Archive/File: holocaust/usa/ihr raven.0894
Last-Modified: 1994/09/07

Article 14536 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!torn!newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!newshub.ariel.cs.yorku.ca!cs932090
From: cs932090@ariel.cs.yorku.ca (JOANNA I TIMARIU)
Subject: Re: Keren's methodology
Message-ID: 
Sender: news@ariel.cs.yorku.ca
Organization: York University, Dept. of Computer Science
References:   
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 1994 02:33:11 GMT
Lines: 13

Greg Raven, 


>Perhaps you missed the beginning of my posts here. I was asking for the
>best evidence of a Nazi policy or plan of extermination of Jews in gas
>chambers. Russian POW (short for "prisoners of war," just as "rpm" is short
>for "revolutions per minute"). This is very simple.         

How about this for evidence: my grandfather's entire family has been a victim
of this plan. For me, this is enough of an evidence. It's as simple as that. 

Joanna



Article 14539 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Keren's methodology
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 1994 22:35:16 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 37
Message-ID: 
References:  <315k1n$88k@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> <315pq6$d9t@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  <317rft$ath@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

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


> Tell you what, Greg.  Leaving aside your rather bizarre view of how to
> investigate history (or anything, for that matter -- how many serious
> researchers would use a single data point to prove a hypothesis?), let's
> assume that for each piece of evidence posted here, there is one person,
> somewhere, who believes that that piece of evidence is the "best" piece. 
> If you want, we can limit it to the evidence posted within the past week,
> or even to those posted in threads in which you have participated.

I have not said that anyone would use a single data point to prove a
hypothesis. I merely want to make the discussion somewhat manageable. If we
can discuss one piece of evidence at a time, that would seem to be a much
more manageable method than that currently being employed here, if "method"
is not too strong a word to describe this newsgroup.

If you agree that it would be nice to have a more manageable discussion,
and that discussing one piece of evidence at a time would be nice, then why
not start with the "best" piece of that evidence? I don't think I am being
unreasonable, and the unrelenting howls of protest by those who claim to
have evidence, but yet who avoid presenting it in an orderly fashion and
then mischaracterize my position in order to justify their methodology,
seems to support the approach I suggest.

By the way, for all the protests directed my way for trying to bring a
little order to this discussion, no one has offered an alternative plan,
workable or not.


-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14541 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Keren's methodology
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 1994 22:40:46 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 16
Message-ID: 
References:  <315k1n$88k@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  <31gemu$4l7@access2.digex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <31gemu$4l7@access2.digex.net>, mstein@access.digex.net (Michael
P. Stein) wrote:

> (text of the finger file for greg.ihr@kaiwan.com deleted)

You just saved my the effort of e-mailing you. I recently figured out how
to change the information received when fingered, and I am gratified to see
that I got the permissions set correctly.


-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14542 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Gassings in the Old Reich
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 1994 22:46:52 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 54
Message-ID: 
References:  <319dts$s3c@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  <31aoig$qe1@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <31aoig$qe1@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
wrote:

> Raven keeps lying. Broszat never said there were no gas chambers in 
> the "Old Reich". He said that the *mass gassings* took place in
> the camps the SS built in Poland. 

Hhere is the widely-quoted 1960 letter by Dr. Martin Broszat, as it
appeared in the Hamburg weekly Die Zeit under the headline RKeine Vergasung
in DachauS (RNo Gassing in DachauS). It appeared in the German edition of
August 19, 1960, and in the US edition of August 26, 1960 (p. 14). Dr.
Broszat writes in the name of the prestigious Institute for Contemporary
History (Institut fuer Zeitgeschichte). He later served as director of the
Munich-based archive and research center, which is funded by German
taxpayers.

Here is a translation of the complete text of BroszatUs letter:

Neither in Dachau nor in Bergen-Belsen nor in Buchenwald were Jews or other
prisoners gassed. The gas chamber in Dachau was never entirely finished or
put Rinto operation.S Hundreds of thousands of prisoners who perished in
Dachau and other concentration camps in the Old Reich [that is, Germany in
its borders of 1937] were victims, above all, of the catastrophic hygienic
and provisioning conditions: according to official SS statistics, during
the twelve months from July 1942 through June 1943 alone, 110,812 persons
died of disease and hunger in all of the concentration camps of the Reich.
The mass extermination of the Jews by gassing began in 1941-1942 and
occurred exclusively in a few facilities selected and equipped with
appropriate technical installations, above all in the occupied Polish
territory (but at no place in the Old Reich): in Auschwitz-Birkenau, in
Sobibor on the Bug [river], in Treblinka, Chelmno and Belzec.

It is at those places, but not in Bergen-Belsen, Dachau or Buchenwald,
where the mass extermination facilities, spoken of in your article [in an
earlier issue of Die Zeit], were built and disguised as shower baths or
disinfection rooms. This necessary differentiation does not, of course,
change anything regarding the criminal character of the facility that was
the concentration camp. However, it may perhaps help eliminate the annoying
confusion that arises from the fact that some ineducable people make use of
a few arguments that, while correct, are polemically torn from the context,
and that, rushing to respond to them are other people who, although they
have the correct overall view, rely upon false or mistaken information.

Dr. M. Broszat
Institute for Contemporary History
Munich


-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14543 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Gassings in the Old Reich
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 1994 22:49:21 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 29
Message-ID: 
References:   <31aoig$qe1@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> <31ccdd$7sb@ankh.iia.org> <31ecpr$m23@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <31ecpr$m23@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
wrote:

> Friedrich Berg, the "revisionist scholar" who calls those who argue
> with him "Jewish trash", "Jewish slime", "creatures" etc, asks:
> 
> # Perhaps Mr. Keren would care to tell us which 6 camps in the "Old Reich" 
> # had been the site of "gassings" according  to the Institute of 
> # Contemporary History in Munich.
> 
> The summary sent to me from the ICH is below. Feel free to quote from
> it, under the following conditions:
> 
> 1) Verbatim quotes only.  
> 2) The Institut Fuer Zeitgeschicthe has to be cited as the source.
> 
> **********************************************************************
> Concerns: The killing of people through gas in the extermination and
> concentrations camps under the Nazi power

Do you have any explanation for the camps that sometimes appear on this
list and sometimes do not, such as Majdanek and Dachau, to list just two?

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14544 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!psgrain!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Raven's methodology
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 1994 22:50:50 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 36
Message-ID: 
References:  <315k1n$88k@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  <31a20m$2cl@access3.digex.net> <31apvf$rb0@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <31apvf$rb0@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
wrote:

> This is really like talking to a brick wall, but I'll try nontheless.
> 
> 1) It is impossible to choose "the best piece of evidence" for the
> Holocaust. For instance, how can one choose which of the eyewitness
> testimonies for the gassings at the various camps is "best"?

I would think that if truly there were good evidence, you would not be
forced to cite testimonies, which are notoriously poor on this (and other)
topics. How about some physical evidence? How about some contemporaneous
evidence? Something tangible would be nice.

> 2) The reality of any historical event is not in the single "best
> piece of evidence", but in the amount of the evidence present and the
> way it converges to a similar general picture of what happened.
> 
> 
> Why is it so difficult to understand this?
> 

This is true, as far as you go. However, you must be careful when
constructing a circumstancial case such as this one, because with the same
approach you use to "prove" the planned homicidal gassings of Jews, someone
else could "prove" that aliens from other solar systems have visited Earth.
After all, there are hundreds of testimonies, and even some photos. How can
you support Holocaust gassing claims, but deny UFO claims (assuming you
do)?

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14545 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Raven's methodology
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 1994 22:55:01 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 28
Message-ID: 
References:  <315k1n$88k@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article , bzs@world.std.com (Barry
Shein) wrote:

> 
> Perhaps Raven can clarify this demand he has made which apparently to
> many of us seems idiotic. Maybe we all misunderstand him.
> 
> He wants the single best piece of evidence of the Holocaust.
> 
> I assume Mr Raven believes World War II occurred (?)
> 
> So what is the single best piece of evidence that World War II
> occurred?
> 
> Just as an example of the kind of thing he is looking for.

I would perhaps start off with declarations of war from both the Axis and
Allied sides (presented one at a time, of course!), and then perhaps move
to official documents about military campaigns, backed up with
contempareneous photos of those campaigns, and perhaps finish with corpses
that could be shown to have been the result of wartime action. Simple.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14546 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: open debate
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 1994 23:08:54 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 59
Message-ID: 
References:  <31h4nm$7id@search01.news.aol.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article , bzs@world.std.com (Barry
Shein) wrote:


> Although it's been 50 years surely out of millions of these supposed
> survivors many, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, of these
> people thought dead must still be alive.
> 
> Many would not even be very elderly.  How many WWII veterans are still
> alive, by comparison? Many, right?  There are a half dozen WWII
> veterans alive just counted among my father and uncles.
> 
> So where are these millions of survivors that supposedly died in the
> camps but the revisionsts claim actually escaped to the Soviet Union?
> 
> Or their children, friends, relatives, etc?
> 
> How many such stories would it take to get some notice? A dozen?
> Probably not. One hundred? Maybe that would be interesting, "100
> people who supposedly died in concentration camps found alive and well
> in the former Soviet Union", I think that would capture some interest
> from the media, from someone (perhaps revisionists even?)
> 
> But the claim by the revisionists is millions!
> 
> It's *their* number.
> 
> And I don't think it's outrageous to say that there must therefore be
> tens of thousands of such people alive today.
> 
> A fair number is probably at least in the hundreds of thousands if not
> over a million, but even merely ten thousand people thought dead being
> discovered alive and well should captivate some interest, wouldn't
> escape notice.

You are making a couple of assumptions. First, you are assuming that "lost"
people look for each other. This we know not to be the case. For example,
when Mark Weber and David Cole were on the Montel Williams Show, "survivor"
Ernst Hollander claimed his brother had been murdered by the Nazis. Well,
it turns out his brother was still alive in Eastern Europe, and Ernst never
bothered to look for him.

You are also assuming that there are few stories of reunions. Without more
research I cannot give you a number, but IHR founder David McCalden used to
delight in collection stories about the reunion of family members
"murdered" by the Nazis in the Holocaust.

Third, you are assuming that it is easy to search for a "lost" family
member even if you try. This is obviously not the case, as can be seen by
the results of the (Arolsen?) center that conducts such searches. However,
according to the figures I saw in the paper a few months back, they confirm
more people alive than they do dead.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14547 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Auschwitz facts: Where to find them
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 1994 23:18:09 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 40
Message-ID: 
References:  <1994Jul28.223120.5451@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <1994Jul28.223120.5451@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>,
kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay) wrote:

> The following video is available - send the command GET
> HOLOCAUST/BIBLIOGRAPHY SSSS.VIDEO-1 to server@oneb.almanac.bc.ca to
> learn where you can obtain it for your library or educational
> institution.
> 
> HOLOCAUST: Liberation of Auschwitz. When Soviet troops liberated
> Auschwitz on January 27, 1945, a cameraman accompanied them to record
> the liberation process. This powerful program incorporates the
> personal impressions of the camerman, Alexander Woronzow, with his
> haunting footage. The camera documents the fearful faces of Auschwitz
> survivors, who didn't know the Soviets were their liberators. The
> commentary describes the selection process which sent some inmates to
> work while others went to their deaths, horrific medical experiments,
> and daily life within Auschwitz. WARNING: not recommended for
> unprepared audiences due to the intensely graphic presentation of
> atrocities. Grades 9 and up. Colour and black-and-white. 18 minutes.
> Encyclopaedia Britannica. Copyright 1990.

Interesting. The Germans told Auschwitz inmates that the Soviets were
coming, and offered them a chance to either leave with the Germans or stay
and wait for the Soviets. Few waited. In fact, Elie Wiesel and his father
opted for the Germans, as can be read in his book, "Night."

It is also interesting to find anyone willing to accept wholeheartedly
anything offered by the Soviets, especially in light of the Soviets'
attempts to demonize the "fascists" (Nazis).

Finally, according to this blurb, the selection (and possibly the gassing)
process is described, but what about some footage of gas chambers, gassed
corpses, or other tangible artifacts? 

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14548 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Gannon's failure to post IHR journals
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 1994 23:22:01 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 23
Message-ID: 
References: <9407280139.02BNL00@banished.com> <1994Jul28.223517.5628@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <1994Jul28.223517.5628@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>,
kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay) wrote:

> Hey, Nazi-Boy, won't the IHR let you post their stuff anymore? (It
> was such a rich source of vitriolic nonsense, and you used to post
> it regularly... did your scanner break down, or did the IHR simply
> decide you were embarrassing, and cut you loose?

Mr. Gannon is more than capable of replying for himself, but on behalf of
the IHR, I would like to say that I send him the full text of all articles,
reviews, and historical news and comment from each new Journal as it comes
out, usually within a week of it going to the printer. I understand Dan has
been busy starting a new business lately (in addition to his school work),
so it is possible he is backlogged with work, as are all of us. However, he
does have all the text, directly from us, and is welcome to post all of it
that is not copyrighted by the author.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14552 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: More "Open Debate" (was: Re: Raven's methodology)
Date: 1 Aug 1994 08:02:29 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <31ia6l$2oa@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:  <31a20m$2cl@access3.digex.net> <31apvf$rb0@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu
X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: alt.revisionism

How does Raven assume WW2 happened? How does he assume Dresden was
bombed (which I assume he does)?

Let us expand this "revisionism". The following claims are often
made by "revisionists":

1) WW2 happened.
2) Dresden was bombed.
3) The Soviet soldiers killed and raped many German civilians.

Now, I am not saying this did not happen. What I want is to see the
"revisionists" prove these things happened - and give a proof
which satisfies their standards.

I want to understand how the "revisionist mind" works. In order to
understand this, I first have to understand what "revisionists" 
accept as proof.

I am waiting for Raven to:

A) State if he believes 1-3 above are true.
B) If he believes they are true, prove them.

I hope he is not too much of a coward to skip the challenge. 

We have to be intellectually honest. If the Holocaust is to be the
subject of "revisionist open debate", so should 1-3 above.


-Danny Keren.




Article 14553 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Gassings in the Old Reich
Date: 1 Aug 1994 08:04:49 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <31iab1$2oj@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:  <31ccdd$7sb@ankh.iia.org> <31ecpr$m23@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu
X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: alt.revisionism

Maidanek does appear on the list, and so does Dachau.


-Danny Keren.



Article 14554 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!psgrain!library.ucla.edu!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Gassings in the Old Reich
Date: 1 Aug 1994 08:21:49 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <31ibat$3ak@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:   <31aoig$qe1@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu
X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: alt.revisionism

I'll answer again, with the hope it sinks in one day. 

Broszat, in his 1960 letter, mentions 3 camps in which gassing did not
take place. Nowhere does he say that no gassing took place in the
"Old Reich". Is this point too difficult to understand?

If Raven considers Broszat a reliable source, he should stop
distorting what he says. And he should also agree to what Broszat says
about the mass gassings in the death camps the SS built in Poland.

I posted here the letter from the "Institute for Contemporary
History" which does say that gassings took place inside the "Old
Reich".

Moreover, the "Institute for Contemporary History" is aware of the
lies the "revisionists" spread, which is why the letter they sent to
me included the following:



In order to elucidate different circulating misinformation we
furthermore would like to state:

On the part of the Institute for Contemporary History it was never
maintained that there would nowhere have been gas chambers in the
concentration camps in the area of the old German Reich (Oldreich).
It was only (in a letter of Dr. Martin Braszat, back then scientific
coworker, from 1972 to his death in October 1989 director of the
Institute for Contemporary History, to the weekly newspaper "Die
Zeit" which was published in its edition from 8/19/1960) determined
that the "mass extermination of Jews through gassing... (took place)
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
exclusively at a few for this purpose selected and with the aid of
appropriate technical furnishings equipped places, especially in the
occupied Polish territory (but nowhere in the Oldreich)". The names
of these extermination camps are in the first part of the list
above.



By the way, the emphasis under the "mass extermination..." appears in the 
original, it's not mine.

I hope that, in view of this, Raven stops with his lies.


-Danny Keren.



Article 14557 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Gassings in the Old Reich
Date: 1 Aug 1994 10:07:02 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <31ihg6$67q@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:  <31aoig$qe1@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  <31ibat$3ak@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu


From the testimony of SS-Unterscharfuehrer Wilhelm Bahr in his trial
at Hamburg:
[Quoted in "Truth Prevails", ISBN 1-879437-00-7, p. 99].
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Q: Is it correct that you have gassed 200 Russian POW's with Zyklon-B?

A: Yes, on orders.

Q: Where did you do that?

A: In Neuengamme [concentration camp].

Q: On whose order?

A: The local doctor, Dr. Von Bergmann.

Q: With what gas?

A: With Prussic acid [another name for Zyklon-B].

Q: How long did the Russians take to die?

A: I do not know. I only obeyed orders.

Q: How long did it take to gas the Russians?

A: I returned after two hours and they were all dead.

Q: For what purpose did you go away?

A: That was during lunch hour.

Q: You left for your lunch and came back afterwards?

A: Yes.

Q: Were they dead when you came back?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you look at their bodies?

A: Yes, because I had to load them.

Q: Why did you apply the gas to the Russians?

A: I only had orders to pour in the gas and I do not know anything
   about it.




-Danny Keren.



Article 14559 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!kmcvay
From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay)
Subject: Re: Raven's Myopia, revisited...
References:   
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac
Message-ID: <1994Aug01.221941.15910@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 94 22:19:41 GMT

In article  greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes:

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

>By the way, for all the protests directed my way for trying to bring a
>little order to this discussion, no one has offered an alternative plan,
>workable or not.

Once again Mr. Raven's May 4th. Myopia comes to the fore, as he
continues to ignore an article posted here at least six times which
offers a response to his "challenge," and a suggested approach to
the matter... eventually, one must hope, Mr. Raven will have someone
read it to him, in simple English, so he will understand it.
-- 
   /^\__/^\                 The Old Frog's Almanac 
  / @    @ \     A Salute to That Old Frog Himse'f, Ryugen Fisher
 (          )       Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada
  \  ~~~~  / (Mail to this system has bounced since 28 July - keep trying)


Article 14562 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!via.kz.merit.edu!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Keren's methodology
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 1994 11:44:13 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 62
Message-ID: 
References: 
   <315k1n$88k@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
   <315pq6$d9t@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
   
   <317rft$ath@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
   
   
   
NNTP-Posting-Host: 35.132.2.15

greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:
> 
> If you agree that it would be nice to have a more manageable discussion,
> and that discussing one piece of evidence at a time would be nice, then why
> not start with the "best" piece of that evidence? I don't think I am being
> unreasonable, and the unrelenting howls of protest by those who claim to
> have evidence, but yet who avoid presenting it in an orderly fashion and
> then mischaracterize my position in order to justify their methodology,
> seems to support the approach I suggest.

Liar.  (Ken, are we keeping a "liar" file for Greg?)

Brian Harmon, Danny Keren, Ken McVay, Michael Stein, and I presented ten
documents "in an orderly fashion" on May the 4th.  It has since been posted
three more times, and has been emailed to you at least once, and I have
received email _back_ from you confirming that you received it.

But perhaps I'm jumping the gun -- perhaps you're not referring to any of
us five when you speak of "those who claim to have evidence, but yet who
avoid presenting it in an orderly fashion and then mischaracterize my
position."  Would you care to name someone whom you believe has done this,
besides we five?

I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, you see.

> By the way, for all the protests directed my way for trying to bring a
> little order to this discussion, no one has offered an alternative plan,
> workable or not.

Liar.

In that article that first appeared on May the 4th, we asked Mr. Raven to
"provide us with what he thinks are the one or two best pieces of evidence
that the Nazis did _not_ exterminate millions of people in homicidal gas
chambers."  I personally have repeated that request several times.

This is not only an alternative plan, it's highly superior to Mr. Raven's
suggestion, for reasons which have been detailed many times on this
newsgroup, in the May 4th article and in my personal remarks thereon.


In fact, I've been making this request of Dan Gannon since about a month
after I started reading alt.revisionism, which would be around the spring
or summer of 1991.  And, as other Nazi apologists and Holocaust-deniers
have wandered through these electronic halls, I believe at one point or
another I've directed the question to each of them individually.

If not, I hereby ask anyone who believes that the Nazis did not try to
exterminate millions of civilians in the early 1940s:

Pick the topic.  Name the one area in which we should focus discussion,
that you think will best make your case.  For example:  Leuchter's
forensic findings;  diesel engines and Reinhard;  population reports;
the difficulty of using HCN.  I've looked into all of these examples
and have found them all to be bogus claims.  If your argument is that
I'm simply not looking deeply enough, then pick the one claim that you
think is your best, and we will focus all our efforts thereon, looking
as deeply as it takes.

-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 14563 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!via.kz.merit.edu!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Real Lesson of the Holocaust
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 1994 11:53:06 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 41
Message-ID: 
References: <30vcvu$6h5@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
   
   <3164ap$k80@access2.digex.net>
   <31ch8e$7sb@ankh.iia.org>
   <31eddh$mg4@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
   <31evk8$kdg@ankh.iia.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 35.132.2.15

bergf@iia.org (Friedrich Berg) wrote:

> Dear Mr. Keren,
> 
> Is it your position that Zyklon-B was used at Auschwitz-Birkenau and/or 
> Auschwitz I ONLY for mass-murder--or are you willing to say that it was 
> ALSO used in those camps to save people's lives?

Mr. Berg, stop clouding the issue.  Clarity is essential to education.
Confusion hinders it.

No one denies that Zyklon-B was used for its original purpose, killing
lice.

And it's also true, though kooks deny it, that it was used to kill
batches of human beings as well.

Other things no one denies:  the Nazis ordered special batches of
Zyklon that lacked the identifying odor (you know, the way they add
bad-smelling stuff to natural gas so you'll figure out something's wrong
if there's a leak).  The rooms that deniers call "morgues" had
gas-tight doors, and showerheads that weren't connected to anything, and
tiny peepholes protected from the inside by a mesh of iron bars (must
have been some pretty active cadavers in that "morgue").

> P.S. My position on "Sonderbehandlung" is certainly not contradicted in 
> the slightest by anything Kremer wrote in his diary--only by what he felt 
> obliged to say in his postwar trial.

Perhaps now you'd like to claim that Kremer was tortured?  Brutalized?
Brainwashed?  Tricked?  That he was promised Twinkies if he admitted
that "Sonderaktion" and "Sonderbehandlung" meant what everyone knew
they meant?

Come on, don't hint.  Out with it.

And don't forget to present your evidence.

-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 14565 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!paladin.american.edu!newsfeed.ACO.net!fuw.edu.pl!news.nask.org.pl!ci.pwr.wroc.pl!ci.pwr.wroc.pl!not-for-mail
From: pankiewicz@sun1000.ci.pwr.wroc.pl (Jerzy Pankiewicz)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Auschwitz myths and facts
Date: 1 Aug 1994 17:44:03 +0200
Organization: Technical Univeristy of Wroclaw
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <31j583$oen@sun1000.ci.pwr.wroc.pl>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: sun1000.ci.pwr.wroc.pl
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

I wonder why so serious historians don't do their research
in places where the Jews weren't exterminated. You can
collect about 1000$ and come for several days  to Poland.
You may visit Oswiecim and maybe you would find people
who saw  in 1944 Jews leaving Auschwitz. You can find
people who forged gas chambers, cremas, collections of 
false teeths, haars and toys. You may probably
find people who worked in cremas who are much more
competent than a man from Toronto 
who probably burns 10 corpses per day. 
But be prepared to be taken to a Polish asylum. We Poles
are very unfair to 'revisionists'. We treat them.
Rather don't discuss your theories with Polish antisemites.
They might think that you are polling their legs which
they don't like.                        Jerzy PAnkiewicz



Article 14566 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!via.kz.merit.edu!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Raven's methodology
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 1994 12:24:55 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 46
Message-ID: 
References: 
   
   <31a20m$2cl@access3.digex.net>
   <31e7fs$fi3@ankh.iia.org>
   <31fgap$2gg@access1.digex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 35.132.2.15

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

[Berg describes why he considers something a forgery:]

> >First of all,
> >on September 7, 1945 the Nuremberg prosecution admitted already on their
> >cover document that: "Source of Original: Unknown--Obtained from OCC
> >London."
> 
>     I truly must be dumb.  Berg expects me to believe those clever Jewish
> forgers could fabricate this document, but couldn't fabricate a 
> little note about where it came from.

Yep yep yep.

I find it really interesting how, even as they try to distance themselves
from the hard-core Nazis, the deniers resort to the same logic.  It's a
common feature of Nazi-apologist and neo-Nazi propaganda that Jews are
portrayed as simultaneously brilliant and imbecilic.  The Jews are clever
buggers who had taken over the entire world media even in the early years
of this century.  And they've managed to pull off that "Holocaust hoax,"
a project comparable in scale to the moon shot, without leaving behind
any traces of their having done so.  But of the millions of forgery jobs
they did for the "hoax," they somehow weren't able to make a single one
of them look convincing!  Amazing!  Talk about idiot-savants!

I think once, while thumbing through a collection of Nazi anti-Semitic
propaganda, I read something about Jews being "clever like foxes" --
they aren't really intelligent, but they have a sort of animal cunning.
Yeah right, whatever.

> >Now, let's consider the Francke-Gricksch report.  There is NO such 
> >document anywhere.  There is only a supposed "transcription."
> >That is clearly spelled out even by Pressac.  
> 
>     This is what Pressac spells out: "The report was found in
> [Franke-Gricksch's] career file and is now thought to be preserved in the
> National Archives Collection of World War II, War Crimes Records, in
> Washington, under reference NA RG 238."  (p. 239) Pressac hasn't been to
> look for the original, but NOWHERE does he say it's missing.

Ken, do we have a "liar" file for Fritz?  Should we start one?

-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 14567 of alt.revisionism:
Xref: oneb alt.revisionism:14567 sci.skeptic:59419
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!via.kz.merit.edu!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Raven's methodology
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 1994 12:48:55 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 90
Message-ID: 
References: 
   <315k1n$88k@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
   
   <31a20m$2cl@access3.digex.net>
   <31apvf$rb0@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
   
NNTP-Posting-Host: 35.132.2.15

Mr. Raven actually makes a good point.

He manages, however, to show that he doesn't really understand what's
going on.

greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:

>...you must be careful when
> constructing a circumstancial case such as this one, because with the same
> approach you use to "prove" the planned homicidal gassings of Jews, someone
> else could "prove" that aliens from other solar systems have visited Earth.
> After all, there are hundreds of testimonies, and even some photos. How can
> you support Holocaust gassing claims, but deny UFO claims (assuming you
> do)?

(First of all--the "case" for the Holocaust is _not_ "circumstancial."  But
I'll let that go, to get to my point.)

There are indeed hundreds of testimonies, nay thousands, saying that
aliens have visited our planet.  And for the record, I think every one of
them is wrong.  (I'm not an expert, though, and have no desire to be one;
please don't ask me to argue about UFOs, I find the topic utterly boring.)

The reason I dismiss them all so effortlessly is that there is no
convergence of evidence.  Every one of the testimonies regarding UFOs has
different details -- they have skinny heads, they have two heads, they have
no heads, they're nothing but balls of gas, they're ten-foot-tall reptiles,
whatever.  Their spacecraft are cigar-shaped, they're saucer-shaped, they're
long rows of lights, they're totally silent, they make a tremendous noise,
they glide smoothly along, they dart and zoom around, whatever.

Now, surely some of these stories are similar, because of sheer random
chance (get enough snowflakes, and two of them are bound to look pretty
much alike).  And surely some of them are similar, because people who make
up UFO stories aren't always the most imaginative -- there are probably
a hundred stories about big-eyed, hairless aliens with no noses, right?

(I'm reminded of the scene in that horrible movie, "Communion" was it?,
where all the people who'd seen UFOs were in therapy together.  The main
character says he's seen them, and two or three others chime in with,
"was it the guys with the big teeth? or the ones with the round heads?"
Sheesh, how many alien visitors can one planet support?)

Anyway -- the analogy Mr. Raven is trying to make is of the UFO-sighters
to the testimonies of people who have survived the Holocaust.  This fails
for a number of reasons.  But the biggest reason is:  the testimonies of
Holocaust survivors are _consistent_.

For the analogy to hold, there would have to be almost as many stories
as there are survivors.  One would say they were killed with gas, three
would say the Nazis burned them at the stake, two would subscribe to
the mass-guillotine story, one would say they were tortured to death.
And there would have to be other discrepancies as well.

Now, I'm not denying that some testimonies are false, for whatever
reasons.  Surely _some_ of the witnesses are lying and making things
up -- there are just too many witnesses for that not to happen.
Surely some have failing memories.  Faurisson delights in finding the
rare cases of witnesses that swear to things we now know to be false,
such as electrocutions, or killing by steam, or gassings in places
where we now believe no gassings happened.

But the vast majority have stories that agree on the major details, or
at least don't contradict each other (also important).

And, occasionally, details of witnesses' testimonies have been
surprisingly accurate;  sometimes, historians discount testimony as
fabricated when, years later, it turns out the witness was right!

It would be as if 98% of all UFO sighters agreed that the aliens looked
pretty much identical, that their spaceships looked and worked alike,
and so on.  And let's say that UFO sighters reported a loud noise
when the spacecraft exceeded the speed of sound, way back before we
knew about sonic booms.  _Then_ I would give _much_ more credence to
their stories.

The second big reason the analogy fails is that we have much other
evidence _besides_ testimony.  It is as if we had captured the leaders
of the aliens in 1945, and had interrogated them and put them on trial.
Had we done that, I'd be much more inclined to believe in UFOs.

But Mr. Raven wants to restrict discussion to one piece of evidence at
a time, and ignore the _convergence_ of evidence.  Science doesn't work
that way.

Note the crosspost.

-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 14572 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!via.kz.merit.edu!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Raven's methodology
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 1994 13:28:39 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 44
Message-ID: 
References: 
   <315k1n$88k@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
   
   
NNTP-Posting-Host: 35.132.2.15

greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:
> I would perhaps start off with declarations of war from both the Axis and
> Allied sides (presented one at a time, of course!), and then perhaps move
> to official documents about military campaigns, backed up with
> contempareneous photos of those campaigns, and perhaps finish with corpses
> that could be shown to have been the result of wartime action. Simple.

