlich606@aol.com Sat Jun  1 06:49:44 PDT 1996
Article: 1305 of alt.fan.ernst-zundel
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e2a.gnn.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail
From: ehrlich606@aol.com (Ehrlich606)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.ernst-zundel
Subject: Re: 960530: Revisionism, measles, and expirements
Date: 31 May 1996 11:51:28 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Lines: 42
Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com
Message-ID: <4on4i0$6pi@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
References: <199605309218.AAA9823@infinity.c2.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com
X-Newsreader: AOL Offline Reader

In article <199605309218.AAA9823@infinity.c2.org>, ezundel@alpha.c2.org
(E. Zundel Repost) writes:

[which is a repost, quoting from Englishmen]

>"If we have a law to stop people saying things, even though they are
>palpably untrue, then God help us," he said. . .
>
>"It is one thing to incite hatred and another to express views, however
>disagreeable, on historical events."
>
>"If the freedom of speech means anything at all, it includes the right to
>be wrong and tendentious, and the right even to cause offense.  And if
we,
>as Jews, now live in comparative security, it is largely because we have
>the good fortune to live in societies where such freedom is taken for
>granted.
>
>The whole process of historiography is one of revision, not only because
>new facts and documents come to light, but also because even established
>facts can be reassessed and reinterpreted, for one generation rarely sees
>events through the perspective of another.
>
>To demand laws that the received wisdom surrounding the Holocaust should
>forever be insulated from the process goes against every dictate of
reason.
>
>Such laws are wrong in principle and are ineffective and possibly harmful
>in practice ."
>
>"Any attempt to stifle their work, however, will always lay one open to
the
>suspicion that one has something to hide.  And nothing such people can
say
>is quite as damaging as the suppression of their right to say it."
>
>

The remarks of the distinguished MP should be cast in bronze, IMHO!

And moreover, he upholds the Jewish rationalist tradition of Maimonides,
Spinoza, and the German Jewish Neo-Kantians. Bravo!

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