How are you going to present these declarations of war, Mr. Raven?  Do you
have a recording of FDR's radio address?  Recordings can be easily forged,
you know;  do you have witnesses to his delivering it?  Do you have any
official court that has determined whether or not your recording is real?

(Faurisson has demanded that and more of Himmler's recorded speech at
Poznan.  A court recognized it as genuine;  that isn't enough for
Faurisson.)

You claim that you have written declarations of war?  How many people
signed them?  Were there witnesses to the signing?  Was the fact that
these important politicians signed the documents written up in the
newspapers of the day?  Why not?  You claim that "everyone knew" that
the world was at war, and that therefore the signing of the documents
would be relatively unimportant, but that's rather a transparent claim.

Keep in mind, Mr. Raven, that we Second World War Revisionists don't deny
that _some_ countries took part in the general skirmishes that occurred
around 1939-1945.  But we Revisionists deny that any countries east of
Poland were involved.  So you'll have to present declarations of war and
military campaigns and photos from the Soviet Union...and we all know
what skulduggery goes on behind the Iron Curtain, right?  Anything that
comes from over there runs a very high risk of being a forgery, just
keep that in mind.

And photos...oh, please, don't make me laugh.  Photos of corpses don't
prove anything -- it's obvious that all the victims died of typhus and
other diseases.  Put a caption on a photo, and you can make it be
anything you want.

(That last paragraph could have been taken verbatim from just about any
Holocaust-denial propaganda...Butz and Faurisson are its intellectual
progenitors.)

-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 14576 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!torn!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!darkstar.UCSC.EDU!news.hal.COM!olivea!uunet!news.pipeline.com!malgudi.oar.net!sun!oucsace!dspiegel
From: dspiegel@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Dan Spiegel)
Subject: Re: Auschwitz facts: Where to find them
Message-ID: 
Organization: Ohio University CS Dept,. Athens
References:  <1994Jul28.223120.5451@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> 
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 1994 19:18:18 GMT
Lines: 22

In article  greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes:
>
>Interesting. The Germans told Auschwitz inmates that the Soviets were
>coming, and offered them a chance to either leave with the Germans or stay
>and wait for the Soviets. Few waited. In fact, Elie Wiesel and his father
>opted for the Germans, as can be read in his book, "Night."

   Interesting. Instead of just asserting this fact, please provide a page
number so I may consult my copy of Night.
>
>-- 
>
>Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
>Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
 [Inappropriate advertisements that were here deleted]


-DS
I speak for myself only.
No unsolicited e-mail, please. I'll read your flames with everyone else.
Please do not use my name in any subject headers.



Article 14578 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Auschwitz facts: Where to find them
Date: 1 Aug 1994 20:54:13 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <31jndl$ars@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:  <1994Jul28.223120.5451@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu

I checked it out, although didn't have time to read in detail. Wiesel
writes the Auschwitz inmates were afraid that the SS was going to
murder all those who said they want to stay, and that is why they
chose to leave. They didn't leave because they felt safe with the SS.

Raven "forgot" that part, of course. Don't forget that you're dealing
with a "revisionist scholar" here.

What is amazing is that Raven thinks no one will bother to go and
check out his claims. 

Reminds me of how nazi-boy Gannon was humiliated here when he
lied about the content of an article in some obscure magazine from
1919. Nontheless someone went and found it and, of course, it was
discovered nazi-boy blatantly misquoted the article. Poor nazi-boy
apologized for his "error" and never posted that piece again. Raven,
who should be smarter than Gannon, doesn't even try to find
obscure sources.


-Danny Keren.



Article 14583 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.kei.com!world!bzs
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Raven's methodology
In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Sun, 31 Jul 1994 22:55:01 -0800
Message-ID: 
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Organization: The World
References:  <315k1n$88k@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
	
	
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 1994 22:44:25 GMT
Lines: 123


From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) [responding to me]
>> So what is the single best piece of evidence that World War II
>> occurred?
>> 
>> Just as an example of the kind of thing he is looking for.
>
>I would perhaps start off with declarations of war from both the Axis and
>Allied sides (presented one at a time, of course!),

--------------------
From a speech by Adolf Hitler, January 30, 1942, Berlin Sports Palace:

"This war will not end as the Jews imagine, namely, in the liquidation
of all the European and Aryan poeples; the outcome of this war will be
the extermination of Jewry. For the first time it will not be other
nations who will bleed to death. For the first time we will practice
the ancient Jewish law: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."
--------------------
-Speech by Himmler before senior SS officers in Poznan, 10/4/43:

"I am referring here to the evacuation of the Jews, the extermination of the
Jewish people. This is one of the things that is easily said: 'The Jewish
people are going to be exterminated,' that's what every party member says,
'sure, it's in our program, elimination of the Jews, extermination -- it'll
be done.' And then they all come along, the 80 million worthy Germans, and
each one has his one decent Jew. Of course, the others are swine, but this
one, he is a first-rate Jew. Of all those who talk like this, not one has
seen it happen, not one has had to go through with it. Most of you men know
what it is like to see 100 corpses side by side, or 500, or 1000. To have
stood fast through this and -- except for cases of human weakness -- to have
stayed decent that has made us hard."

--------------------

>and then perhaps move
>to official documents about military campaigns

--------------------
"Since December 1941, for example, 97,000 were processed using three
vans, without any faults occuring in the vehicles."

	Dr August Becker on 5 June 1942 to SS-Obersturmbannfuhrer Rauff

--------------------
Einsatzgruppe C
Standort Kiev

In collaboration with the group staff and two Kommandos of Police
Regiment South, on 29 and 30 September 1941 Sonderkommando 4a executed
33,771 Jews in Kiev.

	Ereignismeldung UdSSR, No. 101, 2 October 1941

--------------------

  "..the unfit go to cellars in a large house which are entered
   from outside.  They go down five or six steps into a fairly long, 
   well-constructed and well-ventilated cellar area, which is lined 
   with benches to the left and right. It is brightly lit, and 
   the benches are numbered.  The prisoners are told that they are to 
   be cleansed and disinfected for their new assignments.  They must therefore 
   completely undress to be bathed. To avoid panic and to prevent
   disturbances of any kind, they are instructed to arrange their
   clothing neatly under their respective numbers, so that they will
   be able to find their things again after their bath.  Everything
   proceeds in a perfectly orderly fashion.  Then they pass through 
   a small corridor and enter a large cellar room which resembles a
   shower bath.  In this room are three large pillars, into which
   certain materials can be lowered from outside the cellar room.
   When three- to four-hundred people have been herded into this room,
   the doors are shut, and containers filled with the substances are
   dropped down into the pillars.  As soon as the containers touch 
   the base of the pillars, they release particular substances that put
   the people to sleep in one minute. A few minutes later, the door opens
   on the other side, where the elevator is located. . . . Then
   the corpses are loaded into elevators and brought up to the first
   floor, where ten large crematoria are located. (Because fresh
   corpses burn particularly well, only 50-100 lbs. of coke are needed
   for the whole process.)  The job itself is performed by Jewish
   prisoners, who never step outside this camp again.
      The results of this `resettlement action' to date: 500,000 Jews
   Current capacity of the `resettlement action' ovens: 10,000
   in twenty-four hours."
                  --from report entitled "Resettlement of Jews"
                    written by SS-Sturmbannfuehrer Alfred Franke-Gricksch
                    for SS-Col. M. von Herff and RF-SS H. Himmler, after
                    inspection of Auschwitz camp on 14-16 May 1943.  This
                    excerpt from "Hitler and the Final Solution" by
                    Gerald Fleming, ISBN 0-520-05103-3.
--------------------

During my visit to Kumhof I also saw the extermination installation,
with the lorry which had been set up for killing by means of motor
exhaust fumes. The head of the Kommando told me that this method,
however, was very unreliable, as the gas build-up was very irregular
and was often insufficient for killing.

	Rudolf Hoss, Commandant of Auschwitz, on a visit to Chelmno
	on 16 September 1942
--------------------

>backed up with
>contempareneous photos of those campaigns,

Photos have been presented but revisionists always claim they're
either forgeries or misrepresented (why? I don't know, mostly because
they disagree with the revisionists' viewpoint.)

>and perhaps finish with corpses
>that could be shown to have been the result of wartime action.

It's 1994, the war ended nearly 50 years ago, where would you get
corpses for examination?

But I think that's some sort of start.


-- 
        -Barry Shein

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


Article 14585 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!kmcvay
From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay)
Subject: Re: Raven's methodology
References:   
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac
Message-ID: <1994Aug02.121927.20787@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 94 12:19:27 GMT

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

>From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) [responding to me]

>>and perhaps finish with corpses
>>that could be shown to have been the result of wartime action.

>It's 1994, the war ended nearly 50 years ago, where would you get
>corpses for examination?

Not to mention the fact that not a single 50-year-old "corpse" has
been autopsied to show the cause of death. In fact, there is no
proof at all that these "corpses" even exist. Row upon row of
crosses in "cemetaries" don't prove that anything is "buried"
beneath them. I think this whole WWII thing is a massive scam
dreamed up by the Germans to shame the Yanks into providing them
with billions of dollars in aid.

The "troops" said to have "fought" in Europe actually were young
people who, in typical rebellion, simply got tired of living with
their parents, and, like teenagers will do, they ran away. Most are
now living in France.

>But I think that's some sort of start.

Hardly.

-- 
   /^\__/^\                 The Old Frog's Almanac 
  / @    @ \     A Salute to That Old Frog Himse'f, Ryugen Fisher
 (          )       Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada
  \  ~~~~  /


Article 14588 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!swiss.ans.net!malgudi.oar.net!sun!oucsace!dspiegel
From: dspiegel@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Dan Spiegel)
Subject: Re: open debate
Message-ID: 
Organization: Ohio University CS Dept,. Athens
References: <31h4nm$7id@search01.news.aol.com>  
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 1994 22:52:32 GMT
Lines: 81


In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>In article , 
>        bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) wrote (text left out):
>    [An excellent post - Asking why none of the people who
	"disappeared" into the USSR have called home, among
	other well-stated points]
>
>You are making a couple of assumptions. First, you are assuming that "lost"
>people look for each other. This we know not to be the case. 

   And how do we (who the hell is "we"?) know this? All I see is an 
assertion. Prove it.

>							      For example,
>when Mark Weber and David Cole were on the Montel Williams Show, "survivor"
>Ernst Hollander claimed his brother had been murdered by the Nazis. Well,
>it turns out his brother was still alive in Eastern Europe, and Ernst never
>bothered to look for him.

   Written as if one example {probably asserted out of context,
judging by the Raven track record} proves Raven's assertion. Why am
I not surprised?
>
>You are also assuming that there are few stories of reunions. Without more
>research I cannot give you a number, but IHR founder David McCalden used to
>delight in collection stories about the reunion of family members
>"murdered" by the Nazis in the Holocaust.

   Another assertion backed by not even one scintilla of *evidence*. Being
a "historian", I'm sure that Mr. Raven *will* provide us a number.
   Also, isn't that a nice description of IHR founder McCalden? So,
he "delights" in stories about families torn apart (with some members
likely murdered)? Just the kind of attitude all the IHR "historians" and 
"scholars" think is is really neat, huh?

>
>Third, you are assuming that it is easy to search for a "lost" family
>member even if you try. This is obviously not the case, as can be seen by
>the results of the (Arolsen?) center that conducts such searches. 

   What are the results of the center whose name you don't even know?
How do they conduct searches? Under whose auspices do they operate?
Are there other such centers? Where do they look? Yet another assertion 
backed by nothing.

   All I know is that my father went searching for his family and was 
able to find those who survived and bring them out from the Soviet Zone. 
The rest were murdered, not lost, murdered. Let's see your numbers, 
Raven. How many reunions were there? 11 million people are "missing",
according to your assertions (not backed up as usual) that they weren't
murdered. There's lots of evidence (much posted right here) that they
were murdered. As your pal Berg likes to say, put up or shut up.

>								   However,
>according to the figures I saw in the paper a few months back, they confirm
>more people alive than they do dead.
>
   Uh, Mr. Scholar, could you maybe _post_ these figures (not to mention
which "paper") so we may all judge whether they "confirm" your assertion, 
which, like all the rest you've made here, is that is not backed by 
anything remotely resembling documentable fact.

>-- 
>
>Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
>Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
 [Inappropriate advertising deleted]

Raven,
   I doubt you'll reply, as I'm asking for historical documentation, not
lame assertion. If you do reply, don't ask me to document anything. I've
made only one assertion, that my relatives were murdered. Once you
document your assertions, I'll ask the survivors for testimonies.
   I don't hold myself up as a historian. You do. Put up or shut up.

-DS
I speak for myself only.
No unsolicited e-mail, please. I'll read your flames with everyone else.
Please do not use my name in any subject headers.


Article 14589 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access1.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Raven's methodology
Date: 1 Aug 1994 20:47:35 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 75
Message-ID: <31k537$agu@access1.digex.net>
References:    
NNTP-Posting-Host: access1.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>If you agree that it would be nice to have a more manageable discussion,
>and that discussing one piece of evidence at a time would be nice,

    I don't find the discussion unmanageable, and I am perfectly capable 
of discussing three pieces of evidence at a time, the better to show the 
interrelationships between them.  Heck, I can even handle five or six - 
eight or ten with a good night's sleep.

    If Mr. Raven's intellect is too small to handle more than one piece 
at a time, is that *my* problem?


>I don't think I am being unreasonable,

    Neither do the people who wander down the street with shopping carts
full of rags, muttering about radio messages in their dental fillings. 
However, they do not seem to be in the majority in holding that opinion 
about their reasonableness. Neither is Mr. Raven. 


> and the unrelenting howls of protest by those who claim to
>have evidence, but yet who avoid presenting it in an orderly fashion and
>then mischaracterize my position in order to justify their methodology,
>seems to support the approach I suggest.

    What court proceeding has ever adopted the approach Raven suggests? 
Every court proceeding lets one side tell its story, presenting all its
evidence and showing how it interrelates and adds up.  The other side gets
to pick apart the individual pieces, and any which are shown to be truly
worthless can be discarded. 

    Let's just see how Mr. Raven's approach would work in a single simple
murder case.  A dead body is not proof of murder - lots of people die of
natural causes.  A dead body with a pathologist testifying that death
occurred due to a bullet is not proof of murder - it could have been an
accident or self-defense.  So we must discard that evidence and look
elsewhere, as it is not proof.  A body dead of a bullet proven by
ballistics tests to have come from my gun is not proof *I* murdered that
person - someone else may have used my gun.  So we discard the ballistics
tests.  Paraffin tests showing I fired my gun recently are not proof I
murdered anyone - I might have gone down to the shooting range.  Since the
paraffin tests are not proof of murder, we discard them and move on.  My
threats to kill the person who is dead are not proof of murder - lots of
people make empty threats.  Drop that in the trash can.  Ten eyewitnesses
who saw me shoot the victim are not proof of murder - we all know how
unreliable eyewitnesses are, and there *are* a number of people in the
world who look like me.  Toss that; still no proof.  Ten other
eyewitnesses who saw a car matching the description of mine, and with a
license plate number matching mine, peeling out of the area at the time of
the murder, is not proof of murder - my car might have been stolen, or I
might have been visiting a friend in the area.  Scratch that one.

    See, no proof at all!

    Well, if I'm ever up on a murder charge with the above worthless 
evidence against me, I'll make sure to try to get Greg Raven on the jury.

    Oh, and if I manage to drop the gun down a sewer so it can't be 
found?  Obviously I cannot be convicted no matter what, as the murder 
weapon cannot be established.


>By the way, for all the protests directed my way for trying to bring a
>little order to this discussion, no one has offered an alternative plan,
>workable or not.

    Who appointed Greg Raven judge here?  Especially since he is also 
playing defense counsel?  He has to make up his mind which role he's 
going to play; it can't be both.
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 14590 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access1.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Raven's methodology
Date: 1 Aug 1994 20:56:00 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <31k5j0$arl@access1.digex.net>
References:  <31a20m$2cl@access3.digex.net> <31apvf$rb0@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: access1.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>How can you support Holocaust gassing claims, but deny UFO claims 
>(assuming you do)?

    I don't understand.  Hasn't Ernst Zundel proved there *are* UFOs -
that these were Hitler's secret weapons still operating out of Antarctic
bases or something?  Is Mr. Raven saying Mr. Zundel is an unreliable
source? 

-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 14598 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Joint response to Greg Raven
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 1994 20:44:41 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 183
Message-ID: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

To: "Michael P. Stein" 
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Subject: Re: A Joint Response to Greg Raven (LONG)
 
At 11:33 6/6/94 -0400, Michael P. Stein wrote: 
As requested, the article. You can also get it off McVay's server. 

I have finally taken some time to go through the lengthy and largely
pointless "response" to my first postings on this topic, postings that
included a response to some non-evidence provided by Danny Keren. As I
stated originally, I do not have time for, and thus will not allow myself
to be dragged into, meta-discussions. I also do not want to go wandering
off-topic.

My proposal for conducting a somewhat civilized discussion of this topic
was to deal with one piece of evidence at a time, starting with whatever
the exterminationists consider to be the "best" evidence, and then working
on from there. I can only wonder why Keren and the others are so fearful of
approaching this topic carefully and honestly.

In the response below, I have excised all trivial and off-topic ramblings,
and confined myself to answering only the substantive points. Thus, this
response is MUCH shorter than the post to which it is directed:

After a few pages, Stein claims that the Nazis left behind proof of
homicidal gassings of Jews. In "rebuttal" to a statement of mine, he
posted:

>>.... except for the dynamited gas chambers, the records of the Zyklon-B shipments, and the testimony of those who participated - but Mr. Raven limited the scope of the discussion, so Dr. Keren couldn't include this mass of evidence into his response ...

How nice that Keren has Stein to interpret for him. But I did not demand
that Keren produce the truly awful post-war testimonies that he offered up.
If there are dynamited gas chambers, then by all means let us discuss them!
If the use of Zyklon B is the proof, then by all means let us delve into
that. Stein seems to be saying that even though Keren has tangible,
substantive evidence to support his position, he chooses to rely on bizarre
and off-point testimonies.

Stein then brings up the confession of Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Hoess:

>>But back to the claim Raven makes. Apart from the fallacy of suggesting that the Museum "depends" on Hoess to make a point - there are countless other pieces of evidence upon which they could similarly "depend" - is it true that Lipstadt and Browning "have admitted that the Hoess statements are useless"?
>>
>>No. A grain of truth, covered by an ocean of distortion. 

Let's look at this. The US Holocaust Memorial Museum displays a portion
Hoess' confession to visitors the moment they arrive on the top floor, is
this not true? Even Stein seems to admit later that Hoess is not reliable,
so why does his statement appear so prominently in the USHMM? I will deal
with Browning's and Lipstadt's position on Hoess shortly.

>>The grain of truth is that Hoess made rather bad estimates of how many people were exterminated while he was Kommandant of Auschwitz. In his testimony, he estimated 2.5 million were killed; it has been known for decades that this number is far too high. Current estimates range from 1.2 to 1.5 million deliberately gassed, and many more killed by other means, primarily the simple but effective combination of starvation, overwork, and disease.

That grain of truth is attached to a rather large boulder of truths
exterminationists choose to ignore. Hoess also stated that there was an
extermination camp at Wolzek. Wrong.

>>In his memoirs, Hoess writes "During previous interrogations I have put the number of Jews who arrived in Auschwitz for extermination at two and a half millions. This figure was supplied by Eichmann who gave it to my superior officer, Gruppenfuehrer Gluecks, when he was ordered to make a report to the Reichsfuehrer SS [Himmler] shortly before Berlin was surrounded. Eichmann, and his permanent deputy Guenther, were the only ones who possessed the necessary information on which to calculate the total number destroyed. ... I myself never knew the total number and I have nothing to help me make an estimate of it." (Bezwinska, pp. 126-7)
>>
>>Hoess merely warns that the 2.5 million figure, which he got essentially from hearsay, is shaky. Later he writes: "I regard a total of two and a half millions as far too high. Even Auschwitz had limits to its destructive possibilities." (Ibid, p. 129) 

Let's think about this for a moment. Hoess was the commandant of Auschwitz
(although not for the entire existence of the camp). He would not have had
to rely on Eichmann (who denied having supplied any such figures) to know
how many people he had had put to death under his command. And because he
was not commandant for the entire existence of the camp, it stands to
reason that the number of those murdered should have been a sum of those
victims under Hoess' administration and those of all other administrations.
The number of victims should be higher, not lower!

>>Now jump ahead to the present. In December 1993, a three-page article on "revisionism" appeared in _Vanity Fair_ (not exactly a professional historical journal). A half-page discusses "the most sinister of the current revisionist arguments - if indeed it is an argument at all," Holocaust-denial. (p. 117) The author contacted Browning and Lipstadt to get their opinions of Hoess. 
>>
>>Browning said, "Hoess was always a very weak and confused witness ... the revisionists use him all the time for this reason, in order to try and discredit the memory of Auschwitz as a whole." (ibid) Weak and confused is one thing, but where does Browning say that "the Hoess statements are useless?" Nowhere.

The revisionists use Hoess because the exterminationists have for years
depended on his forced confession to be the cornerstone of the myth of mass
homicidal gassings. I challenge anyone to check this for himself. Check out
books on the Holocaust and see how many quote Hoess. Hoess' confession and
subsequent testimony were certainly taken seriously at the Nuremberg (and
other) war crimes trials.

>>Lipstadt directed the article's author to her book, which merely points out what historians have known for decades: Hoess was wrong about the total death count. But where does Lipstadt say the "the Hoess statements are useless"? Again, nowhere. 

This is a gross distortion of the Vanity Fair article. As I have responded
elsewhere, Lipstadt equates Hoess' statements to the stories about "human
soap," saying essentially that these errors must be admitted to be errors
in order to avoid giving more ammunition to the revisionists. I challenge
anyone to read the actual text of the Vanity Fair article and come away
with the impression that Browning and Lipstadt stand behind Hoess'
confessions.

Stein then quotes some other Hoess nonsense about gassing. Before
responding, I would ask that Stein tell me if this statement represents to
him the best evidence of the homicidal gassing myth.

>>Mr. Raven goes on to note: "Stark claims that the gassings were already taking place in the autumn of 1941," and then performs another bit of denial slight-of-hand. As the evidence shows, the gassings which occured at Auschwitz in the Fall of 1941 were experimental in nature. The following information, from the Auschwitz FAQ, discusses the matter:

I can't believe this is so difficult to understand. I asked specifically
for the best evidence of a Nazi plan or policy of exterminating the Jews in
gas chambers. Claims (and bogus ones at that) about experimental gassings
are not responsive. Is there evidence or is there not? If there is not,
just say so.

Stein then attempts to defend Keren's use of Kremer's TESTIMONY rather than
the contemporaneous diary kept by Kremer during the time he served at
Auschwitz. Encyclopedia references, testimony from the 1950s (and 1960s,
and 1970s, etc), and scraps of Soviet-supplied documents may be
interesting, but they are hardly solid evidence.

Stein then moves on to the testimony of Boeck, which Keren provided:

>>"...of this statement, pointing out, for example, that Boeck could only have witnessed one such gassing (at most)."
>
>Is "at most" in Pressac's original text, or is it a clever insertion on Mr. Raven's part, as we are only presented with a paraphrase, not a direct quote, and no exact page citation to make it easy to check the accuracy of it, so that if we want to verify it for ourselves we must take the time to read Pressac cover to cover? 

Well, if you were familiar with Pressac's book, you would find it
relatively easy to locate the text, as it is in the section on SS
testimonies. Lacking that familiarity, you could have referred to
Faurisson's long review of Pressac's book, which appeared in two parts in
the Journal of Historical Review.

>However, nothing has been said to rebut Boeck's testimony about witnessing of a gassing. May we assume, then, that Mr. Raven grudgingly accepts that Boeck *did* witness a gassing, that the Nazi use of poison gas is now established, and we are now only involved in a discussion of numbers?

Let's say for the sake of argument that Boeck did witness one gassing. Does
this one gassing imply a Nazi plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in
homicidal gas chambers? If your answer is no, as it must be, then Keren has
not been responsive in providing this testimony. That was (and is) my
point.

Stein then attempts to buttress KerenUs use of the testimony (once again)
of Pery Broad (first paragraph below is a quote of my post):

>>"In the passage quoted by Keren, Broad speaks of a Zyklon B gassing, in a truck of some sort while it is parked next to a building we are told was itself a gas chamber. Even Pressac says 'Broad's testimony raises questions yet to be solved." (page 124) Pressac also says Broad's 'declaration has been 'slightly' reworked by the Poles.' (page 124) As Faurisson has point out, Pressac's use of quotes around the word 'slightly' indicate that the reworking was anything but slight."
>
>The writer does not reproduce Faurisson's argument so that you can evaluate it for yourself, nor does he tell you where to find it (though one could probably assume it's somewhere in the Faurisson book Raven cited earlier). Neither does he give us anything more than a sentence - no, only two snippets of a sentence - from Pressac. He expects you to accept his unsubstantiated assertion and summary once again. We have already exposed how untrustworthy these are. But we thank him for providing the page number this time.

Is it your contention, Mr. Stein, that the Nazi plan to exterminate Jews
was so haphazard that they might use a barn, or a truck, or a morgue, or a
crematory, or whatever came to hand as their Rgas chamberS? Are you then
saying that they built no gas chambers because they were so busy wandering
the countryside looking for novel ways to gas Jews? I think not. Then do
you still claim that these wild testimonies, which show no Nazi plan or
policy to exterminate the Jews, represent the best evidence of such a plan?

Finally, FaurissonUs statement that the Polish rework of BroadUs
declaration is anything but slight, is obvious, based on what Pressac
writes. It would be pointless to elaborate further.

Stein then moves to help support the statement of Dr. Czeslaw Glowakci, as
supplied by Keren. He starts off quoting my post:

>>>I can only make a couple of general comments. Glowakci speaks of gassings at Block 11, which is on the extreme opposite side of the camp from the crematory in Auschwitz (this crematory is where the "gas chamber" was supposed to have been).
>
>We had thought the purpose of the discussion was proving that the Nazis carried out gassings. What difference does it make where this particular gassing, one of many at many different places, occurred? This comment is wholly irrelevant to the issue at hand. 

Once again, it makes no sense to say that the Nazis had a plan or policy of
exterminating Jews in homicidal gas chambers (and a secret one at that!),
and then to turn around and say, in essense, that after performing one of
their top-secret gassings, the Nazis had to haul the gassed corpses clear
across the Auschwitz main camp.

>>>Perhaps most important, though, he claims the victims were Soviet POW; is Keren saying that all Soviet soldiers were Jewish, or just these? Keren doesn't elaborate. 
>
>>Dr. Keren doesn't elaborate because he thinks the point of the quotation should be clear: gas chambers existed, despite Mr. Raven's attempts to get us to doubt the fact. Nothing that has been said about this quotation in any way diminishes its credibility. The fact that this particular example was of gassing of non-Jews says nothing about whether Jews were gassed, only that the Nazis did, as hundreds of witnesses testified, use poison gas as a means of disposing of "enemies of the state" both non-Jewish and Jewish. The case for the existence and use of gas chambers is solidly supported, and *nothing* has been said which really challenges the credibility of that testimony - unless you believe that an unsubstantiated assertion is a legitimate challenge.

This is an admission that KerenUs RevidenceS is non-responsive to my
request for the best evidence of a Nazi plan or policy for the
extermination of the Jews in homicidal gas chambers.

Mr. Stein, I now ask you, which of these testimonies -- that you have gone
to great lengths to defend -- do you feel to be the best evidence I have
asked for? Or, is there another? Whichever it is, please present it so that
we may discuss it.

I apologize to anyone who has had to wade through this. In the future,
please letUs discuss one piece of evidence at a time.


-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14599 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: McCarthy repost
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 1994 20:45:40 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 52
Message-ID: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

To: "Jamie R. McCarthy" 
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Subject: Re: Repost: A response to Greg Raven's request
Cc: k044477@kzoo.edu
Bcc: 
X-Attachments: 
At 12:01 6/8/94 -0400, Jamie R. McCarthy wrote: 
AArticle 5122 of alt.revisionism:
>Xref: kzoo misc.test:40416 alt.revisionism:5122 Newsgroups: misc.test,alt.revisionism
>Path: kzoo!k044477
>From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie R. McCarthy) Subject: Repost: A response to Greg Raven's request Message-ID: <1994Jun6.203436.1697@hobbes.kzoo.edu> Organization: Kalamazoo College, Kalamazoo MI 49006 Date: Mon, 6 Jun 1994 20:34:36 GMT

>In his efforts to whitewash Holocaust-denial, Mr. Raven has posted a glaring contradiction, perhaps without even noticing that he's done so. His third paragraph defines "Holocaust" as "the murder of six million Jews as a central act of state by the Nazis during the Second World War, many in gas chambers." (This definition will suffice, but we will concern ourselves with _all_ the victims of the Nazi mass murderers - they took the lives of about five million non-Jews, as well.) And he writes, twice, "I do not deny the Holocaust happened."
>
>Then, in his fourth paragraph, he denies the Holocaust happened. He writes that "there is no evidence that the Nazis had a plan or policy of exterminating the Jews." He writes that "there is no evidence that there were homicidal gas chambers for murder [sic] Jews." And he writes that "the figure of six million Jewish victims is an exaggeration." 
>
>One wonders how he will reconcile these two opposing viewpoints. 
>
>We suspect that he would like us to believe that he does not deny the Holocaust - rather, that he merely has an "open mind" on the subject, and is simply waiting to see sufficient evidence either way. 

First, this definition of the Holocaust is not mine: it comes from the US
Holocaust Memorial Museum. I happen to think it is a terrible definition,
but to selectively redefine the term RHolocaustS to suit myself and then go
about making claims relative to my redefinition (as you do) is folly. I am
willing to accept the USHMMUs definition as a starting point.

I am perfectly willing to admit that Jews suffered tremendously under the
Nazi regime. I am willing to admit that many died as a result of the
treatment they received. I am willing to accept that it might be called a
holocaust by those inclined to label such things in such a way.

What I cannot accept, however, is unsubstantiated claims that the Nazis had
a plan or policy to exterminate the Jews, that they loaded Jews into gas
chambers to murder them, and that they wiped out 6 million Jews as part of
this plan/policy.

This still leaves a lot of suffering and death, however, so much that I do
not understand why it must be exaggerated as it has been for the last 50
years. To invent sufferings, and to exaggerate sufferings of those who
survived, seems to me to discount the misery and fate of those who suffered
most: those who are no longer alive. When you have people such as Filip
Mueller putting their names on plagarized fictions and presenting them as
fact, it cheapens and vulgarizes the plight of the true victims.

IUm surprised you donUt see this.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14600 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Keren's "Muench"
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 1994 20:46:23 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 32
Message-ID: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <315pq6$d9t@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dsk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
presented the following in support of his position on the Holocaust story:

> Testimony of Dr. Hans W. Muench
> [Trials of War Criminals, Vol. VIII, p. 313-321]

It is not surprising that Keren posts this piece. What is surprising is
that his fellow exterminationists allow him to get away with it.

Referring to the Trials of the War Criminals (also known as the blue
series), we find there is no such testimony on the pages indicated in
volume 8. In fact, no such person is mentioned at all on these pages.

Furthermore, referring to volume 24, which contains the document and name
index, we discover that the only Muench in the blue series is a Colonel
Muench, who is mentioned as having been killed in action (volume 22, page
92).

Checking to see if a typo changed Keren's roman numeral 8 to a roman
numeral 7 or roman numeral 13, we find nothing on the pages indicated.

Given the above, before responding to the body of this post I will await 1)
a truthful statement from Keren as to the source of his original posting on
this matter, and 2) a statement from Keren that he considers this the best
evidence of a Nazi plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in gas chambers.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14601 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Suchomel 1/2
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 1994 20:46:59 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 418
Message-ID: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

To: "Michael P. Stein" 
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Subject: Re: A View into Hell: Suchomel Tells of His Days in Treblinka
Cc: 
Bcc: 
X-Attachments: 
At 20:24 6/8/94 -0400, Michael P. Stein wrote: 
Since you say there was no credible eyewitness testimony, I thought you
might like to see this posting and explain to us what is not credible about
this account from a former SS man at Treblinka. 

>In article <2sl4ll$6gt@cat.cis.brown.edu> Danny Keren writes: 
It is always interesting to see the stories of those who were at the camps;
their testimony is, invariably, very different from the accounts given by
our "revisionist scholars", who were never at the camps during the time
they operated. 

>>This is a short excerpt from the eyewitness account of Franz Suchomel, an SS officer who served in the death camp Treblinka. It is taken from the movie "Holocaust". This is a translation; if anyone who saw the movie detects an error, please inform me. "L" stands for Lantzman, "S" for Suchomel. 

>>-Danny Keren.
> (text deleted)

Gladly.

First, you are wrong in making the blanket statement that I say there is no
credible eyewitness testimony.

Second, Keren is wrong in classifying Treblinka as a death camp: it was a
transfer camp.

Third, Keren is wrong in claiming this excerpt comes from the movie
"Holocaust:" it comes from "Shoah."

Fourth, Keren is wrong in claiming that the "L" stands for "Lantzman:" it
stands for Lanzmann.

Fifth, Keren is wrong to direct readers to the movie version of this
passage: the book version contains all this and more, and is much more
accessible.

Sixth, Keren is deceptive not to point out the differences between
Suchomel's statements here and his statements to Gitta Sereny.

Be that as it may, for some truth about Treblinka, let us refer to the
article on this topic that appeared in the volume 12 number 2 Journal of
Historical Review, written by Mark Weber and Andrew Allen.

Treblinka

Wartime Aerial Photos of Treblinka Cast New Doubt on RDeath CampS Claims

MARK WEBER and ANDREW ALLEN

Treblinka is widely regarded as the second most important German wartime
extermination center. Only Auschwitz-Birkenau is supposed to have claimed
more lives.

Treblinka became the focus of worldwide attention in 1987-1988 during the
14-month trial in Jerusalem of John (Ivan) Demjanjuk, a Ukrainian-born
American factory worker. As TreblinkaUs RIvan the Terrible,S Demjanjuk
supposedly operated the machinery used to gas hundreds of thousands of Jews
there. Citing testimony by Jewish survivors, the Israeli court that
condemned him to death in April 1988 declared that more than 850,000 Jews
were killed at Treblinka between July 1942 and August 1943.

After the death sentence was handed down, DemjanjukUs family was able to
discover previously suppressed evidence --much of it from Soviet Russian
archives--indicating that the real RIvan the TerribleS was another
Ukrainian named Ivan Marchenko (or Marczenko). This new evidence
discredited the courtroom testimony of five Jewish camp survivors, each of
whom had RpositivelyS identified Demjanjuk as the sadistic mass murderer of
Treblinka.1

As historians know, and as common sense would suggest, such decades-old
testimony is far less trustworthy than contemporary records or forensic
evidence.2

And yet, TreblinkaUs reputation as a mass extermination center is based
almost entirely on precisely such subjective and unprovable testimony by
former prisoners--evidence that has proven to be notoriously unreliable in
several major trials of alleged RNazi war criminals.S3

There is no documentary evidence that Treblinka was an extermination
center. In fact, contemporary records suggest that the camp had a very
different function.

Aerial reconnaissance photographs taken in 1944 of the Treblinka Rdeath
campS site--and forgotten for almost 45 years in the National Archives in
Washington, DC--cast serious doubts on the widely accepted story that it
was a mass extermination center.

Discovered in 1989, and published here for the first time in the United
States, these German reconnaissance photos corroborate other evidence
indicating that Treblinka was actually a transit camp.4

These photographs indicate that the remarkably small camp was not isolated,
or even particularly well guarded. (They clearly show that fields where
Polish farmers planted and cultivated crops were directly adjacent to the
camp perimeter.)

Moreover, the campUs burial area quite obviously appears too small to
contain the hundreds of thousands of bodies supposedly buried there.
(Casting doubt on the widely accepted story of hundreds of thousands of
Treblinka victims, these photos suggest instead that only those deportees
who died during the sometimes protracted rail journey to the camp were
buried there.)

RSteam ChambersS

The generally accepted story today is that hundreds of thousands of Jews
were killed at Treblinka in gas chambers with poisonous exhaust from
engines. But the RoriginalS Treblinka extermination story was that Jews
were steamed to death there in Rsteam chambers.S 

According to an ReyewitnessS account received in November 1942 in London
from the Warsaw ghetto underground organization, Jews were exterminated in
Rdeath roomsS at Treblinka with Rsteam coming out of the numerous holes in
the pipes.S5 In August 1943, the New York Times reported that two million
Jews had already been killed at Treblinka by steaming them to death.6

The Treblinka steam story is also given in detail in The Black Book of
Polish Jewry, a work published in New York in 1943 and RsponsoredS by
Albert Einstein, Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, Congressman Sol Bloom, New York
Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia, and other personalities.7 Another book, Lest We
Forget, published in New York in 1943 by the World Jewish Congress,
describes in detail how Jews were steamed to death, and provides a diagram
showing the location of the purported Rboiler roomS that produced the Rlive
steam.S8

According to a 1944 ReyewitnessS account compiled by the OSS, the principle
US intelligence agency, Jews at Treblinka Rwere in general killed by steam
and not by gas as had been at first suspected.S9

At the main Nuremberg trial of 1945-1946, two conflicting stories were
given: steaming and gassing. Former Treblinka prisoner Samuel Rajzman
testified that Jews were killed there in gas chambers.10 (To confuse
matters still more, a few months earlier Rajzman claimed that during the
time he was in Treblinka, Jews were Rsuffocated to deathS there with a
machine that pumped air out of death chambers.)11

American prosecutors at the main Nuremberg trial supported the steam story.
As proof, a Polish government report dated December 5, 1945, was submitted
as prosecution exhibit USA-293. It charged that Jews were killed at the
camp Rby suffocating them in steam-filled chambers.S This report, which
says nothing about poison gas killings, was published in the official
Nuremberg trial record as document PS-3311.12 An American prosecutor quoted
from this report during his address to the Tribunal on December 14, 1945.13

Although no reputable historian now supports the RsteamS story, and little
has been heard of it during the last several decades, it was revived in a
widely-circulated booklet published in 1979 and 1985 by the influential
Anti-Defamation League of BUnai BUrith.14

There may have been a factual basis for the Rsteam chamberS stories. It is
quite possible that there was indeed some kind of steaming operation at
Treblinka--but one designed to kill disease-carrying lice, not people. Such
disinfection steaming was commonly used in German camps for Allied
prisoners of war.15

Shortly after the war, the World Jewish Congress published The Black Book,
a 559-page volume of real and imagined wartime atrocities against Jews. At
Treblinka alone, the book alleges, three million persons were killed. Three
diabolical techniques, including poison gas and steam, were supposedly used
there to kill some 10,000 Jews daily. But Rthe most widespreadS method
Rconsisted of pumping all the air out from the chambers with large special
pumps.S16 A former inmate testified shortly after the war that TreblinkaUs
victims were Rpoisoned by the different gasses or asphyxiated when the
chamber was turned into a vacuum and all the air sucked out.S17

In the Nuremberg trial of Oswald Pohl, U.S. Judge Michael A. Musmanno
declared that Rdeath was inflicted here [at Treblinka] by gas and steam, as
well as by electric current.S Citing Nuremberg document PS-3311, Musmanno
declared: RAfter being filled up to capacity the chambers were hermetically
closed and steam was let in.S18

Adolf Eichmann, the wartime head of the SS Jewish affairs section, said in
1961 during pre-trial interrogation in Israel that during the war he Rwas
toldS that Jews were gassed at Treblinka Rwith potassium cyanide.S19

One of the strangest Treblinka extermination stories, which appeared in
September 1942 in a Polish underground periodical, claimed that Jews were
killed there with a Rdelayed actionS gas:20

 They enter it [the gas chamber] in groups of 300-500 people. Each group is
immediately closed hermetically inside, and gassed. The gas does not affect
them immediately, because the Jews still have to continue on to the pits
that are a few dozen meters away, and whose depth is 30 meters. There they
fall unconscious, and a digger covers them with a thin layer of earth. Then
another group arrives.

According to the testimony of yet another Reyewitness,S a Jew named Oskar
Berger who escaped from the camp, many Jews were systematically put to
death at Treblinka by shooting them with rifle and machine-gun fire.21

Diesel Gassing

In recent years, the most widely-circulated story has been that Jews were
gassed at Treblinka with carbon monoxide from the exhaust of a diesel
engine.22

However, as American engineer Friedrich Berg has established, this story is
improbable for technical reasons.23 In spite of the obnoxious odor of
diesel exhaust, diesel engines produce much smaller quantities of toxic
carbon monoxide than ordinary gasoline motors.24 It would thus be difficult
efficiently to gas large numbers of people using diesel exhaust. A normal
gasoline engine would be much more logical.25

It is important to keep in mind that the RevidenceS now usually cited for
diesel gassing at Treblinka is no more credible than the evidence that was
once presented for steaming and suffocating. Apparently the steaming and
suffocating stories have been dropped for the sake of credible consistency.

Solid evidence for gassings at Treblinka has proven to be very elusive. For
example, it turned out that none of the witnesses in the 1951 West German
RTreblinkaS court case ever actually saw anyone being gassed. RThe type of
gas used to kill the people there [Treblinka] cannot be determined with
certainty because none of the witnesses was able to witness this
procedure,S the judges declared in their verdict.26

At least some former Treblinka prisoners testified in postwar West German
trials that they not only never saw a gas chamber, but did not even hear
about gassings from others.27

Holocaust historians today are not able to agree about the number of
homicidal Rgas chambersS at Treblinka. Raul Hilberg maintains that there
were three at first, but because they were allegedly not adequate for the
job, more were built later on. There were eventually six or perhaps ten
chambers, he reports.28 Others have reported the existence of 13 gas
chambers at Treblinka.29

BombaUs Testimony

One of the most memorable testimonies about Treblinka presented in Shoah,
the nine-and-a-half-hour Holocaust film by French Jewish film maker Claude
Lanzmann, is that of Abraham Bomba. He told how he and other Jewish barbers
cut the hair of the naked Jews who were about to be gassed. They worked
inside RtheS gas chamber (he always spoke of one chamber), which was
Raround four by four metersS (about 12 feet by 12 feet). Bomba also
reported that R140 or 150 women,S with children, as well as 16 or 17
barbers, were inside this small room. In addition, there were benches where
the women sat while their hair was cut, as well as two or more German
guards.

The barbers had to leave the chamber for five minutes while the victims
were gassed, Bomba said, and it took just one minute to clear out the 140
or so corpses, and clean the floor and walls, before everything was ready
for the next batch of victims.30

BombaUs moving testimony, which conservative writer George Will called the
Rmost stunning in this shattering film,S is simply not credible. 

Treblinka Labor Camp

About one mile (1.5 km) from the Rextermination camp,S which was known as
RTreblinka II,S was a penal labor camp for Poles and Jews known as
RTreblinka I.S It was not at all secret. The 1941 directive announcing the
establishment of the RTreblinka Labor CampS was published in both Polish
and German in widely distributed official journals.31 Poles and Jews worked
in a large sand and gravel quarry at the Treblinka labor camp.32

As wartime aerial reconnaissance photographs clearly show, the Treblinka
T-I labor camp was located at the end of the rail spur on which the
Treblinka T-II RexterminationS (transit) camp was also located. This fact
strengthens the thesis that the T-II camp was not particularly secret,
since penal labor prisoners being taken by train to and from the publicly
known T-I camp passed directly by the supposedly top secret T-II
RexterminationS camp.33

Documentary Evidence

Documents found after the war confirm that large numbers of Jews were
deported to Treblinka in 1942 and 1943. German railway records report the
transfer of trainloads of RsettlersS (RUmsiedlerS) and RworkersS to
Treblinka from various places in Poland and from other countries.34

In July 1942, a senior German railway official reported to the chief of
HimmlerUs personal staff that 5,000 Jews were being transported daily to
Treblinka.35 An August 3, 1942, German ROstbahnS railway directive
similarly reported that special trains would be carrying RresettlersS from
Warsaw to Treblinka daily, until further notice.36

Interestingly, it was not until September 1, 1942, that the Treblinka train
station was closed to passenger rail travel by the general public (Rto
permit a smooth handling of the special resettlement trainsS), which
suggests that German officials were not particularly concerned with keeping
the deportations or the station secret.37

Other records mention trains to Treblinka in March 1943 from Vienna,
Bulgaria and Greece.38 From Vienna and Luxembourg, Jews reportedly arrived
at the camp in passenger train coaches, and the deportees were given food
and medical care during their journey.39 In at least one case, a train with
sleeping cars and a dining car arrived at Treblinka.40

German railway records have been cited as evidence that hundreds of
thousands of Jews were exterminated at Treblinka.41 While there is little
doubt that these documents are genuine, and that they confirm transports of
Jews to Treblinka, they are not proof of an extermination program.42

Transit Camp

If Treblinka was not an extermination center, what was it? As already
mentioned, the balance of evidence indicates that Treblinka II--along with
Belzec and Sobibor--was a transit camp, where Jewish deportees were
stripped of their property and valuables before being transferred eastwards
into German-occupied Soviet territories.43

The generally-accepted story is that Treblinka II was a RpureS
extermination center, from which no Jew was permitted to leave alive.44
However, credible reports of deportations of Jews from Treblinka refute the
allegation that all Jews sent there were destined for extermination, and
indicate instead that the camp functioned as a transit center.

In the aftermath of the April 1943 Warsaw ghetto uprising, for example,
Jews were transported from Warsaw to Treblinka II. As some of the deportees
later confirmed, after a RselectionS in the camp, trainloads of hundreds of
Jews were taken from Treblinka to Lublin (Majdanek), and possibly other
camps.45 Several thousand Jews (at least) were transferred by German
authorities from Treblinka to other camps, a postwar German court
determined.46

Letters and postcards that arrived in the Warsaw ghetto from Jews who, by
all accounts, had been deported to Treblinka, indicate that the camp was a
transit center from where Jews were resettled in the occupied Soviet
territories. These messages, which arrived from settlements and camps in
Belarus (Byelorussia), Ukraine, and even Russia proper (near Smolensk),
were written by Jews who had been deported in 1942. Some letters and cards
had been sent by mail and some had arrived through the underground. Many
mentioned that the senders were working hard, but confirmed that they (and
often their children) were being fed.47

Completely contrary to its supposed character as a top secret extermination
center, Treblinka was neither secret nor even closely guarded, as both
former inmates and officials have confirmed. RSecrecy? Good heavens, there
was no secrecy about Treblinka,S Jewish prisoner Richard Glazer later
testified. RAll the Poles between there and Warsaw must have known about
it, and lived off the proceeds. All the peasants came to barter, the Warsaw
whores did business with the Ukrainians--it was a circus for all of them.S
Polish farmers worked the fields that directly adjoined the camp. RAnd many
others,S said Jewish survivor Berek Rojzman, Rcame to the fence to barter,
mostly with the Ukrainians, but with us too.S48

Even regular German concentration camps such as Dachau and Buchenwald were
much more closely guarded than Treblinka. As already mentioned, aerial
reconnaissance photographs taken in 1944 confirm that the area around
Treblinka was not cleared. The photos show that one perimeter of the camp
passed through a wooded area, and that cultivated fields where Polish
farmers worked were directly adjacent to the camp perimeter.49

How Many Victims ?

Shortly after the end of the war, the World Jewish Congress and at least
one former Treblinka prisoner alleged that more than three million Jews had
been exterminated there.50 More recent estimates of the number of people
allegedly killed at Treblinka range from between 700,000 (Leon Poliakov and
Uwe Adam), 750,000 (Raul Hilberg and Encyclopaedia Judaica), 870,000
(Yitzhak Arad), to more than 900,000 (Wolfgang Scheffler and Washington
Post).51

There is no documentary or physical evidence for any of these figures,
which are simply conjectural estimates. 

Layout and Size

Diagrams published in recent years that show Treblinka as a neatly
organized, rectangular-shaped camp are not accurate.52 As already
mentioned, though, wartime aerial reconnaissance photographs confirm that
the Treblinka II camp was actually unsymmetrically four-sided and
irregularly shaped.53

One of the most remarkable features of the Treblinka Rdeath campS is its
small size. The entire Treblinka II camp area was only 32 or 33 acres (13
hectares), or about onetwentieth of a square mile.54 Even smaller was the
alleged RexterminationS area of the camp, which was 200 by 250 meters in
size (or five hectares) according to purportedly authoritative sources.55

PolandUs RCentral CommissionS announced shortly after the war that the
burial or RditchesS area where the bodies of TreblinkaUs victims were
buried (before they were supposedly later dug up for burning) was about two
hectares or five acres (or some 20,235 square meters).56 And according to a
diagram in a book about Treblinka by Jewish Holocaust historian Alexander
Donat, the campUs RditchesS area was not more than 80 or 100 meters in
length and about 50 meters wide--that is, a maximum of 5,000 square meters
or half a hectare.57

By comparison, the mass graves area in the Katyn forest (near Smolensk),
which held the bodies of some 4,500 Polish officers who had been killed by
Soviet secret police and buried there in 1940, measured about 500 square
meters.58

In short, it is very difficult to accept that anything like 700,000 or
800,000 bodies could have been buried in the minuscule area allegedly set
aside at Treblinka for this purpose.

Cremation Inconsistencies

Between April and July 1943, the corpses of TreblinkaUs hundreds of
thousands of victims were allegedly dug up from the burial pits and burned
with Rdry wood and branchesS on grids made of rails in batches of 2,000 or
2,500. The residual Rash and bits of boneS were dumped back into the burial
pits, and covered with a layer of sand and dirt two meters deep. This was
done, it is said, in order to eliminate the physical evidence of mass
extermination.59

Although enormous amounts of fuel would have been needed to cremate the
hundreds of thousands of alleged corpses, there is no documentary record or
witness recollection of the great quantities of firewood that would have
been required. According to Polish-Jewish historian Rachel Auerbach, fuel
to burn bodies was not needed at Treblinka because Rthe bodies of woman,S
which had more fat, Rwere used to kindle, or more accurately put, to build
the fires among the piles of corpses.S Even more incredible, Rblood, too,
was found to be first-class combustion material,S she wrote.60

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14602 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Suchomel 2/2
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 1994 20:47:39 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 463
Message-ID: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

(continued from previous message)

Treblinka, by Mark Weber and Andrew Allen
Journal of Historical Review, volume 12 number 2

Missing Remains

A wartime Warsaw ghetto internee, Dr. Adolf Berman, testified in the 1961
Eichmann trial that he visited the Treblinka camp site shortly after the
Soviet occupation of Poland. He told the Jerusalem court that he saw Ran
area of several square kilometers covered with bones and skulls, and nearby
tens upon tens of thousands of shoes, many of them childrenUs shoes.S61

BermanUs testimony, which was considered one of the most emotionally moving
of the Eichmann trial, is completely inconsistent with known facts. For one
thing, the entire Treblinka camp was much smaller than one square kilometer
in size, and no other witness has confirmed the presence of Rtens of
thousandsS of shoes.

Jewish historian Rachel Auerbach, a member of an official Polish commission
that inspected the camp site in November 1945--that is, a few months after
the end of the war--reported finding large human bones, Rrotted masses of
corpses,S Rpieces of half-rotted corpses,S and Rfully dressedS corpses, at
the Treblinka camp site.62

In the area where the gas chambers were supposed to have been located, the
commissionUs team of 30 excavation workers reportedly found Rhuman remains,
partially in the process of decay,S and an unspecified amount of ash.
Untouched sandy soil was reached at 7.5 meters, at which point the digging
was halted. An accompanying photograph of an excavated pit reveals some
large bones.63

PolandUs RCentral Commission for Investigation of German CrimesS reported
that Rlarge quantities of ashes mixed with sand, among which are numerous
human bones, often with the remains of decomposing tissues,S were found in
the five acre (two hectare) burial area during an examination of the site
shortly after the end of the war.64

The presence of uncremated human remains is not consistent with the
often-repeated allegation that all such remains were thoroughly destroyed.
Significantly, none of the Polish reports specifies the quantity of human
remains, the numbers of corpses, or the amount of ash found at the camp
site, which suggests that evidence of hundreds of thousands of victims was
not found.65

In spite of its often inconsistent, contradictory and implausible
character, testimony indicating that many Jews lost their lives at
Treblinka cannot easily be dismissed. Many Jewish prisoners doubtless
perished during their rail journey to the camp site, and were almost
certainly buried there. Furthermore, it is plausible and even likely that
hundreds and perhaps thousands of Jews who were too weak or ill to continue
the eastbound journey from the camp were killed there by officials acting
on their own authority.

All the same, there is no hard or compelling evidence that Treblinka was a
mass extermination center where hundreds of thousands of Jews were
systematically put to death. To the contrary, credible reports of transfers
of Jews from Treblinka eastwards to the occupied Soviet territories, the
relative lack of secrecy and security in the camp, and the small size of
the area where the bodies were supposedly buried, all suggest instead that
this was a transit center.

(Captions)

This diagram of the Treblinka II camp was used in the RTreblinka TrialS in
Duesseldorf, where it was supposedly Raccepted by all of the defendants and
witnesses.S In this diagram, not only is the general shape of the camp
inaccurate, but no scale is provided, thus giving a misleading impression
that the camp was much larger than it actually was. The alleged
extermination Rgas chambersS are marked 32 and 33. The supposed mass burial
sites, which are marked 34, are not large enough to have held the hundreds
of thousands of bodies allegedly buried there. [From: Eugen Kogon, et al.,
Nationalsozialistische Massent_tungen durch Giftgas (Frankfurt: 1986), p.
342.]

Inaccurately portraying a rectangular-shaped camp, this diagram of
Treblinka appears in the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust. The alleged
extermination Rgas chambersS are marked 32 and 33. The supposed mass burial
areas are marked 34. [From: Israel Gutman, editor, Encyclopedia of the
Holocaust (New York: Macmillan, 1990), Volume 4, p. 1485.]

The diagram on the facing page of the Treblinka II camp in 1942-1943 is
based on wartime aerial photographs, published sources, and postwar on-site
inspection. (Copyright 1991 by Janusz Patek. Reproduced by permission.)

The site of Treblinka II (Rdeath campS) is at the center of this aerial
reconnaissance photo (reportedly taken in September 1944). Cultivated
fields of Polish farmers can be seen directly adjacent to the T II camp,
suggesting that it was not carefully guarded or closed off. A small part of
the Malkinia-Siedlce main road is visible at the upper right. At the
bottom, the Treblinka I labor camp site can be clearly seen, just below the
quarry area.

Trees and other vegetation seen in this aerial photo of Treblinka II (Sept.
1944) show that the camp site was not carefully closed off from the
surrounding area.

This reconnaissance photo of Treblinka II (reportedly taken in October
1944), clearly shows that part of the outer perimeter of the camp (above)
passes through part of a forest of trees, and that the area around the camp
was not cleared to insure a high level of security.

Notes

1.  F. Dannen, RHow Terrible is Ivan?,S Vanity Fair (New York), June 1992,
pp. 132 ff.; RNew Evidence: Demjanjuk a Nazi Guard, Probably Not TIvanU,S
Los Angeles Times, January 16, 1992.; C. Haberman, RSoviet Files Are
Presented . . . ,S The New York Times, June 2, 1992, p. A6.

2.  On the unreliability of such testimony, see John CobdenUs review of
Witness for the Defense (by E. Loftus and K. Ketcham) in The Journal of
Historical Review, Summer 1991, pp. 238-249.; Samuel Gringauz, a Jewish
historian who was himself interned in the Kaunas ghetto during the war,
wrote: RMost of the memoirs and reports [of Holocaust survivors] are full
of preposterous verbosity, graphomanic exaggeration, dramatic effects,
overestimated self-inflation, dilettante philosophizing, would-be lyricism,
unchecked rumors, bias, partisan attacks and apologies.S (Jewish Social
Studies, New York, January 1950, Vol. 12, p. 65.).

3.   On the unreliability of such ReyewitnessS testimony in the
illustrative case of Frank Walus, who was falsely accused of murdering Jews
as a Gestapo officer in Poland, see, for example, RThe Nazi Who Never Was,S
The Washington Post, May 10, 1981, pp. B5, B8.

4.   These aerial reconnaissance photos are on file in the National
Archives (Washington, DC), Cartographic Division (Record Group 373).

 Several of these reconnaissance photos were published in Germany in 1990
by Udo Walendy in the booklet RDer Fall Treblinka,S Historische Tatsachen,
Nr. 44, 1990. (Postfach 1643, D-4973 Vlotho, Germany). See especially pages
13, 31, 34, 35, 38. In this booklet, Walendy cites specific archival source
references from the US National Archives for these photographs.
Unfortunately, these specific references are not always quite accurate. The
specific source references cited by Walendy are:

GX 12225 (or 122225?), Exp. 257 (and 258, 259?). (November or May 1944)

GX 180 D F 934/44 SK , Exp. 246 (May 18, 1944)

GX 12299 B A -2249, Exp. 014 (July 10, 1944)

GX 72 F 933/44 SK, Exp. 139, 140 (May 13, 1944)

GX 1946 F 2926 /44 SK, Exp. 062 (Sept. 18, 1944)

GX 937 F 13 A 6099, Exp. 74 

GX 12250 F 2795 SK, Exp. 045 (Sept. 2, 1944)

GX 12290 F 3086 SK r 2600, Exp. 68 (Oct. 16, 1944)

GX 1946 / 44 SD, Exp. 076.

GX 12373, Exp. 11 (Sept. 2, 1944)

The most important of these Treblinka aerial photographs were made public
for the first time in the United States in January 1991 at a meeting in
Palo Alto, California. (IHR Newsletter, Feb. 1991, p. 3.).

We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the Polish Historical Society
(Stamford, Connecticut) in compiling this essay.

Soviet wartime aerial reconnaissance photographs of the Treblinka camp site
almost certainly exist, and are very probably still held in Russian
archives. If so, they should be made public.

5.  RLikwidacja zydowskiej Warszawy, Treblinka,S Biuleytn Zydowskiego
Instytutu Historycznego (Warsaw), Jan.-June 1951, pp. 93-100. Quoted in:
Carlo Mattogno, RThe Myth of the Extermination of the Jews,S The Journal of
Historical Review, Fall 1988, pp. 273-274, 295 (n. 16).

6.  New York Times, Aug. 8, 1943, p. 11. Reprinted in: The Record: The
Holocaust in History (New York: ADL, 1985), p. 10. (The Record was also
distributed as an advertising supplement to the New York Post, April 17,
1978.)

7.  Jacob Apenszlak, ed., The Black Book of Polish Jewry (New York: 1943),
pp. 142-143, 145.

8.  World Jewish Congress, Lest We Forget (New York: 1943), pp. 4, 6-7.;
See also the reference to killings at Treblinka by Rhot steamS in HitlerUs
Ten-Year War On the Jews (p. 149), a book published in New York in 1943 by
the RInstitute of Jewish Affairs,S an agency of the American Jewish
Congress and the World Jewish Congress.

9.   OSS document, April 13, 1944. National Archives (Washington, DC),
Military Branch, Record Group 226 (OSS records), No. 67231.

10.  International Military Tribunal, Trial of the Major War Criminals
Before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg: 1947-1949, (Rblue
seriesS), Vol. 8, p. 325. (Feb. 27, 1946)

11.  Rajzman text in: Yuri Suhl, ed., They Fought Back (New York: 1967), p.
130.; This story also appears in: Isaiah Trunk, Jewish Responses (New York:
1982), p. 263.

12.  IMT, Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International
Military Tribunal (IMT Rblue seriesS/ 1947-1949), vol. 32, pp. 153-158;
Also published in: Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression (NC&A Rred seriesS/
1946-1948), Vol. 5, pp. 1104-1108. See also: NC&A (Rred seriesS), vol. 1,
pp. 1005-1006.

13.  IMT, Trial of the Major War Criminals (Rblue seriesS), vol. 3, p.
567-568. 

14.   The Record: The Holocaust in History. (The NYT report of Aug. 8,
1943, is reproduced here.) 

15.  Major S. G. Cowper, RA Note on a Disinfestation Plant Used in a Typhus
Hospital for Prisoners of War in Germany,S Journal of the Royal Army
Medical Corps, Sept. 1946, Vol. 87, No. 3, pp. 173-176.; RTyphus,S 1922
supplement to Encyclopaedia Britannica. Facsimile reprint in: Carlos
Porter, Made in Russia (1988), p. 364.; Globocnik reported in Jan. 1944
that textile goods seized in the course of RAktion ReinhardtS were
disinfected. See: 4024-PS. IMT Rblue series,S vol. 34, p. 84.

Jacob Seewald, a Polish Jew, spent the war years working as a forester in a
German labor camp. When he came down with a severe illness, he was
transferred to a hospital, where he recovered. After the war he emigrated
to the United States. In a 1983 interview, he recalled that the camp
authorities Rtook us [Jewish workers] into a shower for the steam to kill
lice. There we got no clothes, just a bundle with our names on them. Naked.
Then they turn on the water for a second--scalding water.S (John C.
Bromely, RStories from the Darkness,S The Denver Post Magazine, Sunday,
June 12, 1983, p. 20.) Similar events at Treblinka may perhaps have
provided a basis for the campUs RsteamS legend.

16.  Jewish Black Book Comm., The Black Book (1946), pp. 407-408.

17.  Isaiah Trunk, Jewish Responses (New York: 1982), p. 263.

18.  Trials of the War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals
(NMT Rgreen seriesS/ Washington, DC: 1949-1953), vol. 5, pp. 1133-1134.

19.  Jochen von Lang, ed., Eichmann Interrogated (New York: 1983), p. 84.;
See also: R. Aschenauer, ed., Ich, Adolf Eichmann (1980), pp. 179, 183.

20.  RInformation Bulletin,S Sept. 8, 1942, published by the command of the
Polish underground RArmia Krajowa.S Quoted in: Yitzhak Arad, Belzec,
Sobibor, Treblinka (Bloomington: 1987), pp. 353 f.

21.  E. Kogon, Theory and Practice of Hell (New York: Berkley, pb., 1981),
pp. 183-185.

22.  Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews (New York: 1985),
p. 878.; RTreblinka,S Encyclopaedia Judaica (1971), vol. 15, p. 1368.;
Eugen Kogon, et al., Nationalsozialistische Massent_tungen (1986), p. 163;
Yitzhak Arad, RTreblinka,S in: I. Gutman, ed., Encyclopedia of the
Holocaust, pp. 1483, 1484.

23.  F. Berg, RThe Diesel Gas Chambers,S The Journal of Historical Review,
Spring 1984, pp. 15-46.

24.  R. Schmidt, A. Carey, and R. Kamo, RExhaust Characteristics of the
Automotive Diesel,S Society of Automotive Engineers Transactions (New
York), Vol. 75, Sec. 3, 1967, pp. 106, 107. (paper 660550).

25.  Even more logical and efficient than a gasoline engine--in the view of
engineer Friedrich Berg--would have been the RHolzgasS generator, which
were in very widespread use in Europe during the war years. See: F. Berg,
RThe Diesel Gas Chambers,S The Journal of Historical Review, Spring 1984,
pp. 38-41.

26.  Case against J. Hirtreiter, LG Frankfurt, 1951. Justiz und
NS-Verbrechen (Amsterdam: 1972), Band 8, p. 264 (270 a-4).

27.  Hans Peter Rullmann, Der Fall Demjanjuk (Sonnenb_hl: 1987), p. 149.
Source cited: Adalbert R_ckerl, NS-Vernichtungslager (1977).; An
unsatisfactory explanation has been offered for this remarkable testimony:
these witnesses must have been inmates of the nearby Treblinka labor camp,
or for some other reason were never in the RexterminationS section of the
T-II camp. 

28.  R. Hilberg, Destruction (1985), p. 879.

29.  Central Commission . . ., German Crimes in Poland (Warsaw: 1946-1947),
vol. 1, p. 97.; Yitzhak Arad, RTreblinka,S in: I. Gutman, ed., Encyclopedia
of the Holocaust, pp. 1483, 1485.

30.  Shoah (Paris: Fayard, 1985), pp. 126-129. (I am thankful to Dr.
Faurisson for pointing this out.) See also: Bradley R. Smith, RShoah:
Abraham Bomba, the Barber,S The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1986,
pp. 244-253.

31.  Directive of Nov. 15, 1941. Amtsblatt f_r den Distrikt Warschau, Dec.
16, 1941, p. 116. Facsimile reproduction in: S. Wojtczak, RKarny Oboz,S
Biuletyn Glownej Komisji Badania Zbrodni Hitlerowskich w Polsce (Warsaw),
Vol. 26, 1975, pp. 155-156.; Also published in: Amtlicher Anzeiger, Dec. 2,
1941. Cited in: Yitzhak Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka (1987), p. 352.
Facsimile reproduction in: C. Pilichowski, No Time-Limit for These Crimes
(Warsaw: 1980), no page number.; An internal German document dated July 7,
1942, refers to the RTreblinka labor camp,S which means that it was
operating at the same time as the nearby Rextermination center.S Facsimile
is reprinted in: H. Eschwege, ed., Kennzeichen J (East Berlin: 1966), p.
245.

32.  I. Gutman, ed., Encyclopedia of the Holocaust (1990), p. 1482.

33.  Note particularly the aerial photograph dated Sept. 2, 1944, in: U.
Walendy, RDer Fall Treblinka,S Historische Tatsachen, Nr. 44 (1990), p.
31.; Even today, a visitor to the site is struck by the large size of the
quarry pit there. Hundreds (and perhaps thousands) of rail cars must have
gone to and from the site (passing by the T-II Rextermination campS) to
carry away the sand and gravel excavated from the large pit.

34.  Facsimile documents in: Biuletyn Glownej Komisji Badania Zbrodni
Hitlerowskich w Polsce (Warsaw), Vol. 26, 1975, pp. 171-182.; These records
also show that (presumably empty) trains were promptly returned to their
points of origin.; See also: Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European
Jews (1985), p. 488 (and notes). 

35.  Ganzenm_ller to Wolff, July 28, 1942. Document NO-2207. R. Hilberg,
Destruction (1985), p. 491.

36.  Main rail office (Gedob) in Krakow, directive No. 548. Facsimile in:
Biuletyn Glownej Komisji . . . (Warsaw), Vol. 26, 1975, p. 171.

37.  Main rail office (Gedob) in Krakow, directive of Aug. 27, 1942.
Facsimile in: Biuletyn Glownej . . . (Warsaw), Vol. 26, 1975, p. 182.; Also
quoted in: Y. Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka (1987), p. 96.

38.  Biuletyn Glownej . . . (Warsaw), Vol. 26, 1975, pp. 178 f.; Y. Arad,
Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka (1987), p. 145.

39.  Gerald Reitlinger, The Final Solution, (London: Sphere, pb., 1971), p.
150.

40.  Martin Gilbert, Final Journey (New York: 1979), p. 119.

41.  R. Hilberg, Destruction (1985), p. 488 (and notes).

42.  For one thing, the surviving documents are not at all clear about the
numbers of deportees, and certainly do not confirm the deportation of
hundreds of thousands of Jews to the camp.

43.  Dr. Arthur Butz has concluded that Treblinka served both as a labor
camp and as a transit center for Jews being deported eastwards: A. Butz,
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century (1983), p. 221.; See also: Steffen
Werner, Die Zweite Babylonische Gefangenschaft (1990), pp. 70-71, 171.

44.  Y. Wiernik, in: A. Donat, ed., The Death Camp Treblinka (New York:
1979), p. 166.; Jewish Black Book Comm., The Black Book (1946), p. 399. 

45.  I. Trunk, Jewish Responses (1982), pp. 197-198, 261-262.; A. Donat in:
B. Chamberlin, M. Feldman, eds., The Liberation of the Nazi Concentration
Camps (Washington, DC: 1987), p. 171.; This point is also confirmed in US
Dept. of Justice (OSI) interviews with Treblinka survivors. Portions of
several such OSI interview reports are reproduced in facsimile in UFFA
Bulletin (Stamford, Conn.), Oct. 1990, p. 6.

46.  Adalbert R_ckerl, ed., NS-Vernichtungslager im Spiegel deutscher
Strafprozesse (Munich: DTV, 1977), p. 198. This work by the main German
official responsible for prosecuting war crimes cases is based on records
of postwar German court cases.

47.  Yisrael Gutman, The Jews of Warsaw, 1939-1943 (Bloomington, Ind.:
Indiana Univ., 1982), p. 219.; Lucy Dawidowicz, The War Against the Jews,
(New York: Bantam, pb., 1976), pp. 414, 451.; L. Dawidowicz, Holocaust
Reader (New York: 1976), pp. 356, 364.; See also: Abraham Lewin, A Cup of
Tears (New York: 1988), pp. 38-39. (Holocaust historians maintain that
because none of the RresettledS Jews from Warsaw survived Treblinka, these
letters and postcards therefore are either forgeries or were written under
duress.) 

48.  Gitta Sereny, Into That Darkness (London: A. Deutsch, 1974), p. 193.;
The Lanzman film Shoah also confirms that Polish farmers worked the fields
right next to Treblinka. 

49.  Aerial reconnaissance photos from the US National Archives. Published
in: U. Walendy, RDer Fall Treblinka,S HT Nr. 44 (1990), pp. 31, 34, 35, 38.

50.  I. Trunk, Jewish Responses to Nazi Persecution (1982), p. 263.; Jewish
Black Book Comm., The Black Book, pp. 400, 407.

51.  Leon Poliakov, Harvest of Hate (New York: 1979), p. 334.; Uwe Adam,
in: F. Furet, ed., Unanswered Questions, (New York: 1989) p. 146.; R.
Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews (1985), p. 893.;
Encyclopaedia Judaica, vol. 15, p. 1371.; Lucy Dawidowicz, The War Against
the Jews (Bantam pb., 1976), p. 200.; Y. Arad in: I. Gutman, ed.,
Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, p. 1486.; A. R_ckerl, ed.,
NS-Vernichtungslager (DTV, 1977), p. 199 (n.).; Glen Frankel, RDemjanjuk
Proceeding Unites Israel,S Washington Post, Feb. 21, 1987, p. A 17.; K.
Feig, HitlerUs Death Camps (1981), p. 311.; Gitta Sereny, Into That
Darkness (1974), p. 250.

52.  For example: I. Gutman, ed., Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, pp. 1482,
1485.; Gitta Sereny, Into That Darkness (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974), p.
146.; Obozy hitlerowskie na ziemiach polskich 1939-1945 (Warsaw: 1979), p.
526.; E. Kogon, et al., Nationalsozialistische Massent_tungen (1986), p.
342.;

53.  U. Walendy, RDer Fall Treblinka,S HT Nr. 44 (Vlotho: 1990), pp. 31,
34, 35, 38.; This same layout is also shown in: Central Commission...,
German Crimes in Poland (Warsaw: 1946), Vol. 1, fold-out diagram between
pp. 96-97.

54.  Central Commission . . ., German Crimes in Poland (1946), Vol. 1, p.
96.; Janusz Gumkowski, K. Lezczynski, Poland Under Nazi Occupation (Warsaw:
Polonia, 1961), p. 72.; RTreblinka,S Encyclopaedia Judaica (1971), vol. 15,
p. 1367.; One hectare equals 10,000 square meters. One square mile is 640
acres.

55.  E. Kogon, et al., Nationalsozialistische Massent_tungen (1986), p.
162.; Y. Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, p. 41.; I. Gutman, ed.,
Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, p. 1483.; Note also the discussion of this
matter in: U. Walendy, RDer Fall Treblinka,S HT 44 (1990), passim.

56.  Central Commission . . ., German Crimes in Poland (Warsaw: 1946-1947),
Vol. 1, p. 96.; This is equivalent to about 142 by 142 meters.

57.  A. Donat, ed., The Death Camp Treblinka (1979), pp. 318-319.

58.  Louis FitzGibbon, Katyn (IHR, 1980), p. 141.; According to one
informed historical researcher, the 1944 aerial reconnaissance photographs
indicate that the burial area of the Treblinka II camp was about one-fifth
smaller than the mass graves area in the Katyn forest. Also, contrary to
claims made during the Demjanjuk trial and elsewhere, the 1944 aerial
photos also suggest that the retreating Germans left the campUs burial area
intact.

59.  Y. Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka (1987), pp. 174-177.; E. Kogon, et
al., Nationalsozialistische Massent_tungen durch Giftgas (1986), p. 190.;
On the other hand, the World Jewish Congress claimed in 1946 that the
bodies of TreblinkaUs victims were cremated immediately after gassing in
large crematory furnaces. See: Jewish Black Book Comm., The Black Book (New
York: 1946), pp. 410 f.; And according to one ReyewitnessS account, bodies
were burned while still in the large burial pits. This is physically all
but impossible. See: Abraham Krzepicki, in: A. Donat, ed., Death Camp
Treblinka, p. 92.

60.  Rachel Auerbach, RIn the Fields of Treblinka,S in: A. Donat, ed.,
Death Camp Treblinka (1979), p. 38.; Similarly, former prisoner Wiernik
claimed that Rthe bodies of women were used for kindling the firesS at
Treblinka. J. Wiernik, in: A. Donat, ed., Death Camp Treblinka, p. 170. 

61.  Moshe Perlman, The Capture and Trial of Adolf Eichmann (New York:
Simon and Schuster, 1963), pp. 303-304.

62.  R. Auerbach, RIn the Fields of Treblinka,S in: A. Donat, ed., Death
Camp Treblinka, pp. 19, 69, 71, 72. 

63.   Facsimile of report, Nov. 13, 1945, in: Biuletyn Glownej Komisji . .
. (Warsaw), Vol. 26, 1975, pp. 183-185. (Translation provided to the
author).; Note also photo of skulls and large bones on p. 151. This is
similar to the photo in: A. Donat, ed., Death Camp Treblinka, p. 266.

64.  Central Commission . . ., German Crimes in Poland, Vol. 1, pp. 96-97.

65.  After cremation, between five and about ten pounds of residual ash and
bone are left from each corpse. (Frederick Peterson, with Haynes and
Webster, Legal Medicine and Toxicology, vol. 2, pp. 877, 883. Facsimile in:
C. Porter, Made in Russia, pp. 346, 351.) If, let us say, 700,000 Jews were
killed at Treblinka, and each cremated corpse resulted in five pounds of
ash and residual bone, 1,750 tons of remains would have been left at the
camp site. Nothing like this quantity of remains has ever been found and
identified.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14603 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: Brian Harmon 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Raven's methodology
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 94 00:57:00 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 58
Message-ID: 
References:  <315k1n$88k@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  <31a20m$2cl@access3.digex.net> <31apvf$rb0@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1d.delphi.com
X-To: Greg Raven 

Greg Raven  writes:
 
>In article <31apvf$rb0@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
>wrote:
>
>> This is really like talking to a brick wall, but I'll try nontheless.
>> 
>> 1) It is impossible to choose "the best piece of evidence" for the
>> Holocaust. For instance, how can one choose which of the eyewitness
>> testimonies for the gassings at the various camps is "best"?
>
>I would think that if truly there were good evidence, you would not be
 
 
>forced to cite testimonies, which are notoriously poor on this (and other)
>topics. How about some physical evidence? How about some contemporaneous
>evidence? Something tangible would be nice.
 
 
	Testimonies are not _necessarily_ poor sources of info.  If there are many,
anyd they agree in many crucial details, they constitue excellent evidence.  To
be poor evidence, they must be inconsistent with one another.
 
	Let's see your demonstration that eyewitness accounts were inconsistent
with each other in vital details.  Why is it that none of the testimonies deny
zi?
 
	You also ask for physical evidence.  what about the camps themselves?
The evidence does supports mass extermination, despite Leuchter's attempts to
show otherwise.  What about Nazi Documents?  do they not constitute physical
evidence ofsome sort?
 
	You guys have yet to show us even _one_ forged Nazi document.
	You guys have uyet to descredit any EYewitness accounts that i've seen.
 
 
>This is true, as far as you go. However, you must be careful when
>constructing a circumstancial case such as this one, because with the same
>approach you use to "prove" the planned homicidal gassings of Jews, someone
>else could "prove" that aliens from other solar systems have visited Earth.
>After all, there are hundreds of testimonies, and even some photos. How can
>you support Holocaust gassing claims, but deny UFO claims (assuming you
>do)?
 
 
	This is no circumstantial case.  The very perpetrators of the crime
admitted to their actions (Ho"ss, Eichmann, Kremer, etc.).  eleven million
civillians are gone becase of the holocaust, six million because they were jews.
Documents, testimonies, confessions, physical evidence exists from the very
early planniung stages to the actual exection of the Holocaust.
 
	This was murder, plain and simple, and the Nazis did it, just as
Hitler had ordered them too.
 
Brian Harmon  
------
Human memory is the glue that bonds the massive physical evidence
into a coherent and unified history.     


Article 14604 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!swiss.ans.net!malgudi.oar.net!sun!oucsace!dspiegel
From: dspiegel@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Dan Spiegel)
Subject: Re: Auschwitz facts: Where to find them
Message-ID: 
Organization: Ohio University CS Dept,. Athens
References: <1994Jul28.223120.5451@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>  
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 1994 04:36:53 GMT
Lines: 98


  Sorry to follow up my own post, but I took the monumental step of
going to my bookcase and opening my copy of _Night_.

In article  dspiegel@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Dan Spiegel) writes:
>In article  greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes:
>>
>>Interesting. The Germans told Auschwitz inmates that the Soviets were
>>coming, and offered them a chance to either leave with the Germans or stay
>>and wait for the Soviets. Few waited. In fact, Elie Wiesel and his father
>>opted for the Germans, as can be read in his book, "Night."
>
>   Interesting. Instead of just asserting this fact, please provide a page
>number so I may consult my copy of Night.

   No need. Greg, shall we read together? Then, we can re-examine your 
paragraph above.

_Night_, by Elie Wiesel, Fourth Printing, December 1970 (Paperback)
pp. 92
--------------------------------------------------------
   At four o'clock on the afternoon of the same day, as usual the bell 
summoned all the heads of the blocks to go and report.
   They came back shattered. They could only just open their lips enough to
say the word: evacuation. The camp was to be emptied, and we were to be sent
futher back. Where to? To somewhere right in the depths of Germany, to other
camps; there was no shortage of them.
   "When?"
   "Tomorrow Evening."
   "Perhaps the Russians will arrive first."
   "Perhaps."
   We knew perfectly well that they would not.
-----------------------------------------------------------

   Well, Greg, it seems that contrary to your assertion, the prisoners
were hoping the Russians would arrive before they had to be evacuated.
The text doesn't say "We feared the Russians...", it says "Perhaps...".

   Now we'll see that the alternative wasn't Germans vs. Russians, as
our "scholar" implies, but Germans vs. death. 

_Night_, by Elie Wiesel, Fourth Printing, December 1970 (Paperback)
pp. 92 (cont. from above)
--------------------------------------------------------
   The camp had become a hive. People ran about, shouting at one another.
In all the blocks, preparation for the journey was going on. I had forgot-
ten about my bad foot. A doctor came into the room and announced:
   "Tomorrow, immediately after nightfall, the camp will set out. Block
after block. Patients will stay in the infirmary. They will not be 
evacuated."
   This news made us think. Were the SS going to leave hundreds of
prisoners to strut about in the hospital blocks, waiting for their 
liberators? Were they going to let the Jews hear the twelfth stroke 
sound? Obviously not.
   "All the invalids will be summarily killed", said the faceless
one [He was another prisoner - DS]. "And sent to the crematory in 
a final batch."
   "The camp is certain to be mined," said another. "The moment the 
evacuation's over, it'll blow up."
-----------------------------------------------------------

    Uh, Greg? Enough for you? So, why did you, at best, misrepresent
the context of the passage? Tell us, when did you read _Night_?
Who told you how to distort that passage? Since when do people 
prefer their persecutors over their liberators?

   Here's what you wrote:
>>Interesting. The Germans told Auschwitz inmates that the Soviets were
>>coming, and offered them a chance to either leave with the Germans or stay
>>and wait for the Soviets. Few waited. In fact, Elie Wiesel and his father
>>opted for the Germans, as can be read in his book, "Night."

   It is true that those left behind by the evacuation were not 
murdered, and that Elie Wiesel and his father opted for the Germans,
but you deliberately (what else could be the explanation?) asserted
out of context. It is clear that the perception was that anyone
who didn't choose to go would be murdered. You clearly distorted 
the meaning of this passage in your assertion to try to make your point 
that the Jewish prisoners preferred to stay with the Germans instead 
of waiting for the Soviets. 

   In short, you are either a foolish parrot, or a deliberate liar.

>>Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
>>Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
> [Inappropriate advertisements that were here deleted]
>
   I can thus assume that your level of "scholarship" is the same
as the rest of the "scholars" at the IHR?
   I'm just a Mathmetician/Computer Scientist. Why don't you give it
up? A real historian would eat your weak stuff and spit you out.
>

-DS
I speak for myself only.
No unsolicited e-mail, please. I'll read your flames with everyone else.
Please do not use my name in any subject headers.
>


Article 14605 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access1.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Finding Missing Persons
Date: 1 Aug 1994 23:08:39 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <31kdbn$jle@access1.digex.net>
References:  <31h4nm$7id@search01.news.aol.com>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: access1.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote [addressing Barry Shein]:
>You are making a couple of assumptions. First, you are assuming that "lost"
>people look for each other. This we know not to be the case. For example,
>when Mark Weber and David Cole were on the Montel Williams Show, "survivor"
>Ernst Hollander claimed his brother had been murdered by the Nazis. Well,
>it turns out his brother was still alive in Eastern Europe, and Ernst never
>bothered to look for him.
>
>You are also assuming that there are few stories of reunions. Without more
>research I cannot give you a number, but IHR founder David McCalden used to
>delight in collection stories about the reunion of family members
>"murdered" by the Nazis in the Holocaust.
>
>Third, you are assuming that it is easy to search for a "lost" family
>member even if you try. This is obviously not the case, as can be seen by
>the results of the (Arolsen?) center that conducts such searches. However,
>according to the figures I saw in the paper a few months back, they confirm
>more people alive than they do dead.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    If this is the case, then it seems to me that even a person as stupid
as Fritz Berg says I am can see that the simplest way for the revisionists
to prove their position is to conduct the search for the missing people
the relatives have failed to look for.  Six million were alleged to have
died.  If Mr. Raven and his cronies can find even 10% of them, let alone
more than half, they will have an excellent claim for having disproved the
Holocaust - much better than the distorted citations and invalid logic Mr.
Raven has presented so far. 

    In fact, let's make this simpler.  Let's just deal with Belzec.  Only
one or two Jews who were sent to Belzec were known to have survived the
war.  If Mr. Raven or Mr. Berg can find JUST FIVE MORE of the hundreds of
thousands of Jews who were sent to Belzec for delousing and then sent on
to other destinations, as Fritz Berg has claimed, then I will pay
attention to their claims with much more seriousness.  I mean, if the
Arolson center finds more than half alive, then it shouldn't be too much
trouble to find just five out of 600,000 or so who were alleged to have
died but (according to the revisionists) were still very much alive after
the war.  A lot of the 18-25 year olds should still be with us; even some
of the 30-year-olds. 

    How about it, Mr. Raven?  Mr. Berg?  Five Jews who passed through
Belzec.  If your version of history is correct, you should be able to find
them.  You've had years to look - you mean you never thought of doing this
before?  How could such an obvious and easy method of smashing the
Holocaust Hoax have slipped past a supergenius like Fritz Berg when even
an idiot like me could see it?  Obviously it's too simple, and I'm just
too stupid to see what's wrong with it.  I'm sure Mr. Raven or Mr. Berg 
will explain.

-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 14607 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!news.duke.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!ddsw1!golux.pr.mcs.net!user
From: golux@mcs.com (The only Golux in the World, and not a mere Device)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Raven's methodology
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 1994 00:52:28 -0600
Organization: MCSNet Services
Lines: 48
Message-ID: 
References:  <315k1n$88k@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: golux.pr.mcs.net

In article , greg.ihr@kaiwan.com
(Greg Raven) wrote:

> In article , bzs@world.std.com (Barry
> Shein) wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Perhaps Raven can clarify this demand he has made which apparently to
> > many of us seems idiotic. Maybe we all misunderstand him.
> > 
> > He wants the single best piece of evidence of the Holocaust.
> > 
> > I assume Mr Raven believes World War II occurred (?)
> > 
> > So what is the single best piece of evidence that World War II
> > occurred?
> > 
> > Just as an example of the kind of thing he is looking for.
> 
> I would perhaps start off with declarations of war from both the Axis and
> Allied sides (presented one at a time, of course!), and then perhaps move
> to official documents about military campaigns, backed up with
> contempareneous photos of those campaigns, and perhaps finish with corpses
> that could be shown to have been the result of wartime action. Simple.

Let's take these in order.

1.  A declaration of war is a political document regarding the intention of
the issuing state.  It says nothing about whether the war ever occurred. 
Besides, did either the Allies or the Axis ever use the phrase "World War
II" in their declarations of war?  I don't think so.  Next!

2.  Please limit yourself to *one* document, Mr. Raven.  Your citation to
"official documents" is a little vague.  Which one "document" of which
"military campaign" is the *best* piece of evidence that World War II
occurred?  If you produce any such document, we will address it at that
time.  (As for photos...we all know how easy those are to fake.)

3.  I defy you to produce one single corpse that can be shown to have died
as a result of "World War II."

Not so simple, is it?

-- 
D. J. Schaeffer |       The Todal looks like a blob of glup.
golux@mcs.com   |     It makes a sound like rabbits screaming,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^        and smells of old, unopened rooms.
                            -- Thurber, _The 13 Clocks_


Article 14615 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!world!bzs
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Joint response to Greg Raven
In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Mon, 01 Aug 1994 20:44:41 -0800
Message-ID: 
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Organization: The World
References: 
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 1994 06:48:48 GMT
Lines: 45


From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
>Let's look at this. The US Holocaust Memorial Museum displays a portion
>Hoess' confession to visitors the moment they arrive on the top floor, is
>this not true? Even Stein seems to admit later that Hoess is not reliable,
>so why does his statement appear so prominently in the USHMM?

For the same sort of reason that there is (or was) a large diorama of
a neanderthal family in the Museum of Natural History. No doubt some
small details are not quite right, and certainly the exact year or
location is not indicated clearly.

But the person who put that there wasn't trying to use it to convince
a Creationist, they were providing information for someone who was
interested in getting a better feel for the subject.

And in the same vein I do not believe the Holocaust museum was
designed to change the mind of a Holocaust denier. Because, like the
Creationist, they will find fault in everything presented. It is faith
before knowledge.

Hoess' words are part of the record. That they are not the proof you
seek is irrelevant, really. They are part of the record. Shall we burn
every copy? Hide every copy?

It's not a great bit of evidence IF THAT'S ALL WE HAD. And that's
certainly how the denier addresses it, as if that is the only bit of
evidence and that it may not stand up well in a complete
vacuum. However, it is not the only evidence, in fact there is so much
evidence it is not even viewed by most as evidence at all. It is
merely confirmation, it confirms everything else we know.

The Holocaust Museum is not a proof the Holocaust occurred. To all but
a few kooks that is not even a question.

How exactly could you modify that diorama of the neanderthal family to
suit a Creationist anyhow? You really can't. So why bother? You are
free to doubt, but if you believe the world will kowtow to your doubt
then the issue is not freedom, it is sanity.

-- 
        -Barry Shein

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


Article 14617 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!emory!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Keren's "Muench"
Date: 2 Aug 1994 07:09:12 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <31kreo$7ee@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu
X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: alt.revisionism

Greg Raven  wrote:
# dsk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
  ^^^

Just for the record, it's dzk.

# presented the following in support of his position on the Holocaust story:
#
##  Testimony of Dr. Hans W. Muench
##  [Trials of War Criminals, Vol. VIII, p. 313-321]

# It is not surprising that Keren posts this piece. What is surprising is
# that his fellow exterminationists allow him to get away with it.

# Referring to the Trials of the War Criminals (also known as the blue
# series), we find there is no such testimony on the pages indicated in
# volume 8. In fact, no such person is mentioned at all on these pages.

Ah, what a clown this Raven is.

You got the wrong series, you "revisionist scholar" you. I am not
quoting from the "blue series", but from the series of volumes about
the later trials (such as the Farben Trial, the Doctor's Trial etc;
I hope Raven heard about these).

By the way, Dr. Muench also testified in the 1963-5 Auschwitz trial
in Frankfurt. 


-Danny Keren.


Article 14618 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!panix!ddsw1!news.kei.com!world!bzs
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Suchomel 1/2
In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Mon, 01 Aug 1994 20:46:59 -0800
Message-ID: 
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Organization: The World
References: 
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 1994 07:30:39 GMT
Lines: 159


From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
>The generally accepted story today is that hundreds of thousands of Jews
>were killed at Treblinka in gas chambers with poisonous exhaust from
>engines. But the RoriginalS Treblinka extermination story was that Jews
>were steamed to death there in Rsteam chambers.S 
>
>According to an ReyewitnessS account received in November 1942 in London
>from the Warsaw ghetto underground organization, Jews were exterminated in
>Rdeath roomsS at Treblinka with Rsteam coming out of the numerous holes in
>the pipes

And it's completely believable that this is what it looked like, where
did they observe this from? Not too many people inside the camp
escaped by November 1942.

You have nothing here except perhaps someone observing from a hillside
or some such making his best guess as to how the people being marched
into these chambers and then removed dead a short while later were
perhaps being killed.

Did the person reporting have Superman's X-Ray vision? Obviously no
one who went into the chambers had much opportunity to describe what
happened next. And the SS guards who put this together were probably
not members of this Warsaw underground organization.

Crap, you have nothing here.

>In August 1943, the New York Times reported that two million
>Jews had already been killed at Treblinka by steaming them to death.6

Yeah, well, and how did they claim to know this? They called Stangl
and interviewed him?

Crap, so what, the NY Times may have been wrong. Big deal.

But what comes through pretty clearly is someone saw a lot of killing
going on there, even if they had the exact numbers and method a bit
wrong. I think it's fair to say it would have been hard to get an
accurate count into the NY Times.

>The Treblinka steam story is also given in detail in The Black Book of
>Polish Jewry, a work published in New York in 1943 and RsponsoredS by
>Albert Einstein, Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, Congressman Sol Bloom, New York
>Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia, and other personalities.7

No doubt merely repeating the first source of this, so what?

So therefore there were no dead bodies?

Or therefore it took a while to figure out how this monstrous work was
being done?

>(To confuse
>matters still more, a few months earlier Rajzman claimed that during the
>time he was in Treblinka, Jews were Rsuffocated to deathS there with a
>machine that pumped air out of death chambers.)11

Well, once again, clearly he did not have a good look at this device
in action because if he did he'd be dead.

However, this does tend to confirm some questions that perhaps it was
not so much the CO in the diesel exhaust at Treblinka that killed but,
rather, suffocation was the major cause of death. That would be
consistent with this testimony giving that the witness is no doubt
only describing how he believed all those people became dead.

>There may have been a factual basis for the Rsteam chamberS stories. It is
>quite possible that there was indeed some kind of steaming operation at
>Treblinka--but one designed to kill disease-carrying lice, not people.

Oh, here we go again!

It's not the method of killing that's at issue here all of a sudden,
it's who or what was being killed that all these people are mistaken
about!

Here's an idea: Maybe the fellow on the hilltop who thought he saw
people being marched into the chambers and then later removed dead had
his binoculors backwards and, in fact, was watching the Nazis march
LICE into these chambers and later remove them dead! Yeah, that's the
ticket! His binoculors were backwards!

>In recent years, the most widely-circulated story has been that Jews were
>gassed at Treblinka with carbon monoxide from the exhaust of a diesel
>engine.22

Or, more accurately, they were crammed into a chamber and the exhaust
of diesel fed into that relatively air-tight chamber and somehow they
died. Whether or not it was the carbon monoxide is of course a
reasonable guess but certainly not the only possibility.

>However, as American engineer Friedrich Berg has established,

Ah! You mean the estimable Friedrich Berg who posts things here like:

>Maybe some other engineer out there in cyberland will have the patience 
>to teach this Jewish trash something about the real world.  I have lost 
>my patience.  
>
>FPBerg 

and

>After reading Shein, can anyone really be surprised that the Germans 
>would people like him in concentration camps during WW2.  That is 
>precisely where people like him belonged--that is the only thing his 
>talmudic logic, his filthy sophistry, is ever able to prove.
>
>FPBERG

Yes, yes, *that* Mr Berg, a true scholar and seeker of the truth who
clearly has no axe to grind in his never-ending quest for wisdom...

>In spite of the obnoxious odor of
>diesel exhaust, diesel engines produce much smaller quantities of toxic
>carbon monoxide than ordinary gasoline motors.24 It would thus be difficult
>efficiently to gas large numbers of people using diesel exhaust. A normal
>gasoline engine would be much more logical.25

As we have offered Mr Berg, you and your friends should feel free to
put yourselves into a small, air-tight room and feed the exhaust from
a 600HP diesel into it for a while and report the results back to us.

>It is important to keep in mind that the RevidenceS now usually cited for
>diesel gassing at Treblinka is no more credible than the evidence that was
>once presented for steaming and suffocating. Apparently the steaming and
>suffocating stories have been dropped for the sake of credible consistency.

Apparently since 1943 some facts have become available.

I don't see the great distinction between this diesel method and an
eyewitness (from the outside) describing it as some form of
suffocation. But then again I do not possess the great mind of a
Holocaust Denier, perhaps.

>The type of
>gas used to kill the people there [Treblinka] cannot be determined with
>certainty because none of the witnesses was able to witness this
>procedure,S the judges declared in their verdict.26

Well, now *that's* a shock and a revelation.

You mean the Nazi guards didn't set up reviewing stands for prisoners
to carefully examine what was going on? I refer, of course, to
prisoners who weren't headed into the chambers.

etc etc etc.

So, where are the denier's eyewitnesses? Where is their evidence?

They don't have any, just this tired old rubbish.


-- 
        -Barry Shein

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


Article 14621 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access1.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Suchomel 1/2
Date: 2 Aug 1994 03:18:23 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <31krvv$4ka@access1.digex.net>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: access1.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>At 20:24 6/8/94 -0400, Michael P. Stein wrote: 
>Since you say there was no credible eyewitness testimony, I thought you
>might like to see this posting and explain to us what is not credible about
>this account from a former SS man at Treblinka. 
>
>>In article <2sl4ll$6gt@cat.cis.brown.edu> Danny Keren writes: 
>It is always interesting to see the stories of those who were at the camps;
>their testimony is, invariably, very different from the accounts given by
>our "revisionist scholars", who were never at the camps during the time
>they operated. 
>
>>>This is a short excerpt from the eyewitness account of Franz Suchomel,
>>>an SS officer who served in the death camp Treblinka. It is taken from 
>>>the movie "Holocaust". 

>>>This is a translation; if anyone who saw the
>>>movie detects an error, please inform me. 
>>>"L" stands for Lantzman, "S" for Suchomel. 
>
>>>-Danny Keren.
>> (text deleted)

>Gladly.
>
>First, you are wrong in making the blanket statement that I say there is no
>credible eyewitness testimony.
>
>Second, Keren is wrong in classifying Treblinka as a death camp: it was a
>transfer camp.
>
>Third, Keren is wrong in claiming this excerpt comes from the movie
>"Holocaust:" it comes from "Shoah."
>
>Fourth, Keren is wrong in claiming that the "L" stands for "Lantzman:" it
>stands for Lanzmann.
>
>Fifth, Keren is wrong to direct readers to the movie version of this
>passage: the book version contains all this and more, and is much more
>accessible.
>
>Sixth, Keren is deceptive not to point out the differences between
>Suchomel's statements here and his statements to Gitta Sereny.
>
>Be that as it may, for some truth about Treblinka, let us refer to the
>article on this topic that appeared in the volume 12 number 2 Journal of
>Historical Review, written by Mark Weber and Andrew Allen.

[long article which says not one word about Suchomel deleted]

    Surely, it shouldn't be necessary to overwhelm the reader with a long
off-point article which says not one word about Suchomel.  Let's keep the
discussion manageable, shall we?  Which of these is your BEST EVIDENCE
that Suchomel is insane or lying?  The fact that Daniel Keren misspelled
the name of the filmmaker?  Or is it perhaps the fact that Keren gave the
English translation of the Hebrew title of the film?  Pick one and let's
discuss it.
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 14622 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!kmcvay
From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay)
Subject: Re: Raven's deliberate "Muench" misrepresentation..
References:  <31kreo$7ee@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac
Message-ID: <1994Aug03.032351.25412@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 94 03:23:51 GMT

In article <31kreo$7ee@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:

>Greg Raven  wrote:

># presented the following in support of his position on the Holocaust story:
>#
>##  Testimony of Dr. Hans W. Muench
>##  [Trials of War Criminals, Vol. VIII, p. 313-321]

># It is not surprising that Keren posts this piece. What is surprising is
># that his fellow exterminationists allow him to get away with it.

># Referring to the Trials of the War Criminals (also known as the blue
># series), we find there is no such testimony on the pages indicated in
># volume 8. In fact, no such person is mentioned at all on these pages.

>Ah, what a clown this Raven is.

>You got the wrong series, you "revisionist scholar" you. I am not
>quoting from the "blue series", but from the series of volumes about
>the later trials (such as the Farben Trial, the Doctor's Trial etc;
>I hope Raven heard about these).

It is indeed interesting to note that whenever these clowns make a
literary assertion, somehow it always seems that a little bit of
investigation demonstrates how dishonest they have been.

Can't they do _anything_ without this childish lying?

-- 
   /^\__/^\                 The Old Frog's Almanac 
  / @    @ \     A Salute to That Old Frog Himse'f, Ryugen Fisher
 (          )       Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada
  \  ~~~~  /


Article 14624 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!psgrain!library.ucla.edu!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Suchomel 1/2
Date: 2 Aug 1994 09:51:55 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 215
Message-ID: <31l4vr$dkh@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:  <31krvv$4ka@access1.digex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu

I will comment more on the long piece posted by Raven, but here are
a few initial observations.


1) Raven seems to admit huge numbers of Jews were deported to
the "Operation Reinhard" camps. He claims they were later
transferred elsewhere.

There are a few problems with this incredible assertion.

A) It is not supported by anyone - not the Poles who were watching
the camps, not the survivors, not the SS men who ran the camps. They
all tell a rather different story, as we all know. A story of mass
murder, mainly in gas chambers. Here are two typical testimonies:

Testimony of SS Oberscharfuehrer Erich Bauer
[Quoted in "BELZEC, SOBIBOR, TREBLINKA - the Operation Reinhard 
Death Camps", Indiana University Press - Yitzhak Arad, 1987, p. 77]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Usually the undressing went smoothly. Subsequently, the Jews were
taken through the "tube" to Camp III - the real extermination
camp. The transfer through the "tube" proceeded as follows: one
SS man was in the lead and five or six Ukrainian auxiliaries were
at the back hastening the Jews along. The women were taken through a 
barracks where their hair was cut off. In Camp III the Jews were
received by an SS man... As I already mentioned, the motor was then
switched on by Gotringer and one of the auxiliaries whose name I
don't remember. Then the gassed Jews were taken out.


Testimony of SS-Unterscharfuehrer Herman Lambert about Sobibor
[Quoted in "BELZEC, SOBIBOR, TREBLINKA - the Operation Reinhard 
Death Camps", Indiana University Press - Yitzhak Arad, 1987, p. 123]
----------------------------------------------------------------
As I mentioned at the beginning, I was in the extermination camp
of the Jews for about two to three weeks. It was sometime in
autumn 1942, but I don't remember exactly when. At that time I
was assigned by Wirth to enlarge the gassing structure according
to the model of Treblinka. I went to Sobibor together with Lorenz
Hackenholt, who was at that time in Treblinka...

We reported to the camp commander, Reichsleitner. He gave us exact 
directive for the construction of the gassing installations. The
camp was already in operation, and there was a gassing installation.
Probably the old installation was not big enough, and reconstruction
was necessary. 




B) Raven has to explain where these Jews were "transferred" to. Are
there reports on them being taken anywhere? We have the documents
showing that huge numbers of Jews were sent to Treblinka. Where are
the reports proving that the same numbers left the camp? 

There must be many documents and many eyewitnesses confirming
Raven's claim. Where are they?

C) The Poles - those who lived near the camps, and also the Polish
underground members who spied on them - all reported that no Jews
were coming out of the camps. That's how the truth about what was
happening in the camps leaked out. They saw huge numbers of people
coming in; they didn't see them come out. What they saw come out were
trains full of clothes. They saw the camp, and knew the barracks
in it could not hold even a small portion of the deportees. They
saw that no food was sent in to feed these people. They understood
these people were being killed, and reported it. They sure as hell
didn't see the deportees being "transferred" anywhere. Perhaps Raven
claims all these Poles are lying.

I'll post some of the reports written by the Poles soon - have to
type them in. 


2) Raven correctly points out that some of the initial reports about
the methods of killing in the camps are erroneous. However:

A) Most of these reports are from the initial period of the camps'
operation. Moreover, most of them were made by people watching the
camps from a distance. This explains a lot.

Take, for instance, the "steam chambers" claims. These make a lot of
sense for someone spying on the camps, who was too far to see what
exactly went inside them. He probably saw the gas chambers being
opened, and the corpses being taken out. Now, when the gas chambers
were opened, a cloud of steam came out, because the exhaust of a very
powerful engine was pumped into them for considerable time. This
explains the initial misconception of "steam chambers". Other
theories, also inaccurate, were reported by other people who spied
on the camp. 

Someone without technical background and experience can easily make
such mistakes. And some did. However, the very large majority of the
people in Treblinka reported gassing by engine exhaust. This is what
counts - the reports by the majority of the people who were there.

The bottom line regarding the reports of the Poles spying on the
camps remains clear as the sun, even though some got the
technical details wrong. Numerous people were sent to these camps
and none came out. That is that. 


3) Raven mentions aerial photographs. He is welcomed to post them
as GIF of JPEG files. I happen to have a Ph.D in the area of
computer vision, and I know something about interpreting aerial 
photographs. 


4) Raven mentions Berg's work about the "difficulties" in gassing
with diesel engine exhaust. This was discussed here at length. Berg,
in addition to being an ugly racist and a deplorable Nazi, doesn't
know what he's talking about. Experiments have proved that animals
can be killed with the exhaust of tiny (6 BHP) diesel engines. 500
BHP engines will also kill people enclosed in a chamber. Berg's
claims are as silly as those in the "Leuchter Report".


5) There exist some incredibly detailed documents specifying the
property plundered from the deportees to the "Operation Reinhard"
camps. Here are some excerpts:

Letter from SS-Gruppenfuehrer Katzmann to SS-Obergruppenfuehrer Kruger,
regarding the "solution of the Jewish problem in Galicia", and giving
a breakdown of property taken from the Jews, June 30, 1943
[Documents on the Holocaust - Edited by Y. Arad, Y. Gutman, A. Margaliot,
NY, Ktav Pub. House in Association with Yad-Vashem, 1981, p. 335-341]
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Valuables were secured and handed over to the special staff 
"Reinhard". Apart from furniture and large quantities of textile,
etc., the following were confiscated and delivered to special staff
"Reinhard":

As of June 30, 1943:
 .
 .
20.952 Kg - wedding rings - gold
22.740 Kg - pearls
11.730 Kg - gold teeth
 .
 .

Report by SS-Grupenfuehrer Globocnik listing items plundered
from the Jewish victims of "Operation Reinhard" and delivered to
various Nazi organizations. Attached is a detailed list, prepared
by SS-Sturmbannfuehrer Wippern on February 27, 1943.
[Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals - 
Washington, U.S Govt. Print. Off., 1949-1953, Vol. V, p. 704-709]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Valuation of Jewish belongings delivered up to 3 February 1943

1. cash -                     RM 15,931,722.01
   Delivery SS Econ. Krakow - RM 31,500,000.00
   SS WVHA Berlin -           RM  5,581,411.50
                              ----------------
                              RM 53,013,133.51

[At that time, 2.5 RM were equal to 1 US Dollar].

2. Foreign currency, notes
   
   [Long list]             total RM 1,452,904.65
 .
 .
 .
 
5. Other Valuables
 .
 .
2,894  gold gentlemen's pocket watches
 .
 .
7,313  gold ladies' wrist watches
 .
 .
13,455 gentlemen's pocket watches
 .
 .
22,324 spectacles
 .
 .
7,000  fountain pens
 .
 .
51,370 watches to be repaired
 .
 .
230    clinical thermometers

[many items deleted]

                         Total  RM 26,089,800.00

6. Textiles

462 boxcars rags
253 boxcars feathers for bedding
317 boxcars clothes and linen

                         Total  RM 13,294,400.00




Ok, we have money, jewelry etc, which Raven will claim don't prove a 
thing (only that the Nazis were filthy thieves). But - gold teeth?
Spectacles? 317 boxcars of clothes and linen? 

Perhaps the Nazis replaced the gold teeth with new, better ones?
Maybe they gave the Jews new spectacles, or cured their eyesight?
Gave all the Jews new clothes? 

Who are these "revisionists" trying to fool?


-Danny Keren.


Article 14625 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!panix!ddsw1!godot.cc.duq.edu!news.duke.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Suchomel 1/2
Date: 2 Aug 1994 09:53:47 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 149
Message-ID: <31l53b$dki@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:  <31krvv$4ka@access1.digex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu

(Since the topic of Suchomel's testimony came up, here it is)


This is a short excerpt from the eyewitness account of Franz
Suchomel, a member of the SS who served in the death camp Treblinka.
It is taken from the movie "Shoa". This is a translation;
if anyone who saw the movie detects an error, please inform me.
"L" stands for Lantzman, "S" for Suchomel.

-Danny Keren.
-----------------------------------------------------------------


L: Could you describe, with the utmost accuracy, your first
   impression of Treblinka? With utmost accuracy, this is very
   important.

S: My first impression from Treblinka (and this was the impression
   of the other people with me also) was absolutely catastrophic.
   Because they didn't tell us how and what - that they are
   killing people there.

L: You didn't know?

S: No.

L: That is amazing.

S: But true. I didn't want to go - this was proved in my trial.
   They told me "Mr. Suchomel, there are big workshops there, for
   tailors and shoemakers, and you will watch over them".

L: But you knew it was a camp - 

S: Yes. They told us "the Fuehrer ordered resettlement. This is an
   order from the Fuehrer". Do you understand?

L: Yes. "Resettlement".

S: Resettlement. No one spoke of murder.

 .
 .
 .

L: So, you arrived at Treblinka, and?

S: Stadie, the sergeant, showed us the camp. From corner to
   corner. Just as we were going by, they opened the doors of the
   gas chambers, and the people fell out like potatoes. Of course,
   this shocked and freighted us. We went back, set on our 
   luggage and cried like old ladies.

   Every day a hundred Jews were selected to drag the corpses to
   the mass graves. In the evening, these Jews were thrown into
   the gas chambers by the Ukrainians or shot by them. It was in
   the hottest days of August and the earth moved in waves
   because of the gases -

L: From the corpses?

S: Yes. Picture that, the graves were 6-7 meters deep, filled
   with corpses, and the heat - do you understand? It was hellish.

L: You saw that yourself?

S: Yes, just once, in the first day. We vomited and we cried.

L: You cried?

S: Yes, we also cried. The smell was infernal - 

L: Infernal?

S: Yes, because the gases were being released all the time. The
   smell was awful and it traveled for kilometers - 

L: Kilometers?

S: Kilometers.

L: Not only in Treblinka?

S: Everywhere, depending on the wind. The smell was carried by 
   the wind. Do you understand? 

   More and more people were coming and we didn't have the means
   to kill them. In the "high places" they wanted to evacuate
   the Warsaw Ghetto quickly. The gas chambers couldn't handle
   the pressure, those little gas chambers. The Jews had to wait
   for their turn, a day, two days, sometimes three days. They
   saw what was awaiting them. They knew - maybe they were not
   absolutely sure, but they knew. There were Jewish women who
   slit the veins of their daughters during the night, and then 
   slit their own veins. Some Jews poisoned themselves. They heard 
   the engine which fed the gas chambers. A tank engine was in use 
   in those gas chambers. In Treblinka, the only gas in use was the 
   exhaust gas of an engine. Zyklon-B was used in Auschwitz.

   Eberle, the commandant of the camp, called Lublin and said
   'It is impossible to continue this way, I cannot continue
   like this, it has to be stopped'. One night Wirth came, checked
   everything, and immediately went back. He returned with some
   people from Wolzec, these were practical experts. Wirth 
   succeeded to halt the trains. They cleaned up the corpses
   that were laying there. Then, the old gas chambers were still
   in action. Because there were so many dead people that it was
   impossible to remove, piles of corpses lay for days next to
   the gas chambers. Under them there was a layer, 10 centimeters
   deep, of blood, worms, and filth ["dreck"]. Nobody was willing to
   clean it. The Jews preferred to be shot than to work there.

L: Preferred to be shot?

S: Yes, it was terrible, to bury their people and to see all that... 
   the flesh sticking to their hands... so Wirth went there himself 
   with a few Germans and told them to prepare long straps, which were 
   tied around the corpses, and that's how they were dragged from there.

L: Who did that?

S: Germans.

L: Wirth?

S: Yes, both Germans and Jews.

L: But what did the Germans do?

S: They forced the Jews to work. They beat the Jews, and they also 
   helped to drag the corpses.

L: Who were the Germans who did this?

S: Our guards, who were guarding in Camp II.

L: The Germans themselves did it?

S: They had to.

L: They were the ones giving the orders.

S: They gave orders, yes. They gave orders and they received orders.

L: I think it was the Jews who did it.

S: In that case, the Germans had to participate.




Article 14628 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!psgrain!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!Austria.EU.net!newsfeed.ACO.net!fuw.edu.pl!news.nask.org.pl!ci.pwr.wroc.pl!ci.pwr.wroc.pl!not-for-mail
From: pankiewicz@sun1000.ci.pwr.wroc.pl (Jerzy Pankiewicz)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Auschwitz figures
Date: 2 Aug 1994 13:43:05 +0200
Organization: Technical Univeristy of Wroclaw
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <31lbg9$654@sun1000.ci.pwr.wroc.pl>
References: <58gXPc4w165w@uunet.ca!skaliks> <1994Jul25.020700.2018@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: sun1000.ci.pwr.wroc.pl
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com) wrote:

: Are you including the findings of the Nuremberg tribunal in this list of
: sources that do not accept the figure of 4 million deaths at Auschwitz? You
: do say "never accepted," which leads one to wonder how that same number
: became memorialized in 19 different languages at the Auschwitz camp itself.

The number '4 milion ' comes from SU authorities. Soviets took
Auschwitz documentation in 1945 and no research was allowed.
The Polish communist administration obeyed and memorialized.
Probably about 1981 became obvious that the 4 milion was a Soviet hoax
and the informations were removed. The other feature, which Mr Raven
ignores, was that Holocaust was ignored, all victims were equal.
Only now it's possible to present the nationality of the victims.
The number of victims is estimated at 1.2 - 1.4 milions, as far as I 
remember.
                 Jerzy Pankiewicz


Article 14629 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!panix!ddsw1!godot.cc.duq.edu!news.duke.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!Austria.EU.net!newsfeed.ACO.net!fuw.edu.pl!news.nask.org.pl!ci.pwr.wroc.pl!ci.pwr.wroc.pl!not-for-mail
From: pankiewicz@sun1000.ci.pwr.wroc.pl (Jerzy Pankiewicz)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Let's hear both sides
Date: 2 Aug 1994 14:31:31 +0200
Organization: Technical Univeristy of Wroclaw
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <31leb3$879@sun1000.ci.pwr.wroc.pl>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: sun1000.ci.pwr.wroc.pl
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com) wrote:
: THE HOLOCAUST: Let's Hear Both Sides

: By Mark Weber

: exterminate Europe's Jews and that the estimate of six million Jewish
: wartime dead is an irresponsible exaggeration.

3-3.5 milion of Polish Jews vanished during WWII. Their bodies or ashes
(after more or less precise cremation) can be found in the territory
of the pre-war Poland (50% of the prewar Poland is now abroad).
You have to add Jews from Lithuania, Latvia, Belorussia, Ukraine,
Austria, Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, France, Holland, Italy,
Rumania and some other countries. 

: Many Holocaust Claims Abandoned

: Revisionists point out that the Holocaust story has changed quite a lot
: over the years. Many extermination claims that were once widely accepted
: have been quietly dropped in recent years.

The same 'Katyn story' has changed. The common reason of hoaxes was
the existence of SU.


: In the face of the advancing Soviet forces, large numbers of Jews were
: evacuated during the final months of the war from eastern camps and ghettos
: to the remaining camps in western Germany. These camps quickly became
: terribly overcrowded, which severely hampered efforts to prevent the spread
: of epidemics. Furthermore, the breakdown of the German transportation
: system made it impossible to supply adequate food and medicine to the
: camps.
The question is - why Nazis evacuated Jews if they weren't able 
to feed them and to prevent the epidemics? Jews weren't POWs, weren't
guilty of any crime.

: are no American memorials, "study centers," or annual observances for
: Stalin's victims, who vastly outnumber Hitler's.
I must agree with my disgusting opponent. US - personally Pres. Roosevelt,
supported Soviets in the Katyn denying hoax. GB government supported
Soviets till the 70-ties.
: particularly against the German people as a whole, eastern Europeans and
: the leadership of the Roman Catholic church.
As an 'Eastern European' I don't feel in any way offended by the truth
about the Holocaust. Let the writer doesn't 'represent' me
nor the Catholic church.
                       Jerzy Pankiewicz


Article 14650 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!access.digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Greg Raven Eats Crow
Date: 2 Aug 1994 23:26:37 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 157
Message-ID: <31n2pd$rsh@access2.digex.net>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: access2.digex.net

    Greg Raven, Associate Editor of the Journal for Historical Review,
asked for the one best piece of evidence that there was a Nazi plan or
policy to exterminate Jews in gas chambers.  In response to this
transparent ploy, he was offered a number of different testimonies. 

    Raven responded, and his response was - let's not mince words -
vaporized.  Raven disappeared for two months, and I had begun to wonder if
he was too embarrassed to return (as well he should have been).

    Alas, no.  Raven has reappeared here as if nothing had happened.  He 
has even (finally) attempted to address the shredding of his rebuttal.  
Let's see how he did.

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
[...]
>My proposal for conducting a somewhat civilized discussion of this topic
>was to deal with one piece of evidence at a time, starting with whatever
>the exterminationists consider to be the "best" evidence, and then working
>on from there.  I can only wonder why Keren and the others are so fearful of
>approaching this topic carefully and honestly.

    I can only wonder why Raven is so fearful of approaching this topic 
carefully and honestly.  He wants to deal with one piece of evidence at 
a time?  OK.  Let's cut to the chase.  I'll deal with the testimony of SS 
Private Boeck.  Let's explore what it proves.  Anything to make Mr. Raven 
happy.

    In his reply, on the subject of Boeck, Raven wrote: 

     "Pressac himself casts doubt on some of the aspects
     of this statement, pointing out, for example, that
     Boeck could only have witnessed one such gassing (at
     most)."

This is a paraphrase - and worse, a paraphrase with no page number.
Someone who wanted to see if the paraphrase accurately reflected the
original would have to read through the whole book to find it.  I raised
this question in a reply to Raven's rebuttal:

     "Is 'at most' in Pressac's original text, or is it a clever insertion on
     Mr. Raven's part, as we are only presented with a paraphrase, not a 
     direct quote, and no exact page citation to make it easy to check 
     the accuracy of it, so that if we want to verify it for ourselves we 
     must take the time to read Pressac cover to cover?"


Raven's scornful reply:

     "Well, if you were familiar with Pressac's book, you would find it
     relatively easy to locate the text, as it is in the section on SS
     testimonies. Lacking that familiarity, you could have referred to
     Faurisson's long review of Pressac's book, which appeared in two 
     parts in the Journal of Historical Review."

Apparently Mr. Raven feels that I should be intimately familiar with
Pressac's book, and if not, magically know what secondary source would
tell me where to find the part I'm looking for.  Perhaps it would be
reading too much into this, but one could easily get the impression Raven
is being condescending, saying that if *I* were as good a historian as
*he*, I would be familiar with Pressac's book and know where to look - so
he need not (an	d still does not) bother to tell me the page, as an amateur
like myself is not worth wasting his valuable time on.  The most he will
do for me is tell me to look in the section on SS testimonies. 

    That's one way of reading Raven's response.  But Dr. Faurisson, the 
expert on texts, teaches us that there are other ways.  And indeed, there 
is.

    I do not read it as the condescension of a professional historian to
an amateur.  I read it as a desperate bluff.  He won't tell me the page
not because I'm not worth bothering with, but because he knows that once
the true text of this book (which even Friedrich Berg has noted is hard
for the average person to find) is compared with Raven's paraphrase, he
will have no credibility left.  He is terrified that if he gives me any
help at all, I will be able to expose him, and is desperately praying that
I don't have access to a copy.

    Apparently Mr. Raven does not realize that I live in the area of
Washington, DC, home of the Library of Congress and the Holocaust Museum
library.  While the Library of Congress copy is missing, the Museum has
not one but two copies in its library.  I do have some familiarity with
Pressac's book, and I have actually known for some time that Raven's
paraphrase bears no relation to what Pressac really says, other than
containing the words "gassings," "see," and "one" (in that order).

    I also know that "the" section on SS testimonies does not exist -
there is one set of testimonies on Krema I which includes SS men Pery
Broad and Rudolf Ho"ss, along with Sonderkommando members Alter
Fajnzylberg and - if memory serves - Filip Muller.  The discussion of
Broad is on p. 128 (not 124 as Raven had it).

     Here is the full text of Pressac's comments on Boeck's testimony,
found not in "the section on SS testimonies," but all the way over on page
181 of the English language edition:

     "There is only one clue to show that the scene took place at Bunker 
     2: 'a long farmhouse'.  In this type of account, this is already a 
     good deal.  SS Bo"ck seems to have been a decent enough man.  The 
     gassing of children upset him so much that he saw the SS medical 
     orderlies 'climb on the roof' (they did not climb so high) and did 
     not look at his wife for four weeks.  Not everyone is cut out to be 
     an executioner.  Hermann Langbein writes: 

         'Bo"ck is the only witness who demonstrated a sincere aversion 
         before the court.' 

     I would ask just one question: 'How many gassings did Bo"ck see?'  
     If he only saw the one described before the court, it is not so 
     surprising that his 'aversion' should remain intact.  If he had 
     been forced by his duties to see them regularly, his attitude might 
     be different.  It is all too easy to become hardened." 


    Pressac's text speaks for itself.  It certainly does not need Raven to
speak for it.  (Amusingly, Raven sarcastically commented at another point
on how nice it was that Keren had me to speak for him.  Pot.  Kettle. 
Black.)

    What Raven posted about what Pressac said - "Boeck could only have
witnessed one such gassing (at most)" - is now proven to be blatantly
false.  That is that. 

Raven asked:

    "Mr. Stein, I now ask you, which of these testimonies -- that you 
    have gone to great lengths to defend -- do you feel to be the best 
    evidence I have asked for?  Or, is there another?  Whichever it is, 
    please present it so that we may discuss it."


I have an answer to this question, one which has been posted here by
several others.  No single testimony or document is the best evidence for
the Holocaust.  The volume, totality, and convergence of the evidence is
the best evidence.  Raven is engaging in blatant intellectual dishonesty 
in his methodology.  It has been pointed out here time after time, and he 
has never come up with a credible defense.

    However, I now have a *single* piece of evidence which proves that
sufficient evidence *does* exist to prove the Holocaust.  That evidence is
this: in order to cast doubt on the Holocaust, as his BEST EVIDENCE, Raven
is reduced not only to calling for a totally ridiculous method of
discussion, but to posting a proven falsehood.  And proven falsehoods are
no evidence at all.  If Raven had any real evidence that the Holocaust was
a hoax, he would not have to post falsehoods and then try to bluff his way
out when questioned about his source.

    This is the *Associate Editor* of the Journal of Historical Review
we're talking about here, and this is the best he can do: post blatantly
distorted paraphrases of sources, then cover up the distortion by refusing
to give reasonable pointers - which any *honest* historian would be happy
to provide - to his obscure source.  I've caught him and exposed him.  End
of discussion.
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 14652 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!panix!ddsw1!golux.pr.mcs.net!user
From: golux@mcs.com (The only Golux in the World, and not a mere Device)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Joint response to Greg Raven
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 1994 00:12:19 -0600
Organization: MCSNet Services
Lines: 36
Message-ID: 
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: golux.pr.mcs.net

In article , greg.ihr@kaiwan.com
(Greg Raven) wrote:

[Among other...stuff]
> Mr. Stein, I now ask you, which of these testimonies -- that you have gone
> to great lengths to defend -- do you feel to be the best evidence I have
> asked for? Or, is there another? Whichever it is, please present it so that
> we may discuss it.
> 
> I apologize to anyone who has had to wade through this. In the future,
> please letUs discuss one piece of evidence at a time.

Tell you what, Greg.  We are apparently so dense that we cannot comprehend
your masterful techniques for historical research, and will never be able
to produce to your satisfaction the "best evidence" of the Nazi policy and
plan to exterminate the Jews and others by many means, including homicidal
gas chambers.  To simplify things, why don't you tell us what it is you're
looking for -- what sort of evidence *exactly* are you looking for?  You've
indicated that testimonies and postwar documents aren't good enough; you
insist that the combination of multiple documents isn't good enough.  (Note
that this latter point is distinct from disputing the *interpretation* of
the combination of documents, which would at least be appropriate for
historical research.  Instead, you assert flatly that each and every
document must be regarded in isolation.  Care to explain how this makes for
valid historical debate?)

So what would do it?  Tell us what the document should say and we'll let
you know if such a document exists.  If it does, then you can dissect it. 
If it does not, then you can tell us what you would consider the
second-best piece of evidence, and we'll go through the same process.

-- 
D. J. Schaeffer |       The Todal looks like a blob of glup.
golux@mcs.com   |     It makes a sound like rabbits screaming,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^        and smells of old, unopened rooms.
                            -- Thurber, _The 13 Clocks_


Article 14658 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!psgrain!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!via.kz.merit.edu!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Joint response to Greg Raven
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 1994 11:29:39 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 30
Message-ID: 
References: 
   
NNTP-Posting-Host: 35.132.2.12

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

[to Mr. Raven:]

> So what would do it?  Tell us what the document should say and we'll let
> you know if such a document exists.  If it does, then you can dissect it. 
> If it does not, then you can tell us what you would consider the
> second-best piece of evidence, and we'll go through the same process.

That's a damn good suggestion.

Previously, my highest-priority Question In Search Of An Answer was "what
is the single best argument that deniers have against the Holocaust?"
I now amend that.  I now have two highest-priority questions, the second
being "please give a detailed specification of a hypothetical piece of
evidence that would convince you that the Holocaust happened."

Note that this second question cleverly turns Raven's debating tactics
around on himself.  He's previously been asking for one piece of evidence
at a time.  Now he must instead specify exactly what he's looking for in
one piece of evidence.  If he dares to suggest that any one piece of
evidence could not possibly be enough, then he has admitted what we all
have been saying for quite some time:  that the Holocaust, and indeed
anything of any consequence, is proved by the _convergence_ of evidence.

Those two highest-priority questions of mine are put forth for any denier
or revisionist to answer.
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 14661 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access1.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Joint response to Greg Raven
Date: 3 Aug 1994 22:12:16 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <31piq0$lae@access1.digex.net>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: access1.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:

[snip]

    I really see no reason to respond to someone who has been proved to 
use blatantly distorted paraphrase, except to correct one error:

>Stein then brings up the confession of Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Hoess:
>
>>>But back to the claim Raven makes. Apart from the fallacy of suggesting 
>>>that the Museum "depends" on Hoess to make a point - there are countless 
>>>other pieces of evidence upon which they could similarly "depend" - is 
>>>it true that Lipstadt and Browning "have admitted that the Hoess 
>>>statements are useless"?
>>>No. A grain of truth, covered by an ocean of distortion.

    Raven didn't check his facts (surprise!).  As much as I would like to 
claim credit for it, the above text was by Jamie McCarthy.


>>>Lipstadt directed the article's author to her book, which merely
>>>points out what historians have known for decades: Hoess was wrong about 
>>>the total death count. But where does Lipstadt say the "the Hoess
>>>statements are useless"? Again, nowhere. 
>
>This is a gross distortion of the Vanity Fair article.

    Well, the full text of the Vanity Fair article has been posted
elsewhere - as has Raven's paraphrase of Pressac's comments on Boeck
followed by the unabridged text of Pressac's comments - so readers of this
newsgroup can see for themselves who is the gross distorter of sources.
Let's just say I'm not losing any sleep.
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 14672 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz
From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Raven's methodology
Date: 4 Aug 1994 21:57:24 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <31ro84$idb@agate.berkeley.edu>
References:  <315k1n$88k@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu

Barry Shein asked, in article ,

>> So what is the single best piece of evidence that World War II
>> occurred?

And Greg Raven replied, in article ,

>I would perhaps start off with declarations of war from both the Axis and
>Allied sides (presented one at a time, of course!), and then perhaps move
>to official documents about military campaigns, backed up with
>contempareneous photos of those campaigns, and perhaps finish with corpses
>that could be shown to have been the result of wartime action. Simple.

But it isn't so simple.  What Mr. Raven is being asked to provide is
the *single* *best* piece of evidence that World War II occurred.  In
his response he refers to "declarations" (plural) of war *and* "documents"
(plural) *and* "photos" (plural) *and* "corpses" (plural).  That means
he expects us to accept a minimum or *eight* pieces of evidence as his
"single" piece of evidence.  That's not what we want.  What we want is
the *single* *best* piece of evidence that World War II occurred.

Or is this simply your way of admitting that proving that an historical
event occurred is not by a "single" piece of evidence but by the convergence
of numerous independent pieces of evidence?

					Richard Schultz


Article 14673 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!kmcvay
From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay)
Subject: Raven's double standards
References:   <31ro84$idb@agate.berkeley.edu>
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac
Message-ID: <1994Aug06.054300.12991@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
Date: Sat, 06 Aug 94 05:43:00 GMT

In article <31ro84$idb@agate.berkeley.edu> schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz) writes:

>Barry Shein asked, in article ,

>>> So what is the single best piece of evidence that World War II
>>> occurred?

>And Greg Raven replied, in article ,

[list of multiple pieces of evidence deleted]

...to which Mr. Schultz replies:

>But it isn't so simple.  What Mr. Raven is being asked to provide is
>the *single* *best* piece of evidence that World War II occurred.  In
>his response he refers to "declarations" (plural) of war *and* "documents"
>(plural) *and* "photos" (plural) *and* "corpses" (plural).  That means
>he expects us to accept a minimum or *eight* pieces of evidence as his
>"single" piece of evidence.  That's not what we want.  What we want is
>the *single* *best* piece of evidence that World War II occurred.

>Or is this simply your way of admitting that proving that an historical
>event occurred is not by a "single" piece of evidence but by the convergence
>of numerous independent pieces of evidence?

It is simply Mr. Raven's way of demonstrating that he employs a
clear double standard where historical debate is concerned. We can
add Mr. Raven's double standard to his known penchant for lying, and
begin to assemble an accurate picture of not only Mr. Raven's
approach to historical research, but the IHR's as well - he is,
after all, a Senior Editor...

I think it's time we re-wrote our joint response to Mr. Raven's
request for a "single piece" of "best evidence" to include this
enlightening exchange..

-- 
   /^\__/^\                 The Old Frog's Almanac 
  / @    @ \     A Salute to That Old Frog Himse'f, Ryugen Fisher
 (          )       Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada
  \  ~~~~  /


Article 14681 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!Austria.EU.net!newsfeed.ACO.net!fuw.edu.pl!news.nask.org.pl!ci.pwr.wroc.pl!ci.pwr.wroc.pl!not-for-mail
From: pankiewicz@sun1000.ci.pwr.wroc.pl (Jerzy Pankiewicz)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Suchomel 1/2
Date: 5 Aug 1994 09:18:58 +0200
Organization: Technical Univeristy of Wroclaw
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <31sp52$moe@sun1000.ci.pwr.wroc.pl>
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: sun1000.ci.pwr.wroc.pl
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com) wrote:
: Second, Keren is wrong in classifying Treblinka as a death camp: it was a
: transfer camp.
: all accounts, had been deported to Treblinka, indicate that the camp was a
: transit center from where Jews were resettled in the occupied Soviet
: territories. These messages, which arrived from settlements and camps in
: Belarus (Byelorussia), Ukraine, and even Russia proper (near Smolensk),
: were written by Jews who had been deported in 1942. Some letters and cards
: had been sent by mail and some had arrived through the underground. Many
: mentioned that the senders were working hard, but confirmed that they (and
: often their children) were being fed.47

Theoretically I can believe that several milion Jews were transported
to SU and after 'liberation' deported to Syberia. But now the Soviet
archives are opened, where are the documents? At least part
of the Jews would survive, where are they? Or do you believe
that Jews are some super-people who can be silent after 50 years
to help the anti-Nazi propaganda? People love to speak, to write
books and articles about their lives. Where are books written
by several milion of 'yransported' Jews?
Even if 100 000 Jews were transported to the occupied Soviet
territories it doesn't prove that all of them were.
The policy of extermination apparently changed several times.
 The year 1942 mentioned in the text clearly shows that you are
aware of your method of propaganda, you wouldn't write 1943 or 1944
because it would be a story.
  I was in the mythical East and I  saw a memorial table of probably
200 000 Jews murdered in Minsk, Byelorussia. Any comments?
  More than 50000 of Wilno (Vilnius) Jews were executed in the Ponary
forest. There are many accounts of local people, including one
written by an anti-communist writer Jozef Mackiewicz, who wasn't
in any way anti-Nazi biased.
                    Jerzy Pankiewicz


Article 14682 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz
From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Auschwitz figures
Date: 5 Aug 1994 12:26:46 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <31tb66$4p9@agate.berkeley.edu>
References: <58gXPc4w165w@uunet.ca!skaliks> <1994Jul25.020700.2018@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:

>Are you including the findings of the Nuremberg tribunal in this list of
>sources that do not accept the figure of 4 million deaths at Auschwitz? You
>do say "never accepted," which leads one to wonder how that same number
>became memorialized in 19 different languages at the Auschwitz camp itself.

Given that Mr. Raven's history of accurately reporting what his sources 
say is, let us say, not a distinguished one, I would first ask for the
actual citation from the Nuremberg documents that "accept[s] the figure of
4 million deaths at Auschwitz".  Even Hoess only estimated 2 million, after
all, and he was there.

As to the second point.  I am not sure that one really wonders about that
if one is Greg Raven, but in any case, the answer is fairly straightforward.
After the war, the Polish government saw it in its interest to downplay
that the primary target of the Nazis' genocide was the Jews.  In fact,
antisemitism in Poland, both "official" and "unofficial" continued for a
generation after the war.  One of the ironies facing the Polish holocaust
survivors was that many of those who managed to get back to their homes
became victims of pogroms in 1946 and 1947.  The culmination of the
government's anti-Semitic policy was in 1968, when the official 
persecution of the Jews got so bad that many (actually, I think it was
most) left the country.  All of this is discussed in detail in Lucy
Dawidowicz's book _The Holocaust and the Historians_, which is well
worth reading.  Revisionists might want to take a look at what she says
about David Irving both there and in _The War Against the Jews_.

In a fairly recent _New Yorker_ article (it appeared in the 15 November
1993 issue; I believe the title was "Evidence of Evil"), the wording
of the Auschwitz memorial was discussed.  The original Polish government
"statistics" claimed that four million people were murdered there, of
whom about a million were Jews.  The figures accepted by historians
(and belatedly at the Auschwitz memorial) are that about one million
people were murdered there, almost all of whom were Jews. 

In other words, even if we accept that the total number of people 
killed there has been the subject of argument -- an admission that
I feel no need to make -- that the number of *Jews* murdered there was
on the order of one million has never been a matter of dispute.  As
far as I can tell, the only dispute is over how seriously to take
Hoess's claim to have killed twice that number, but almost everyone
agrees that Hoess's number was an exaggeration.  But in any case, the
argument that "they revised the number down from 4 million to 1 million,
so there's no reason to believe that this new figure isn't exaggerated
by a similar factor" is clearly fallacious, and falls to the ground of
its own weight when the facts of the matter are examined.

				Richard Schultz

P.S.  I eagerly await the evidence that World War II happened, because
I have found some evidence that it didn't, and in fact the whole
thing was a hoax.


Article 14689 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!via.kz.merit.edu!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Auschwitz figures
Date: Sat, 06 Aug 1994 11:59:37 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 24
Message-ID: 
References: <58gXPc4w165w@uunet.ca!skaliks>
   <1994Jul25.020700.2018@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
   
   <31tb66$4p9@agate.berkeley.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 35.132.2.14

schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz) wrote:
> As
> far as I can tell, the only dispute is over how seriously to take
> Hoess's claim to have killed twice that number, but almost everyone
> agrees that Hoess's number was an exaggeration

...including Hoess, don't forget, who stated that his source for the
2.5 million figure was probably wrong, and that he doubted 2.5 million
was possible because "even Auschwitz had limits to its destructive
capabilities."

I'm not aware of any serious historian who gives credence to the
_figure_ that Hoess states.  Raven et al. would have me believe that,
therefore, serious historians don't give credence to _anything_ Hoess
says.  That, of course, is nonsense.

> P.S.  I eagerly await the evidence that World War II happened, because
> I have found some evidence that it didn't, and in fact the whole
> thing was a hoax.

I'd be interested to hear your evidence.  :-/
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 14791 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!panther.Gsu.EDU!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!news.duke.edu!eff!news.kei.com!travelers.mail.cornell.edu!tuba.cit.cornell.edu!crux2!srs3
From: srs3@crux2.cit.cornell.edu (Motti)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Let's hear both sides
Date: 8 Aug 1994 18:00:25 GMT
Organization: Cornell University
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <325rrp$sqe@tuba.cit.cornell.edu>
References:  <31leb3$879@sun1000.ci.pwr.wroc.pl>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.253.232.64
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #6 (NOV)


>Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com) wrote:
>: THE HOLOCAUST: Let's Hear Both Sides

>: By Mark Weber

>: exterminate Europe's Jews and that the estimate of six million Jewish
>: wartime dead is an irresponsible exaggeration.

i would just like to add a comment about this expression
"both sides of the story".  deniers use this expression all the 
time to manipulate people.  when hearing conflicting reports and
opinions many people presume that the truth lies somewhere in the
middle of the two opposing viewpoints.  this is often the case;
but *only* when both of the viewpoints are reasonable.  i won't
go into it here, but the revisionist view of the holocaust is
hardly on a plane of reason...  it is more on a plane of passion.

i think the deniers use this tendency of people to consider truth
to be the the average of the 2 extremes as a way to manipulate naive
college student newspaper editors to print their essays in the
advertisment sections.



mordechai steve seidman
srs3@crux3.cit.cornell.edu
seid@ee.cornell.edu (send to this address if the crux3 address fails)


Article 14801 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz
From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: A partial answer for Greg Raven (Auschwitz figures)
Date: 8 Aug 1994 22:40:09 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <326c89$3e9@agate.berkeley.edu>
References: <58gXPc4w165w@uunet.ca!skaliks> <1994Jul25.020700.2018@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:

>Are you including the findings of the Nuremberg tribunal in this list of
>sources that do not accept the figure of 4 million deaths at Auschwitz? You
>do say "never accepted," which leads one to wonder how that same number
>became memorialized in 19 different languages at the Auschwitz camp itself.

I answered the second part of this query in an earlier posting.  Jerzy
Pankiewicz mentioned that the 4 million figure came from Soviet 
authorities.

I happened to be looking up something completely different and came 
across what is at least a partial answer to the presence of the 4 millions
at Auschwitz figure in the Nuremberg proceedings.  All citations are from
the English edition of "Trial of the Major War Criminals" (the 42-volume
set, just so there's no confusion -- was it Raven or Vicksell who got
the two sets mixed up before?).

On 19 Feb 1946, Smirnov, one of the Soviet members of the tribunal
(I can't remember if he was the counsel for the USSR) presented several
Soviet films about the Nazis' atrocities, and mentioned the "findings"
of the "Extraordinary State Commission for Auschwitz" as being that
4 million citizens of numerous countries were killed there (VII-589).
This figure of 4 million appeared in the indictment.  Interestingly
enough, the Smirnov did not specifically mention the Jews as victims
at Auschwitz, unlike some of the other camps where the Jews are specifically
mentioned as victims.  This appears to give further support to the
explanation that the number came because the Polish and Soviet governments
wanted to downplay the specific targeting of the Jews by the Nazis, and
in part did that by exaggerating the number of non-Jewish victims
(cf. how the Soviet government chose to memorialize Babi Yar).

I am not sure if the number in the indictment indicates that the tribunal
"accepted" the figure (whatever that means).  Hoess's testimony, that 
the number killed there was 2 million (XI-397) or 2.5 million with
an additional 500,000 dying of starvation and disease (XI-415) already
makes the 4 million figure suspect, as has been pointed out some 
large number of times before.

I did not have time to look up what the tribunal said in the sentencing.
Did they give a specific figure there?

I realize that this whole argument is beside the point -- although it's
obviously not beside Raven's point.  Raven seems to think that if he
can sidetrack the discussion into some kind of quibble over detail that
he has won some kind of victory.  As far as I can tell, no one can know
for certain exactly how many people were murdered at Auschwitz.  It is
clear from what records did survive that the number is on the order of 1
million.  Just because one figure was exaggerated does not mean that any
figure given must necessarily be exaggerated or even suspect.

					Richard Schultz


Article 14837 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!kmcvay
From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay)
Subject: Re: A partial answer for Greg Raven (Auschwitz figures)
References: <1994Jul25.020700.2018@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>  <326c89$3e9@agate.berkeley.edu>
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac
Message-ID: <1994Aug09.222500.9635@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 94 22:25:00 GMT

In article <326c89$3e9@agate.berkeley.edu> schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz) writes:

>On 19 Feb 1946, Smirnov, one of the Soviet members of the tribunal
>(I can't remember if he was the counsel for the USSR) presented several
>Soviet films about the Nazis' atrocities, and mentioned the "findings"
>of the "Extraordinary State Commission for Auschwitz" as being that
>4 million citizens of numerous countries were killed there (VII-589).
>This figure of 4 million appeared in the indictment.  Interestingly
>enough, the Smirnov did not specifically mention the Jews as victims
>at Auschwitz, unlike some of the other camps where the Jews are specifically
>mentioned as victims.  This appears to give further support to the
>explanation that the number came because the Polish and Soviet governments
>wanted to downplay the specific targeting of the Jews by the Nazis, and
>in part did that by exaggerating the number of non-Jewish victims
>(cf. how the Soviet government chose to memorialize Babi Yar).

Someone sent me the following today, and it adds some background
information to the "four million" Soviet figure:

The first is from 'The Jerusalem Report' of Oct. 3, 1991 (p. 29):

        "It is often said that four million people - including 2.5 million
Jews, and large numbers of Catholics and agnostic Communists - died at
Auschwitz. This inflated figure is a propaganda invention of Polish
Communists designed to deny the specificity of the holocaust, according to
Hebrew University historian Yehuda Bauer.

        Citing research by French historian Georges Wellers, himself an
Auschwitz survivor, Bauer places the total at about 1.6 million. Of these,
about 1,350,000 were Jews, of whom 30,000 died of maltreatment, and the
rest by gassing with Zyklon-B. The total number of Poles killed there was
83,000. In addition, 20,000 Gypsies and 11,000 Russians, along with 140,000
inmates considered enemies of the Nazi regime, perished there".

The second, from the 'NEWS WEEKLY,' of May 11, 1991, (p 19):

Auschwitz:  controversy over the numbers
Alfred Cattani

Some time ago, at the monument on the grounds of the former Auschwitz
concentration camp, the memorial tablet dedicated to the victims of this
death factory was removed.

The action was prompted by the results of a study conducted by an official
historians' committee established by Poland's Ministry of Culture.  The
study concluded that the number of Auschwitz victims had not been four
million, as stated on the tablet, but the much smaller figure of about one
million.  A similar conclusion was expressed by Franciszek Piper, head of
the Historical Department at the Auschwitz Museum.

This triggered a controversy in Poland over whether removing the tablet had
been an appropriate action.  The dispute spread to Germany.  Spokesmen for
Jewish communities expressed their indignation, because they regarded the
decision to take down the tablet as a mockery of the victims, and saw the
debate as mere numerical speculation calculated to trivialise Nazi crimes.

It is a delicate matter.  The crimes of Auschwitz were of such magnitude
and such character that any dispute over the exact figures seems an
outrage.  Moreover, a debate such as this one threatens to provide new
ammunition for those revisionists who speak of the "Auschwitz Lie" and, in
order to minimise Nazi atrocities, deny the deliberate destruction of
European Jewry.

The Final Solution, and Auschwitz along with it, will constitute a horrible
trauma for Jewish people for generations to come.  Outsiders should
approach it with utmost respect.  It is almost impossible to discuss the
number of victims without doing emotional damage.  Yet it would be a
mistake simply to remain silent and view the removal of the Auschwitz
tablet merely as an act of overt anti-Semitism.  The question examined by
the Polish historians was posed by Western historians and writers decades
ago, and though their answers varied, they tended in much the same
direction.

In Poland, however, the figure of four million Auschwitz victims - which
was used in the bill of indictment at the Nuremberg Trials - remained taboo
in the post-war era largely for political reasons.  the figure itself was
first mentioned in the report of a Soviet investigatory commission, which
travelled to Auschwitz following the liberation of the camp in early 1945
and issued its report on May 12 of that year.

The Soviet study group, which also examined the organisational and
technical aspects of the death camp, based its figure of four million
mainly on the capacity of the crematoria in Auschwitz and its annexe at
Birkenau (where most of the bodies were burned).  That it should have
arrived at such a figure on the basis of the available information is not
strange.

The American historian, Arno J. Mayer, who is today Professor of
Contemporary European History at Princeton University, reached a similar
conclusion about the destructive capacities of Auschwitz and Birkenau in a
study published as recently as 1988.

Doubts about the four million were expressed as early as the 1950s.  One of
the first critics was the British historian Gerald Reitlinger in his 'The
Final Solution'.  Basing his work on statistics compiled for Hitler in
1943, he suggested that a much greater number of Jews than had previously
been supposed died in the ghettos and in transport, rather than in the
camps themselves.  Overall, he concluded, the Holocaust had destroyed not
six million Jews, as had been stated at the Nuremberg Trials in 1945-46,
but somewhere between 4.2 and 4.9 million.  A third of those, he stated,
had died not through direct murder, but from overwork, illness, starvation
and general distress.

As to Auschwitz, said Reitlinger, whose work did not go undisputed, it was
impossible to make a precise estimate because of the many imponderables
involved.  But the figure provided by the Soviet study group, he
maintained, could not stand up to serious examination.  Venturing an
estimate, however, he concluded that "not much less than a million" died in
Auschwitz and its gas chambers.  Reitlinger's book reflected the state of
knowledge in the mid-1950s.

The American historian Raoul Hillberg, whose major study first appeared in
1961 and was published in a revised edition in 1982, gave a higher figure
than Reitlinger - "more than a million".

According to Hillberg, a total of more than five million Jews fell victim
to the Nazi genocide.  he based his figures on a comparison of Jewish
populations in the various European countries before the war and after
1945.  Hillberg, too, expressed an awareness that these horrific figures
could be no more than approximations.  In September 1989, writing in the
'Jerusalem Post', professor Yehuda Bauer of the Hebrew University and
Georges Wellers of the Jewish Documentation Centre in Paris published
similar figures for Auschwitz (1.7 million dead of whom 1.4 million were
Jews).

The Nazi criminals directly involved in the Final solution deliberately
tried to mask these figures; their writings about the death camps are
unreliable.  Rudolf Hoess, the first commandant of Auschwitz, cited Adolf
Eichmann, who allegedly told him shortly before the war's end that 2.5
million Jews had died in Auschwitz.  During the interrogations immediately
after his arrest in the spring of 1946, Hoess initially used that figure,
stating that 2.5 million had been gassed in the camp and 500,000 more had
died of illness and exhaustion.  But in the course of subsequent
investigations, Hoess changed his story.  In his memoirs, written between
October 1946 and January 1947 in his Cracow prison cell, he penned a
country-by-country list of camp victims (an incomplete list according to
Martin Broszat,  who edited the Hoess memoirs).  He offers a total of
something more than one million - and cynically adds that even in Auschwitz
the potential for destruction had its limits.

It is a depressing undertaking to reduce the Holocaust to abstract
statistics.  Individual suffering tends to disappear behind the
astronomical figures.  In his book, Reitlinger properly notes that no one's
guilt is reduced merely because an estimate of this unimaginable crimes
turns out to have been too high.  Nor could a more precise figure, were one
ever to become available, in any way mitigate the justice of Jewish demands
for guarantees against a repetition of such horror.

=30=

-- 
   /^\__/^\                 The Old Frog's Almanac 
  / @    @ \     A Salute to That Old Frog Himse'f, Ryugen Fisher
 (          )       Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada
  \  ~~~~  /


Article 14966 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: A partial answer for Greg Raven (Auschwitz figures)
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 1994 23:50:12 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 30
Message-ID: 
References: <1994Jul25.020700.2018@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> <1994Aug09.222500.9635@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <1994Aug09.222500.9635@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>,
kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay) wrote:


> It is a depressing undertaking to reduce the Holocaust to abstract
> statistics.  Individual suffering tends to disappear behind the
> astronomical figures.  In his book, Reitlinger properly notes that no one's
> guilt is reduced merely because an estimate of this unimaginable crimes
> turns out to have been too high.  Nor could a more precise figure, were one
> ever to become available, in any way mitigate the justice of Jewish demands
> for guarantees against a repetition of such horror.

I would think that if you were close to one of those "abstract statistics"
of those who lost his life, you might feel differently, but that is a
matter of perception.

What is undeniable is that in history as in other endeavors, the truth is
preferable to the lie. Those who do not wish to become bogged down in the
numbers game over "Holocaust" "victims" should simply come clean on the
matter and move on to something that can be proven/supported with evidence.
This means, if there is no evidence to support a statement that some number
of millions of people died at a certain camp, then do not make the claim in
the first place.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14967 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.moneng.mei.com!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!trane.uninett.no!eunet.no!nuug!EU.net!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Dawidowizc on Irving's fraud: No reply possible
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 1994 23:56:28 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 42
Message-ID: 
References: <326ajs$2r7@agate.berkeley.edu> <326t82$qil@search01.news.aol.com> <1994Aug09.223712.9734@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <1994Aug09.223712.9734@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>,
kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay) wrote:

>  (text deleted)
>    To understand those two lines it is necessary to read also the first
>    two lines of the telephone conversation.  Here is the full German
>    text:
> 
>    Verhaftung Dr. Jekelius [name not fully decipherable]
>    Angebl [ich] Sohn Molotovs.
>    Judentransport aus Berline.
>    keine Liquidierung.<37>
> 
>    That is: Arrest Dr. Jekelius.  Presumably Molotov's son.  Transport
>    of Jews from Berlin. No liquidation.
> 
>    The last two lines now make sense.  Himmler called Heydrich to
>    instruct him that a certain Dr.  Jekelius, presumed to be the Soviet
>    Foreign Minister's son, was to be taken in custody by the security
>    police.  Jekelius could be located in the transport of Jews from
>    Berlin arriving in Prague  and, unlike the
>    rest of the transport, was not to be liquidated.  (Perhaps the
>    Germans intended to exchange Jekelius for one of their officers
>    captured by the Russians.)
> 
>    Irving, wittingly or unwittingly, has in fact disproved his own
>    theory.

I asked David about this when at the last IHR Conference (October 1992),
and he told me that Dawidowicz was wrong. I don't remember Irving's exact
words, but the essense of his reply was that this document, being a
telephone log, is not written in complete sentences. The entries are
contemporaneously-created notes of the different subjects that came up
during the call. Therefore, to run the separate notes together to create
the impression that this was all one topic is misleading.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14968 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!psgrain!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Berg, what evidence do you have?  (#3)
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 1994 23:59:56 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 35
Message-ID: 
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article ,
k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:

> 
> This is the third in a series of questions for Friedrich Berg.
> 
> Mr. Berg has seized upon what he believes to be a contradiction in the
> history of the Holocaust, namely that diesel exhaust gas could not
> possibly have been used to kill people.  Since historians tell us that
> diesel engines were used at the Reinhard extermination camps, says Mr.
> Berg, the historians must be wrong.  The conclusion, according to Mr.
> Berg, is that the Nazis did not kill anyone with poison gas at the
> Reinhard camps, nor anywhere else.  He is the leading expert, in the
> Holocaust-denier camp, on the subject of diesel extermination chambers.

I will allow Mr. Berg to reply to the rest of this post, but you are
misleading when you say that historians tell us that diesel engines were
used at the Operation Reinhard extermination camps. First, they were not
extermination camps, and I defy you to produce any contemporaneous German
official documentation that refers to them as such.

Second, and more importantly, to say that historians make this claim is to
imply that a study has been done of this matter, such that the documents
and physical evidence has lead them to this conclusion. I think that if you
look into this matter, you will find that the "historians" to which you
refer are actually basing their "conclusions" on the very shakey testimony
of so-called witnesses, testimony that, as I have pointed out in earlier
posts, is filled with other erroneous and/or unbelieveable statements.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14969 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!trane.uninett.no!eunet.no!nuug!EU.net!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Interrogation of Reinhard Wachman (2)
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 00:05:36 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 33
Message-ID: 
References: <1994Aug12.013640.23491@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <1994Aug12.013640.23491@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>,
kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay) wrote:

> Archive/File: holocaust/poland/reinhard/treblinka yeger.002
> Last-Modified: 1994/08/10
> 
> EXCERPT from Stenographic Report of Interrogation of defendant YEGER',
> A.I., dated April 2, 1948.
> 
> (text deleted)
> 
> Question: What did the Treblinka death camp look like?
> 
> Answer: The Treblinka death camp was situated on an area of about 15
> hectares, which was fenced in on all sides by barbed wire and
> anti-tank obstacles also entwined with barbed wire. Pine branches were
> interwoven with the barbed wire. The camp was shaped like a quadrangle
> and four watchtowers stood at each corner.
> (text deleted)

Oh, boy. More Soviet-supplied "proof." I suppose one could go through this
line by line, but the simple fact that the section of Treblinka now
referred to as the "death camp" was not rectilinear at all should pretty
much handle this "testimony." The Volume 12 number 2 issue of the Journal
of Historical Review shows not only the true lay-out of this camp, but also
Allied aerial photos that clearly show it not to be rectilinear.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14970 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!psgrain!library.ucla.edu!agate!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!fnnews.fnal.gov!nntp-server.caltech.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 00:13:14 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 40
Message-ID: 
References:  <3220rd$29s@search01.news.aol.com> <1994Aug08.030837.22458@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> <32g8lc$2mb@csi0.csi.UOttawa.CA> <32grsi$68h@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <32grsi$68h@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
wrote:

> Mark, in partial response to your question, the answer IMHO is very 
> simple - nobody's perfect.
> 
> It was impossible to destroy all traces of the Nazi genocide. Even
> more so when Germany was taking a horrible beating on all fronts and
> subject to devastating bombing raids.
> 
> The SS did not succeed to kill *all* the internees; it did not succeed
> to destroy *all* the documents; it did not succeed to burn *all* the
> corpses; it did not succeed to destroy *all* the murder machinery.
> 

This is an extremely misleading response. Apparently, the Nazis were able
to destroy all traces of the so-called gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau.
There are no authentic documents, buildings, etc. there for researchers to
examine. About the closest there is is a "reconstructed" gas chamber, for
which there are no original plans to show why it was "reconstructed" in its
current manner.

In fact, there are no documents anywhere showing evidence of a homicidal
gas chamber. This means that not only are there no German documents, but
there are also no Allied documents of code intercepts, stolen plans, etc.

Furthermore, to say that the Germans had time to destroy so-called gas
chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau but not at Dachau, where, we are told, there
are false shower heads (!), is to ask us to believe the incredible. Any
reasonable person would realize that false shower heads are pretty strong
evidence that something strange was going on, but you claim the Germans did
nothing to destroy the other so-called gas chambers. This argument serves
neither logic nor history.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14971 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!trane.uninett.no!eunet.no!nuug!EU.net!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 00:19:38 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 38
Message-ID: 
References:  <3220rd$29s@search01.news.aol.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article , bzs@world.std.com (Barry
Shein) wrote:

> 
> Something I'm becoming more curious about and will keep an eye out for
> material on are smaller concentration and death camps.
> 
> (text deleted)
> 
> So on the surface it seems to lead to a dead-end. However, it is only
> a dead-end if we accept that the only camps were those major camps
> Yahil puts on the map.
> 
> (text deleted)

The exterminationists seem to want it both ways. They want a grand Nazi
plan to exterminate the Jews in a few purpose-built camps in the eastern
territories,  but they alternatively want there to be "mini" gas chambers
all over Europe. The first claim arose out of early studies that showed
that those camps accessible to western allies had no gas chambers. This
made it necessary to "move" all the gassings to the camps in the east,
which were controlled (and used) by the Soviets after the war. Now that
revisionists have shown conclusively that the "evidence" supporting the
existence of the eastern gas chambers is invalid, exterminationists now
seem to pine for the old days, when there were hundreds of gas chambers.

Still, there is no proof of ANY of these gas chambers ... not a one. It is
almost as if, in response to criticism about its "lone gunman" theory,
people close to the Warren Commission start letting it be know that there
might actually have been a couple of dozen gunmen scattered around, all
shooting in unison.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14972 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Shrunken Heads and Archaeological Fakes
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 00:32:54 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 302
Message-ID: 
References: <32kj5l$688@search01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <32kj5l$688@search01.news.aol.com>, wolfrune1@aol.com
(WolfRune1) wrote:

> (text deleted)
> 
> Still no one answered my question. What I am looking for is a list of
> recent books by either Holocaust Historians or Historical Revisionists
> that discuss the myth of human soap, and or human skin gloves, books, lamp
> shades and shrunken heads supposedly made by nazis. 
> 
> I hope this is clear enough for everyone.

"Jewish Soap"

One of the most lurid and slanderous Holocaust claims is the story that the
Germans manufactured soap from the bodies of their victims. Although a
similar charge during the First World War was exposed as a hoax almost
immediately afterwards, it was nevertheless revived and widely believed
during the Second. More important, this accusation was "proved" at the main
Nuremberg trial of 1945-1946, and has been authoritatively endorsed by
numerous historians in the decades since. In recent years, though, as part
of a broad retreat from the most obviously untenable aspects of the
"orthodox" extermination story, Holocaust historians have grudgingly
conceded that the human soap tale is a wartime propaganda lie. In their
retreat, though, these historians have tried to dismiss the soap story as a
mere wartime "rumor," neglecting to mention that international Jewish
organizations and then Allied governments endorsed and sanctioned this
libelous canard.

Wartime rumors that the Germans were manufacturing soap from the corpses of
slaughtered Jews were based in part on the fact that soap bars distributed
by German authorities in Jewish ghettos and camps bore the impressed
initials "RIF," which many took to stand for "Rein jdisches Fett" or "Pure
Jewish Fat." (It did not seem to matter that the letters were "RIF" and not
"RJF.") These rumors spread so widely in 1941 and 1942 that by late 1942
German authorities in Poland and Slovakia were expressing official concern
about their impact.

According to a Polish source quoted in a secret wartime U.S. Army military
intelligence report, for example, the Germans were operating a "human soap
factory" in 1941 at Turek, Poland. "The Germans had brought thousands of
Polish teachers, priests and Jews there and after extracting the blood
serum from their bodies, had thrown them on large pots and melted off
grease to make soap," the intelligence report added.

Macabre "Jewish soap" jokes became popular in the ghettos and camps, and
many non-Jews on the outside came to believe the story. When trains loaded
with Jewish deportees stopped temporarily at rail stations, Poles
reportedly would gleefully shout at them: "Jews to soap!" Even British
prisoners of war interned at Auschwitz in 1944 testified later about the
wartime rumors that corpses of gassing victims were being turned into soap
there.

In spite of its inherently incredible character, the soap story became an
important feature of Jewish and Allied war propaganda. Rabbi Stephen S.
Wise, wartime head of both the World Jewish Congress and the American
Jewish Congress, publicly charged in November 1942 that Jewish corpses were
being "processed into such war-vital commodities as soap, fats and
fertilizer" by the Germans. He further announced that the Germans were
"even exhuming the dead for the value of the corpses," and were paying
fifty marks for each body.

In late 1942, the Congress Weekly, published by the American Jewish
Congress, editorialized that the Germans were turning Jews "by scientific
methods of dissolution into fertilizer, soap and glue." An article in the
same issue reported that Jewish deportees from France and Holland were
being processed into "soap, glue and train oil" in at least two special
factories in Germany. Typical of many other American periodicals, the
influential New Republic reported in early 1943 that the Germans were
"using the bodies of their Jewish victims to make soap and fertilizer in a
factory at Siedlce."

During June and July 1943, two prominent representatives of the
Moscow-based "Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee" toured the United States and
raised more than two million dollars for the Soviet war effort at a series
of mass meetings. At each of these rallies, Soviet Jewish leader Solomon
Mikhoels showed the crowd a bar of soap that he said was made from Jewish
corpses.

After the war the soap story was given important legitimacy at the main
Nuremberg trial. L. N. Smirnov, Chief Counsellor of Justice for the USSR,
declared to the Tribunal:

...The same base, rationalized SS technical minds which created gas
chambers and murder vans, began devising such methods of complete
annihilation of human bodies, which would not only conceal the traces of
their crimes, but also to serve in the manufacturing of certain products.
In the Danzig Anatomical Institute, semi-industrial experiments in the
production of soap from human bodies and the tanning of human skin for
industrial purposes were carried out.

Smirnov quoted at length from an affidavit by Sigmund Mazur, an Institute
employee, which was accepted as Nuremberg exhibit USSR-197. It alleged that
Dr. Rudolf Spanner, the head of the Danzig Institute, had ordered the
production of soap from corpses in 1943. According to Mazur's affidavit,
Dr. Spanner's operation was of interest to high-ranking German officials.
Education Minister Bernhard Rust and Health Leader Dr. Leonardo Conti, as
well as professors from other medical institutes, came to witness Spanner's
efforts. Mazur also claimed to have used the "human soap" to wash himself
and his laundry.

A human soap "recipe," allegedly prepared by Dr. Spanner (Nuremberg
document USSR-196), was also presented. Finally, a sample of what was
supposed to be a piece of "human soap" was submitted to the Nuremberg
Tribunal as exhibit USSR-393.

In his closing address to the Tribunal, chief British prosecutor Sir
Hartley Shawcross echoed his Soviet colleague: "On occasion, even the
bodies of their victims were used to make good the wartime shortage of
soap." And in their final judgment, the Nuremberg Tribunal judges found
that "attempts were made to utilize the fat from the bodies of the victims
in the commercial manufacture of soap."

It is worth emphasizing here that the "evidence" presented at the Nuremberg
Tribunal for the bogus soap story was no less substantial than the
"evidence" presented for the claims of mass extermination in "gas
chambers." At least in the former case, an actual sample of soap supposedly
made from corpses was submitted in evidence.

After the war, supposed Holocaust victims were solemnly buried, in the form
of soap bars, in Jewish cemeteries. In 1948, for example, four such bars
wrapped in a funeral shroud were ceremoniously buried according to Jewish
religious ritual at the Haifa cemetery in Israel. Other bars of "Jewish
soap" have been displayed as grim Holocaust relics at the Jewish Historical
Institute in Warsaw, the Stutthof Museum near Gdansk (Danzig), the Yivo
Institute in New York, the Holocaust Museum in Philadelphia, the Jewish
Holocaust Centre in Melbourne (Australia), and at various locations in
Israel.

Numerous Jews who lived in German ghettos and camps during the war helped
keep the soap story alive many years later. Ben Edelbaum, for example,
wrote in his 1980 memoir Growing Up in the Holocaust:

Often with our rations in the ghettos, the Germans had included a bar of
soap branded with initials R.J.F. which came to be known as "Rif" soap. It
wasn't until the war had ended that we learned the horrible truth about the
bar of soap. Had we known in the ghetto, every bar of "Rif" soap would have
been accorded a sacred Jewish funeral in the cemetery at Marysin. As it
was, we were completely oblivious to its origin and used the bones and
flesh of our murdered loved ones to wash our bodies.

Nesse Godin was transferred from a ghetto in Lithuania to the Stutthof
concentration camp in the spring of 1944. In a 1983 interview, she recalled
her arrival there:

That day they gave us a shower and a piece of soap. After the war we found
out the soap was made out of pure Jew fat, Rein Juden Fett, marked in the
initials on the soap that I washed with. For all I know sometimes maybe
there was a little bit of my father's fat in that soap that I washed with.
How do you think I feel when I think about that?

Mel Mermelstein, the former Auschwitz inmate who was featured in the
sensationalized April 1991 cable television movie "Never Forget" (and who
is currently suing the Institute for Historical Review and three other
defendants for $11 million), declared in a 1981 sworn deposition that he
and other camp inmates used soap bars made from human fat. It was an
"established fact," he insisted, that the soap he washed with was made from
Jewish bodies.

Renowned "Nazi hunter" Simon Wiesenthal repeated the soap tale in a series
of articles published in 1946 in the Austrian Jewish community paper Der
Neue Weg. In the first of these he wrote:

During the last weeks of March the Romanian press reported an unusual piece
of news: In the small Romanian city of Folticeni twenty boxes of soap were
buried in the Jewish cemetery with full ceremony and complete funeral
rites. This soap had been found recently in a former German army depot. On
the boxes were the initials RIF, "Pure Jewish Fat." These boxes were
destined for the Waffen-SS. The wrapping paper revealed with completely
cynical objectivity that this soap was manufactured from Jewish bodies.
Surprisingly, the thorough Germans forgot to describe whether the soap was
produced from children, girls, men or elderly persons.

Wiesenthal went on:

After 1942 people in the General Government [Poland] knew quite well what
the RIF soap meant. The civilized world may not believe the joy with which
the Nazis and their women in the General Government thought of this soap.
In each piece of soap they saw a Jew who had been magically put there, and
had thus been prevented from growing into a second Freud, Ehrlich or
Einstein.

In another article he observed: "The production of soap from human fat is
so unbelievable that even some who were in concentration camps find it
difficult to comprehend."

Over the years, numerous supposedly reputable historians have promoted the
durable soap story. Journalist-historian William L. Shirer, for example,
repeated it in his best-selling work, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.

Leading Soviet war propagandist Ilya Ehrenburg wrote in his postwar memoir:
"I have held in my hand a cake of soap stamped with the legend 'pure Jewish
soap', prepared from the corpses of people who had been destroyed. But
there is no need to speak of these things: thousands of books have been
written about them."

A standard history studies textbook used in Canadian secondary schools,
Canada: The Twentieth Century, told students that the Germans "boiled" the
corpses of their Jewish victims "to make soap." The Anatomy of Nazism, a
booklet published and distributed by the Zionist "Anti-Defamation League"
of B'nai B'rith, stated: "The process of brutalization did not end with the
mass murders themselves. Large quantities of soap were manufactured from
the corpses of those murdered."

A detailed 1981 work, Hitler's Death Camps, repeated the soap story in
lurid detail. While noting that "some historians claim that the Nazi
manufacture of soap from human fat is just a grim rumor," author Konnilyn
Feig nevertheless accepted the story because "most East European camp
scholars...validate the soap stories, and other kinds of bars made from
humans are displayed in Eastern Europe -- I have seen many over the years."

New York Rabbi Arthur Schneier repeated the tale at the opening ceremony of
the largest Holocaust meeting in history. In his invocation to the
"American Gathering of Jewish Holocaust Survivors," held in Washington in
April 1983, the Rabbi solemnly declared: "We remember the bars of soap with
the initials RJF -- Rein jdisches Fett, Pure Jewish Fat -- made from the
bodies of our loved ones."

In spite of all the apparently impressive evidence, the charge that the
Germans manufactured soap from human beings is a falsehood, as Holocaust
historians are now belatedly acknowledging. The "RIF" soap bar initials
that supposedly stood for "Pure Jewish Fat" actually indicated nothing more
sinister than "Reich Center for Industrial Fat Provisioning" ("Reichsstelle
fr Industrielle Fettversorgung"), a German agency responsible for wartime
production and distribution of soap and washing products. RIF soap was a
poor quality substitute that contained no fat at all, human or otherwise.

Shortly after the war the public prosecutor's office of Flensburg, Germany,
began legal proceedings against Dr. Rudolf Spanner for his alleged role in
producing human soap at the Danzig Institute. But after an investigation
the charge was quietly dropped. In a January 1968 letter, the office stated
that its inquiry had determined that no soap from human corpses was made at
the Danzig Institute during the war.

More recently, Jewish historian Walter Laqueur "denied established history"
by acknowledging in his 1980 book, The Terrible Secret, that the human soap
story has no basis in reality. Gitta Sereny, another Jewish historian,

noted in her book Into That Darkness: "The universally accepted story that
the corpses were used to make soap and fertilizer is finally refuted by the
generally very reliable Ludwigsburg Central Authority for Investigation
into Nazi Crimes."

Deborah Lipstadt, a professor of modern Jewish history, similarly "rewrote
history" when she confirmed in 1981: "The fact is that the Nazis never used
the bodies of Jews, or for that matter anyone else, for the production of
soap."

In April 1990, professor Yehuda Bauer of Israel's Hebrew University,
regarded as a leading Holocaust historian, as well as Shmuel Krakowski,
archives director of Israel's Yad Vashem Holocaust center, confirmed that
the human soap story is not true. Camp inmates "were prepared to believe
any horror stories about their persecutors," Bauer said. At the same time,
though, he had the chutzpah to blame the legend on "the Nazis."

In fact, blame for the soap story lies rather with individuals such as
Simon Wiesenthal and Stephen Wise, organizations like the World Jewish
Congress, and the victorious Allied powers, none of whom has ever
apologized for promoting this vile falsehood.

Why did Bauer and Krakowski decide that this was the appropriate time to
officially abandon the soap story? Krakowski himself hints that a large
part of the motivation for this "tactical retreat" has been to save what's
left of the sinking Holocaust ship by throwing overboard the most obvious
falsehoods. In the face of the growing Revisionist challenge, easily
demonstrable falsehoods like the soap story have become dangerous
embarrassments because they raise doubts about the entire Holocaust legend.
As Krakowski put it: "Historians have concluded that soap was not made from
human fat. When so many people deny the Holocaust ever happened, why give
them something to use against the truth?"

The bad faith of those making this calculated and belated concession to
truth is shown by their failure to note that the soap myth was
authoritatively "confirmed" at Nuremberg, and by their unwillingness to
deal with the implications of that confirmation for the credibility of the
Tribunal and other supposedly trustworthy authorities in establishing
other, more fundemental aspects of the Holocaust story.

The striking contrast between the prompt postwar disavowal by the British
government of the infamous "human soap" lie of the First World War, and the
way in which a similarly baseless propaganda story from the Second World
War was officially endorsed by the victorious Allied powers and then
authoritatively maintained for so many years not only points up the
dispiriting lack of integrity on the part of so many Western historians,
but underscores the general decline in Western ethical standards during
this century.

The "human soap" story demonstrates anew the tremendous impact that a
wartime rumor, no matter how fantastic, can have once it has taken hold,
particularly when it is disseminated as a propaganda lie by influential
individuals and powerful organizations. That so many intelligent and
otherwise thoughtful people could ever have seriously believed that the
Germans distributed bars of soap brazenly labeled with letters indicating
that they were manufactured from Jewish corpses shows how readily even the
most absurd Holocaust fables can be -- and are -- accepted as fact.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14976 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access3.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: The "revisionist" war of attrition
Date: 15 Aug 1994 21:07:26 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <32p3ge$k8d@access3.digex.net>
References:    <32ojai$8fi@cat.cis.brown.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: access3.digex.net

In article <32ojai$8fi@cat.cis.brown.edu>,
Danny Keren  wrote:
>It seems more and more that Jamie McCarthy and Ken McVay were right;
>the "revisionist scholars" are launching a war of attrition. Raven
>thinks that if he repeats his lies again and again and again, people
>will tire of responding to them.

    Of course, thanks to the magic of computer technology, the more he
lies, the *easier* it becomes to respond, as all of his unexplained, um,
"inaccuracies" can be posted as often as needed to demonstrate just how
credible a "scholar" our Mr. Raven is.  By default, people are assumed to
be telling the truth.  However, once they start uttering proven falsehoods
on a regular basis, the burden of proof *does* get reversed.  I'd say
given his proven distortions of Lipstadt and Pressac, about now the burden
is on Greg Raven to document everything he says with exact quotes and page
numbers from reputable sources - any paraphrase or any citation without a
page number from him should be *assumed* fraudulent until proven
otherwise.

-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 14978 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.kei.com!ddsw1!golux.pr.mcs.net!user
From: golux@mcs.com (The only Golux in the World, and not a mere Device)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Shrunken Heads and Archaeological Fakes
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 21:35:04 -0600
Organization: MCSNet Services
Lines: 77
Message-ID: 
References: <32kj5l$688@search01.news.aol.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: golux.pr.mcs.net

In article , greg.ihr@kaiwan.com
(Greg Raven) wrote:

> In article <32kj5l$688@search01.news.aol.com>, wolfrune1@aol.com
> (WolfRune1) wrote:
> 
> > (text deleted)
> > 
> > Still no one answered my question. What I am looking for is a list of
> > recent books by either Holocaust Historians or Historical Revisionists
> > that discuss the myth of human soap, and or human skin gloves, books, lamp
> > shades and shrunken heads supposedly made by nazis. 
> > 
> > I hope this is clear enough for everyone.
> 
> "Jewish Soap"
[Much of old, nonresponsive article deleted.  Greg, why not write something
new?  This one had a reference to an ongoing Mermelstein lawsuit....]

> Shortly after the war the public prosecutor's office of Flensburg, Germany,
> began legal proceedings against Dr. Rudolf Spanner for his alleged role in
> producing human soap at the Danzig Institute. But after an investigation
> the charge was quietly dropped. In a January 1968 letter, the office stated
> that its inquiry had determined that no soap from human corpses was made at
> the Danzig Institute during the war.
> 
> More recently, Jewish historian Walter Laqueur "denied established history"
> by acknowledging in his 1980 book, The Terrible Secret, that the human soap
> story has no basis in reality. Gitta Sereny, another Jewish historian,
> 
> noted in her book Into That Darkness: "The universally accepted story that
> the corpses were used to make soap and fertilizer is finally refuted by the
> generally very reliable Ludwigsburg Central Authority for Investigation
> into Nazi Crimes."
> 
> Deborah Lipstadt, a professor of modern Jewish history, similarly "rewrote
> history" when she confirmed in 1981: "The fact is that the Nazis never used
> the bodies of Jews, or for that matter anyone else, for the production of
> soap."
> 
> In April 1990, professor Yehuda Bauer of Israel's Hebrew University,
> regarded as a leading Holocaust historian, as well as Shmuel Krakowski,
> archives director of Israel's Yad Vashem Holocaust center, confirmed that
> the human soap story is not true. Camp inmates "were prepared to believe
> any horror stories about their persecutors," Bauer said. At the same time,
> though, he had the chutzpah to blame the legend on "the Nazis."
> 
> In fact, blame for the soap story lies rather with individuals such as
> Simon Wiesenthal and Stephen Wise, organizations like the World Jewish
> Congress, and the victorious Allied powers, none of whom has ever
> apologized for promoting this vile falsehood.
> 
> Why did Bauer and Krakowski decide that this was the appropriate time to
> officially abandon the soap story? Krakowski himself hints that a large
> part of the motivation for this "tactical retreat" has been to save what's
> left of the sinking Holocaust ship by throwing overboard the most obvious
> falsehoods. In the face of the growing Revisionist challenge, easily
> demonstrable falsehoods like the soap story have become dangerous
> embarrassments because they raise doubts about the entire Holocaust legend.
> As Krakowski put it: "Historians have concluded that soap was not made from
> human fat. When so many people deny the Holocaust ever happened, why give
> them something to use against the truth?"

And yet, all the refutation Greg cites came from what he would call
"exterminationist" sources.  Nobody in the denier camps has ever managed to
disprove this "easily demonstrable falsehood."  Why is that?  Given your
apparent refusal to accept at face value *any* statement by
"exterminationist" sources, Greg, I would expect you to challenge Laqueur,
Sereny, Lipstadt, Bauer and Krakowski to *prove* their retraction of the
soap story.  Or do you accept their words when they say something you like,
and disagree only when you don't like what they say?

-- 
D. J. Schaeffer |       The Todal looks like a blob of glup.
golux@mcs.com   |     It makes a sound like rabbits screaming,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^        and smells of old, unopened rooms.
                            -- Thurber, _The 13 Clocks_


Article 14979 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.duke.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!emory!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Dawidowicz on Irving's fraud
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 20:42:03 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 18
Message-ID: 
References: <326ajs$2r7@agate.berkeley.edu> <326t82$qil@search01.news.aol.com> <1994Aug09.223712.9734@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>  <32nrsc$5oo@agate.berkeley.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <32nrsc$5oo@agate.berkeley.edu>, schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu
(Richard Schultz) wrote:

> (text deleted)
> By the way, I am still waiting for Mr. Raven to produce his one best 
> piece of evidence that World War II occurred.
> 
> 					Richard Schultz

I would be happy to, just as soon as I finish with the discussion in which
I have stated an interest. For now, this is off-topic.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14980 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.duke.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!emory!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: A partial answer for Greg Raven (Auschwitz figures)
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 20:44:58 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 33
Message-ID: 
References: <1994Jul25.020700.2018@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article ,
k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:

> greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:
> 
> > Those who do not wish to become bogged down in the
> > numbers game over "Holocaust" "victims" should simply come clean on the
> > matter and move on to something that can be proven/supported with evidence.
> 
> Evidence...you mean like the ten documents we provided for you over three
> months ago, each of which demonstrates the reality of the Holocaust,
> none of which you have yet addressed?
> -- 
>  Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
>  I speak for no one but myself.

Yes, ten, when I asked for one or two. And when I asked (about each
document I saw) whether this was the best evidence, I never received a
response in the affirmative. As soon as you and others make up your minds
about what you yourselves consider to be the best evidence, we can continue
the discussion. It's only been about four months since I first stated my
desire to discuss the evidence, one piece at a time. If, as is commonly
stated, there exists a mountain of evidence to support claims that the
Nazis had a plan or policy to exterminate Jews in gas chambers, then
certainly it should take less than four months to present either the
evidence or a reference to same.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14981 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 20:48:33 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 24
Message-ID: 
References:  
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article ,
k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:

> ...ah, what's the use.  You could dump a truckload of documents in these
> guys laps, show them confessions and testimonies and interviews and
> court transcripts, and there would never be enough "proof" for them.

I am not asking for a truckload of documents. In fact, I am asking for one,
or two if you absolutely must. However, I would prefer one, as it makes the
ensuing discussion much more manageable.

By the way, thank you for admitting that there is no direct evidence of the
existence of the gas chambers. This points up my argument that the
so-called Holocaust gas chambers are unique in that their existence can
only be shown through testimonies, interviews, "confessions," etc.
Virtually every other event in western history is accompanied by actual
tangible, contemporaneous evidence.
 
-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14982 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 20:55:02 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 30
Message-ID: 
References:  <3220rd$29s@search01.news.aol.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article , bzs@world.std.com (Barry
Shein) wrote:
> (text deleted)
> Apparently the Nazis, specifically Himmler, were worried about losing
> Poland and thus having evidence of this mass murder in the hands of
> whoever pushed them out, probably the Soviets.
> 
> Would they exhibit the same concern regarding locations in the
> Altreich?
> 
> Apparently not. And does this make sense? I think so, if the Allies
> were in Munich there really wouldn't be much point in hiding anything,
> the game was over.

Let me get this straight: The Nazis destroyed the functioning gas chambers,
that is, the ones that were killing the Jews they had been ordered from on
high to kill, but they left intact gas chambers that had never been used,
even though there was a policy of exterminating all Jews?

This is incredible on the face of it. But if by some stretch of the
imagination it is correct, then are you saying that the other gas chambers
in the Soviet over-run territories were similarly destroyed, or is there
yet another special case for them?

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14983 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 20:58:33 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 63
Message-ID: 
References:  <32g8lc$2mb@csi0.csi.UOttawa.CA> <32grsi$68h@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  <32offf$irl@access1.digex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <32offf$irl@access1.digex.net>, mstein@access1.digex.net
(Michael P. Stein) wrote:
> (text deleted)
>     Quite a breathtaking statement from Greg Raven, master of misleading
> paraphrases.  Care to discuss p. 181 of Pressac yet, where your distortion
> of Pressac's text makes your blatant distortion of the Vanity Fair article
> look like a minor misunderstanding by comparison?

Here again is the text of the Vanity Fair article in question. Where have I
misrepresented it? I think you will find that your source (Jamie McCarthy?)
is the one who did the misrepresentation:

Whose History Is It?
Christopher Hitchens
Vanity Fair, December 1993
pages 110-118

(page 117)
... The revisionists sent me an article by a Frenchman named Robert
Faurisson, which claimed that Rudolf Hoess, one of the commandants of
Auschwitz, had been tortured by the British into confessing to a fantastic
and unbelievable number of murders. RI declare herewith under oath that in
the years 1941 to 1943, during my tenure in office as commandant of
Auschwitz Concentration Camp, 2 million Jews were put to death by gassing
and 1/2 million by other means.S This statement, specially mounted and
reproduced, is an important exhibit at the Holocaust Memorial.

I then got in touch with Lipstadt and Browning for their responses, which
were surprising: RHoess was always a very weak and confused witness,S said
Browning, who has been an expert witness at trials involving Auschwitz.
RThe revisionists use him all the time for this reason, in order to try and
discredit the memory of Auschwitz as a whole.S And Professor Lipstadt
directed me to page 188 of her book, which is quite a page. It says that
the stories about the Nazis making Jews into soap are entirely untrue, and
it also says that while the memorial stone at Auschwitz itself lists the
number of victims -- Jews and non-Jews -- at 4 million, the truer figure is
somewhere between 1.5 and 2 million. Since Hoess was the commandant of the
place for only part of its existence, this means that -- according to the
counter-revisionists -- an important piece of evidence in the Holocaust
Memorial is not reliable. A vertiginous sensation if you like.

RItUs the same with the soap story,S said Lipstadt. RI get protests from
survivors, saying that I shouldnUt admit itUs not true, because it gives
ammunition to the enemy. But IUm only interested in getting at the truth.S
An old-fashioned concept.

> (text deleted)
>     What about the Franke-Gricksch report?  So far Fritz Berg's best
> evidence that it's a fake seems to be that the person who found it - an
> American, by the way, not a Russian - has a last name which *might* be 
> Jewish.  Is that your best evidence as well?

Please tell me that you feel the Franke-Gricksch Report is your idea of the
best evidence that the Nazis had a plan to exterminate Jews in gas
chambers. Please! I love talking about the F-G Report, as anyone who
followed my GEnie debate on this topic a couple of years ago can tell you.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14984 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 21:02:51 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 31
Message-ID: 
References:  <3220rd$29s@search01.news.aol.com>   <32ojai$8fi@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <32ojai$8fi@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
wrote:

> It seems more and more that Jamie McCarthy and Ken McVay were right;
> the "revisionist scholars" are launching a war of attrition. Raven
> thinks that if he repeats his lies again and again and again, people
> will tire of responding to them.
> 
> There were gas chambers in the "old Reich", both in the Euthanasia
> institutions and in some of the concentration camps. I posted a summary
> published by the German "Institute for Contemporary History" about
> them. It is true that many more people were gassed in the massive
> death camps in the East than in the "old reich".

So, then, you are contending that the euthanasia program was actually a
Nazi plan to exterminate Jews in homicidal gas chambers? That is the topic
at hand, after all, so for you to mention this must mean that you think it
has some value. Are you now saying that the Nazi euthanasia program was
part of the Nazi plan to exterminate Jews in homicidal gas chambers? 

If you choose to respond to this, and you choose to cite documents, please
be careful to include the actual source of the citation. I had no luck
whatsoever locating the last two pieces of so-called evidence you claimed
to have ... they simply did not exist in the sources to which you referred.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14985 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 21:06:00 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 24
Message-ID: 
References:  <32g8lc$2mb@csi0.csi.UOttawa.CA> <32grsi$68h@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  <32ojp7$8nm@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <32ojp7$8nm@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
wrote:

> Greg Raven  wrote:
> 
> # There are no authentic documents, buildings, etc. there for researchers to
> # examine. About the closest there is is a "reconstructed" gas chamber, for
> # which there are no original plans to show why it was "reconstructed" in its
> # current manner.
> 
> This is not true, as documents like that are posted here all the time.
> In addition, there are testimonies.

You know of an original plan for a gas chamber in the krema of Auschwitz I?
Please either produce it, or tell me what your source is so I can look for
myself. Even the Auschwitz Museum does not have such a document, and it has
never appeared in any of Pressac's works, either.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14987 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.duke.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: More Raven waffling
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 21:07:53 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 57
Message-ID: 
References:  
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article ,
k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:

> greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:
> 
> > dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) wrote:
> > 
> > > Mark, in partial response to your question, the answer IMHO is very 
> > > simple - nobody's perfect.
> > > 
> > > It was impossible to destroy all traces of the Nazi genocide. Even
> > > more so when Germany was taking a horrible beating on all fronts and
> > > subject to devastating bombing raids.
> > 
> > This is an extremely misleading response. Apparently, the Nazis were able
> > to destroy all traces of the so-called gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau.
> > There are no authentic documents, buildings, etc. there for researchers to
> > examine. About the closest there is is a "reconstructed" gas chamber, for
> > which there are no original plans to show why it was "reconstructed" in its
> > current manner.
> 
> Interesting admission, Mr. Raven.
> 
> We can deal with the truth or falsity of this statement later.
> 
> But until then, it sure looks like you've just said that the so-called
> "Leuchter Report" is totally invalid.  After all, what would be the
> usefulness of taking forensic samples of the walls of a _reconstruction_
> of a gas chamber?  What could we possibly learn from having them
> analyzed?
> 
> Do I misunderstand, Mr. Raven?  Or have you, in your above paragraph,
> jettisoned one of the revisionists' major claims?

Fred Leuchter simply wanted to cover all the bases. If he had not taken
samples for analyzation, what would his critics have said then?

But, typically, your statement misses the points. The points are 1) there
is no evidence that the room now presented to tourists as a gas chamber at
the Stammlager was ever a gas chamber, 2) there are no documents to support
the "reconstruction" undertaken after the war (that is, how could it have
been "returned" to some previous condition without some indication of what
that condition was?), and 3) even in its current, "reconstructed" state, it
could not have functioned as a homicidal gas chamber. As Fred Leuchter
himself has stated, the tests for traces of Zyklon B usage are only maybe
10 percent of argument against this room (and others) having been used as a
homicidal gas chamber.

However, you seem to be agreeing that the so-called gas chamber now shown
to tourists is a reconstruction. Is that truly your position?

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14988 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Interrogation of Reinhard Wachman (2)
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 21:16:02 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 35
Message-ID: 
References: <1994Aug12.013640.23491@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>  <32ol5e$9ta@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <32ol5e$9ta@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
wrote:

> Greg Raven  wrote:
> 
> # I suppose one could go through this
> # line by line, but the simple fact that the section of Treblinka now
> # referred to as the "death camp" was not rectilinear at all should pretty
> # much handle this "testimony." 
> 
> Wasn't the ex-guard talking about the complete camp? In Arad's
> book it seems like a rectangle with watchtowers at the corners,
> like he decribed it.

Arad is wrong about the shape of the camp, as he is about many other
things.

> 
> # The Volume 12 number 2 issue of the Journal
> # of Historical Review shows not only the true lay-out of this camp, but also
> # Allied aerial photos that clearly show it not to be rectilinear.
>  
> When were these photos taken? Any chance we'll hear an answer to this
> simple question?
> 
> When were these photos taken?

These photos were taken September 1944, according to the National Archives.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14989 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Shrunken Heads and Archaeological Fakes
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 21:20:45 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 11
Message-ID: 
References: <32kj5l$688@search01.news.aol.com>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

Are you saying that you believe the "human soap" stories? Are you saying
that it is possible to prove a negative? Are you saying that should I chose
to ask Deborah Lipstadt about her statement that these stories were looked
into and then discounted, that she would answer me? Are you serious?

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 14990 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!emory!swrinde!pipex!sunic!trane.uninett.no!eunet.no!nuug!EU.net!uunet!world!bzs
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Mon, 15 Aug 1994 20:55:02 -0800
Message-ID: 
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Organization: The World
References:  <3220rd$29s@search01.news.aol.com>
	
	
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 1994 04:48:09 GMT
Lines: 85


From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
>Let me get this straight:

It feels to me like you are completely incapable of getting anything
straight. And I mean that with the utmost sincerity. I taught college
for over a decade and never have I ran into this kind of willful
bone-headed obstinancy even from the most nihilistic, surly
adolescent. It's incredible, it really is.

>The Nazis destroyed the functioning gas chambers,
>that is, the ones that were killing the Jews they had been ordered from on
>high to kill, but they left intact gas chambers that had never been used,
>even though there was a policy of exterminating all Jews?

Yes, exactly, WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM WITH THAT?

On retreat (or anticipating a retreat) from Poland they destroyed
evidence, probably in the hope that they could broker peace for a Nazi
Germany. They didn't succeed in destroying every last bit of it, and
what they didn't destroy remains as part of the evidence.

They weren't *retreating* from Munich anymore (the general location of
Dachau), they were *defeated* at that point, there was no where to
retreat to. What is the point of cleaning up the evidence? There was
hardly anyone or any organization left to organize any such clean-up
by the time this became inevitable and, I suspect, the Nazis in high
command had other things on their minds by spring 1945, those that had
a mind left.

Even Auschwitz wasn't fully dismantled until January 1945. The war
ended in April 1945, only several weeks later.

I fail to see where you are having so much trouble with
this. Particularly when all you have to say is that you find it
implausible. Implausible?  SO WHAT? I find it implausible that the
Japanese allied themselves with the Germans in a war against much of
the rest of the world. Does that mean it didn't happen? If I find that
implausible perhaps that's just an indication of my own lack of
understanding of what went on, I don't think I'd jump to the
conclusion that therefore the Germans never allied themselves with the
Japanese because I find it implausible.

>This is incredible on the face of it.

Why? Give us a hint, why do you find it incredible? It seems
completely reasonable to me.

What exactly do you find implausible or incredible?

That the Nazis destroyed Auschwitz-Birkenau in the period November
1944-January 1945? Is that what you're having a problem with?

It was destroyed, right? It was in ruins when the Allies entered it.

Who destroyed it? Martians? Give us a hint about what you believe
occurred. Or was it not destroyed when the Allies entered? What? What
is it you believe really happened?

>But if by some stretch of the
>imagination it is correct, then are you saying that the other gas chambers
>in the Soviet over-run territories were similarly destroyed, or is there
>yet another special case for them?

If Himmler ordered evidence of the extermination program destroyed in
Auschwitz-Birkenau it is not a huge stretch to assume he ordered it
destroyed all over Poland etc.

Otherwise why bother? Or do you deny he ordered this to happen?

There's nothing to grasp onto here, it's impossible to even tell what
it is you're objecting to. You seem to sort of repeat what I say and
then just conclude it's incredible, and that's that.

Tell us your version of the history. Let's hold on the gas chambers
per se for a moment, were the facilities at the major camps in Poland
apparently destroyed by the Nazis, or were they found intact, or what?



-- 
        -Barry Shein

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


Article 14994 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Date: 16 Aug 1994 07:45:37 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <32pqr1$7q3@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:   <32ojai$8fi@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu
X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: alt.revisionism

Greg Raven  wrote:

# So, then, you are contending that the euthanasia program was actually a
# Nazi plan to exterminate Jews in homicidal gas chambers? 

No. It was a plan to exterminate Germans who were considered useless
to the Nazi regime. Mainly mentally retarded and insane. However,
many of those who participated in this murderous operation later
took part in running the death camps.

# That is the topic
# at hand, after all, 

Mr. Raven should understand that he does not dictate the topic at
hand. 

# I had no luck
# whatsoever locating the last two pieces of so-called evidence you claimed
# to have ... they simply did not exist in the sources to which you referred.

Which evidence - is it so difficult to write it down? If Raven will
post it, I'll recheck. I may have got a page number wrong, though I
doubt it. Anyway, I can't check if there is no reference.


-Danny Keren.


Article 14995 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Dawidowicz on Irving's fraud
Date: 16 Aug 1994 07:49:56 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <32pr34$7sh@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References: <326ajs$2r7@agate.berkeley.edu>  <32nrsc$5oo@agate.berkeley.edu> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu
X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: alt.revisionism

Greg Raven 
References: <1994Aug12.013640.23491@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>  <32ol5e$9ta@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu
X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: alt.revisionism

Greg Raven  wrote:
# Danny Keren (dzk@cs.brown.edu) wrote:

# Arad is wrong about the shape of the camp, as he is about many other
# things.

Sure, sure. Arad is wrong, everyone who was in the camps is wrong,
and only Greg Raven, who was never in the camps, is right.

## When were these photos taken?
 
# These photos were taken September 1944, according to the National Archives.

Very good, he actually answered a question. Now here's another:

When was the Treblinka camp dismantled?


-Danny Keren.


Article 15009 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz
From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Dawidowicz on Irving's fraud
Date: 16 Aug 1994 12:44:27 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <32qcbb$44j@agate.berkeley.edu>
References: <326ajs$2r7@agate.berkeley.edu>  <32nrsc$5oo@agate.berkeley.edu> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>In article <32nrsc$5oo@agate.berkeley.edu>, schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu
>(Richard Schultz) wrote:
>
>> By the way, I am still waiting for Mr. Raven to produce his one best 
>> piece of evidence that World War II occurred.
>
>I would be happy to, just as soon as I finish with the discussion in which
>I have stated an interest. For now, this is off-topic.

But this is *precisely* the topic at hand.  You keep demanding *one* piece
of evidence to "prove" that the Holocaust occurred.  As others have 
repeatedly pointed out, what better way of illustrating your standards for
"proof" of an historical event than by giving *your* single best piece
of evidence for an historical event that most of us agree occurred (although
I'm still an agnostic on that one)?  The last time you tried, all you could
do was give a list of things, which, taken *together*, are evidence for
World War II having happened.  When I pointed out that that was an implicit
agreement that it is not possible to prove an event by one piece of
evidence, but rather through the confluence of all of the evidence, all I
got from you was silence.

					Richard Schultz


Article 15010 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!trane.uninett.no!eunet.no!nuug!EU.net!uunet!news1.digex.net!access.digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Greg Raven and literature citations
Date: 16 Aug 1994 08:56:35 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <32qd23$luj@access2.digex.net>
References:  <32ojai$8fi@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  <32pqr1$7q3@cat.cis.brown.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: access2.digex.net

In article <32pqr1$7q3@cat.cis.brown.edu>,
Danny Keren  wrote:
>Greg Raven  wrote:
># I had no luck
># whatsoever locating the last two pieces of so-called evidence you claimed
># to have ... they simply did not exist in the sources to which you referred.
>
>Which evidence - is it so difficult to write it down? If Raven will
>post it, I'll recheck. I may have got a page number wrong, though I
>doubt it. Anyway, I can't check if there is no reference.

    No, remember - crack historical scholar Greg Raven looked in the "blue
series" when that wasn't what Keren was citing at all.  I note Raven says
he had no "luck" locating the sources, when it is skill and knowledge that
are needed.  Maybe *that's* the source of his difficulties.  :)

    Of course, Mr. Raven is, to say the least, rather haphazard about
giving precise references in his own work.  He got the page number wrong
on Pressac's comments on Broad (though only by four pages).  I had to hunt
down Pressac's comments about the testimony of Bo"ck on my own, as Raven
ignored a direct request for the page number, only giving a general
statement (and a misleading one at that) about where it was.  Not
surprising, as the actual text was quite a bit different from what Raven
would have led people to believe Pressac said.  As long as you want to
discuss false citations, Greg, any chance of your addressing your blatant
distortion of p. 181 of Pressac?  You've been dodging this question for
quite some time now. 

-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15015 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!via.kz.merit.edu!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Sorry, Mr. Raven, that trick doesn't work on Usenet!
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 1994 12:13:33 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 128
Message-ID: 
References: <1994Jul25.020700.2018@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
   
   
NNTP-Posting-Host: 35.132.2.15

greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:

> k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:
> 
> > Evidence...you mean like the ten documents we provided for you over three
> > months ago, each of which demonstrates the reality of the Holocaust,
> > none of which you have yet addressed?
> 
> Yes, ten, when I asked for one or two. And when I asked (about each
> document I saw) whether this was the best evidence, I never received a
> response in the affirmative.

BULL.

Mr. Raven, you take the cake for being the most blatant liar I have yet
seen on alt.revisionism -- and that's saying a lot!

I hereby ask you to produce for me the article you wrote that asked
to know whether the evidence presented to you on May 4th was the best
evidence.

You won't be able to do it, because you never wrote such an article.

I have every single article you've ever written on Usenet archived,
all 72 of them (not counting email from you that was posted by other
users, but including the twelve articles you posted before the May 4th
reply).  You really should have realized this by now, Mr. Raven.  If
you'd like I can email all 60 post-May-4th articles directly to you,
and you can sift through your own words, looking for a place where you
"asked...whether [the May 4th documents were] the best evidence."  I'm
dead serious about that -- if you can't find the article where you asked
this, please, let me email you everything you've written, and you can
search through it.

But you won't find a damned thing.  I know.  I've looked.

Perhaps when you're "debating" the Holocaust on a radio show where no
one has time to respond, or in a magazine where you control the
content, you can get away with this crap.  But not on an electronic
forum where every word you write can be stored on a hard disk
somewhere.

Welcome to the 1990s, Mr. Raven!  I don't imagine you'll find it very
comfortable here!

> As soon as you and others make up your minds
> about what you yourselves consider to be the best evidence, we can continue
> the discussion. It's only been about four months since I first stated my
> desire to discuss the evidence, one piece at a time. If, as is commonly
> stated, there exists a mountain of evidence to support claims that the
> Nazis had a plan or policy to exterminate Jews in gas chambers, then
> certainly it should take less than four months to present either the
> evidence or a reference to same.

HA!

You asked for "one or two" pieces of evidence on April 20th.

Two weeks later, on May 4th, you had not only _ten_ of them dumped in
your lap, but you had a well-written explanation of why your demand
was ridiculous and not worth consideration _anyway_.  You _also_ had a
question put to you about why you could say in one breath that you
didn't deny the Holocaust, and then turn around and deny it.  You
_also_ had a request that you present _your_ one or two best pieces of
evidence that the Holocaust did _not_ happen, and a well-reasoned
explanation why that request was more reasonable than yours.

You have _never_ addressed why you first denied the Holocaust, then said
you didn't deny it (though I've brought the subject up again at least
once).

You have _never_ delivered one or two documents that prove that the
Holocaust did _not_ occur, nor have you even addressed our request
that you do so, nor our explanation of why we feel that you should.

And you have _never_ addressed any of the ten documents presented.
Oh, wait, there was this one article of yours that touched on the subject,
on July 27th:

> I have been too busy to devote any time to the sorry excuses for responses
> to my challenge, but I hope to get to them in the next couple of weeks. 

In short, Mr. Raven, after you made your pitiful request, two weeks
later you were given all you asked for and more, much more.  And you've
managed to ignore all of it -- all of it! -- for the last three months.

And now, _you_ accuse _us_ of taking too long to present the evidence
that we presented over three months ago.

Really, Mr. Raven, this is just too much.

"Revisionist scholarship" at its best:  hands over ears, yelling madly
to whoever will listen...


As for your claim that we haven't "made up our minds about what we
ourselves consider to be the best evidence," I draw your attention to
the following paragraphs, which were posted first over three months
ago, which have since been reposted three times, which have been
emailed to Mr. Raven at least once:

> So, we will indeed give him a document which we feel fairly represents the
> massive collection of conclusive evidence that the Holocaust happened. And
> then we will give him another.  And another, and another - because they
> are all evidence:  statements from Hoess and Himmler and Boeck and Broad
> and Kremer and Glowakci and others involved in the process, eyewitness
> accounts from Wiesenthal and Kogon and Wiesel and Buki and the Paisikovics
> and Mueller and Dragon and Rosenblum and Nyizli and Silberberg and
> Mandelbaum and the thousands upon tens of thousands of relatively-unknown
> others, plans for the chambers, plans for the vehicles, orders for the
> equipment, inventories of the Krematoria, letters to the government,
> letters from the government, letters between government officials,
> memorandums, reports, diagrams, charts, speeches, statistics, diaries...

> We ask Mr. Raven to please apply himself first to document one.  When he
> has finished attempting to convince his audience that document one does
> not suit his needs, then he may proceed on to document two, and so on
> until he reaches the end of the list.  We would hope that Mr. Raven would
> limit his answers to one document per posted article, to facilitate any
> further discussion that may take place, and that he would enumerate his
> points, as we have done here.  As we say - we welcome focus.

Mr. Raven, document one was presented to you over three months ago.

You may address it any time you're ready.  We're still waiting.
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 15016 of alt.revisionism:
Xref: oneb misc.test:38247 alt.revisionism:15016
Newsgroups: misc.test,alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!alberta!quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca!tribune.usask.ca!decwrl!hookup!news.umbc.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!gumby!kzoo!k044477
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie R. McCarthy)
Subject: Re: More Raven waffling
Message-ID: <1994Aug16.174809.14334@hobbes.kzoo.edu>
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Organization: Kalamazoo College, Kalamazoo MI 49006
References:   
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 1994 17:48:09 GMT
Lines: 88

greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:
> k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:
> 
> > ...it sure looks like you've just said that the so-called
> > "Leuchter Report" is totally invalid.  After all, what would be the
> > usefulness of taking forensic samples of the walls of a _reconstruction_
> > of a gas chamber?  What could we possibly learn from having them
> > analyzed?
> > 
> > Do I misunderstand, Mr. Raven?  Or have you, in your above paragraph,
> > jettisoned one of the revisionists' major claims?
> 
> Fred Leuchter simply wanted to cover all the bases. If he had not taken
> samples for analyzation, what would his critics have said then?

Let me see if I have your position straight, Mr. Raven.

You seem to be admitting that, assuming for the sake of argument that the
chambers are reconstructions, Leuchter's data on those chambers is totally
invalid.  Correct?

So why did Leuchter take samples from the walls of those chambers?

I understand that you say that the forensic sampling is only a small part
of the Leuchter Report (though I must say it's the part I've heard the
most about).

But small part or not, it's still something that Leuchter went to great
pains to do.  He hid the hammer and chisel and hoped customs wouldn't
find them;  he snuck a bunch of rock through customs and the airport,
and so on.

Are you now saying that Leuchter did all that for _show_?  That he _knew_
that the samples were worthless, being taken from reconstructed walls of
reconstructed chambers?  That he went ahead and asked a lab to analyze
them not because he was interested in finding out the truth, but because
he was worried about what his critics would have said!?

Mr. Raven, surely you're aware that Leuchter has presented the samples he
gathered as being taken from the walls of a gas chamber.  If it's your
contention that those walls are not the walls of a gas chamber, then you
seem to be claiming that either (1) Leuchter was such a fool he didn't
even realize that, or (2) Leuchter has misrepresented his results.

Which, please?

> But, typically, your statement misses the points. The points are 1) there
> is no evidence that the room now presented to tourists as a gas chamber at
> the Stammlager was ever a gas chamber,

Mr. Leuchter came back with a Report that showed that there was no
evidence?  How did he do this pray tell?

> 2) there are no documents to support
> the "reconstruction" undertaken after the war (that is, how could it have
> been "returned" to some previous condition without some indication of what
> that condition was?),

Mr. Leuchter's Report showed a lack of documents of some type?  How did he
show this pray tell?

> and 3) even in its current, "reconstructed" state, it
> could not have functioned as a homicidal gas chamber.

I'm not sure what this is supposed to imply.  If a reconstruction couldn't
be used to kill people (God forbid) does that mean that the original
couldn't either?  Is that your contention?

Help me out here, Mr. Raven, don't hint around.

> As Fred Leuchter
> himself has stated, the tests for traces of Zyklon B usage are only maybe
> 10 percent of argument against this room (and others) having been used as a
> homicidal gas chamber.

Oh, so only 10 percent of his Report is a fraudulent sham, right?

> However, you seem to be agreeing that the so-called gas chamber now shown
> to tourists is a reconstruction. Is that truly your position?

As I said before, I'm not going to comment on that until I can get this
Leuchter business straightened out.  I think I've got you nailed down
yet again, Mr. Raven.  I'd like to hear what you have to say before I
let you go.
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 If your email is related to my job, please send it to mccarthy@lpi.com.
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 15017 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!torn!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!via.kz.merit.edu!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 1994 13:22:48 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 23
Message-ID: 
References: 
   <3220rd$29s@search01.news.aol.com>
   
   
   <32ojai$8fi@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
   
NNTP-Posting-Host: 35.132.2.15

greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:

: If you choose to respond to this, and you choose to cite documents, please
: be careful to include the actual source of the citation. I had no luck
: whatsoever locating the last two pieces of so-called evidence you claimed
: to have ... they simply did not exist in the sources to which you referred.

That's because you were looking in the _wrong_place_.

And you would be aware of that, if you bothered to read this newsgroup.
You _do_ read this newsgroup, right, Mr. Raven?

Danny Keren, on August 2:

: Ah, what a clown this Raven is.
: 
: You got the wrong series, you "revisionist scholar" you. I am not
: quoting from the "blue series", but from the series of volumes about
: the later trials (such as the Farben Trial, the Doctor's Trial etc;
: I hope Raven heard about these).
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 15018 of alt.revisionism:
Xref: oneb misc.test:38248 alt.revisionism:15018
Newsgroups: misc.test,alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!quartz.ucs.ualberta.ca!tribune.usask.ca!decwrl!ames!agate!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!gumby!kzoo!k044477
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie R. McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Message-ID: <1994Aug16.175622.15048@hobbes.kzoo.edu>
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Organization: Kalamazoo College, Kalamazoo MI 49006
References:   <32g8lc$2mb@csi0.csi.UOttawa.CA> <32grsi$68h@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  <32offf$irl@access1.digex.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 1994 17:56:22 GMT
Lines: 75

greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:
> mstein@access1.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) wrote:
> >     Quite a breathtaking statement from Greg Raven, master of misleading
> > paraphrases.  Care to discuss p. 181 of Pressac yet, where your distortion
> > of Pressac's text makes your blatant distortion of the Vanity Fair article
> > look like a minor misunderstanding by comparison?

Please note that Mr. Raven completely dodges the question, which is
about his misrepresentation of _Pressac_.  Mr. Raven instead tries to
deal with his misrepresentation of the Vanity Fair article, where he
presumably feels he is on safer ground:

> Here again is the text of the Vanity Fair article in question. Where have I
> misrepresented it? I think you will find that your source (Jamie McCarthy?)
> is the one who did the misrepresentation:

I could hardly do so, considering that I didn't say much about it, I
just _quoted_ it.

How did Mr. Raven misrepresent it?  Let's look at what Mr. Raven wrote,
and then let's just read the article.

On April 26, Greg Raven wrote:

> Recently, Deborah
> Lipstadt and Christopher Browning have admitted that the Hoess statements
> are useless (Vanity Fair, December 1993).

Please note that Hoess' "statements" include much more than a simple
numerical calculation, which is what the article below refers to.
Hoess gives many details about the gassing, saying that the order came
from Hitler through Himmler, describing many people being gassed, and
so on.  _Those_ are the statements from Hoess that historians find
most valuable.

> Whose History Is It?
> Christopher Hitchens
> Vanity Fair, December 1993
> pages 110-118
>
> (page 117)
> ... The revisionists sent me an article by a Frenchman named Robert
> Faurisson, which claimed that Rudolf Hoess, one of the commandants of
> Auschwitz, had been tortured by the British into confessing to a fantastic
> and unbelievable number of murders. "I declare herewith under oath that in
> the years 1941 to 1943, during my tenure in office as commandant of
> Auschwitz Concentration Camp, 2 million Jews were put to death by gassing
> and 1/2 million by other means." This statement, specially mounted and
> reproduced, is an important exhibit at the Holocaust Memorial.
>
> I then got in touch with Lipstadt and Browning for their responses, which
> were surprising: "Hoess was always a very weak and confused witness," said
> Browning, who has been an expert witness at trials involving Auschwitz.
> "The revisionists use him all the time for this reason, in order to try and
> discredit the memory of Auschwitz as a whole." And Professor Lipstadt
> directed me to page 188 of her book, which is quite a page. It says that
> the stories about the Nazis making Jews into soap are entirely untrue, and
> it also says that while the memorial stone at Auschwitz itself lists the
> number of victims -- Jews and non-Jews -- at 4 million, the truer figure is
> somewhere between 1.5 and 2 million. Since Hoess was the commandant of the
> place for only part of its existence, this means that -- according to the
> counter-revisionists -- an important piece of evidence in the Holocaust
> Memorial is not reliable. A vertiginous sensation if you like.
>
> "It's the same with the soap story," said Lipstadt. "I get protests from
> survivors, saying that I shouldn't admit it's not true, because it gives
> ammunition to the enemy. But I'm only interested in getting at the truth."
> An old-fashioned concept.

Please explain to us, Mr. Raven, where Lipstadt and Browning "have admitted
that the Hoess statements are useless."
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 If your email is related to my job, please send it to mccarthy@lpi.com.
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 15022 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!world!bzs
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Mon, 15 Aug 1994 21:02:51 -0800
Message-ID: 
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Organization: The World
References:  <3220rd$29s@search01.news.aol.com>
	
	
	<32ojai$8fi@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
	
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 1994 22:54:11 GMT
Lines: 39


From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
>So, then, you are contending that the euthanasia program was actually a
>Nazi plan to exterminate Jews in homicidal gas chambers? That is the topic
>at hand, after all, so for you to mention this must mean that you think it
>has some value. Are you now saying that the Nazi euthanasia program was
>part of the Nazi plan to exterminate Jews in homicidal gas chambers? 

Mr Raven,

You are the one who likes to judge historical events in terms of their
plausibility or implausiblity.

Now, since you seem to accept that there was a euthanasia program
wherein the Nazis were killing their own children because of various
physical or mental defects perhaps this better tunes your
implausibility meter on the claim that they were killing Jews (and
others) whom, as a group, they vilified in posters, passed laws
forbidding their working or attending school, passed laws forbidding
inter-marriage punishable in some cases by death, forced to wear stars
on the outside of their clothing, made public speeches demonizing
them, accused them of every imaginable problem their country was
having, herded them into concentration camps, tattooed them like
cattle, engaged in high-level political meetings plotting at least
their mass expulsion from the country if not their murder, etc, etc,
etc.

I think that's the point.

So tell us again how you find it "implausible" that people who were
committing mass-murder against their own people, children included,
aren't likely in your view to have been also mass-murdering those they
publicly vilified.

-- 
        -Barry Shein

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


Article 15029 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!panix!ddsw1!golux.pr.mcs.net!user
From: golux@mcs.com (The only Golux in the World, and not a mere Device)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Shrunken Heads and Archaeological Fakes
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 1994 23:47:13 -0600
Organization: MCSNet Services
Lines: 45
Message-ID: 
References: <32kj5l$688@search01.news.aol.com>   
NNTP-Posting-Host: golux.pr.mcs.net

In article , greg.ihr@kaiwan.com
(Greg Raven) wrote:

> Are you saying that you believe the "human soap" stories? Are you saying
> that it is possible to prove a negative? Are you saying that should I chose
> to ask Deborah Lipstadt about her statement that these stories were looked
> into and then discounted, that she would answer me? Are you serious?

I assume you are referring to the following portion of my posting:
>>And yet, all the refutation Greg cites came from what he would call
>>"exterminationist" sources.  Nobody in the denier camps has ever managed to
>>disprove this "easily demonstrable falsehood."  Why is that?  Given your
>>apparent refusal to accept at face value *any* statement by
>>"exterminationist" sources, Greg, I would expect you to challenge Laqueur,
>>Sereny, Lipstadt, Bauer and Krakowski to *prove* their retraction of the
>>soap story.  Or do you accept their words when they say something you like,
>>and disagree only when you don't like what they say?

Do I believe the human soap stories?  I don't know.  There appears to be
little to no evidence that it actually occurred; on the other hand,
thousands of people who were there apparently believed it, and it is not
entirely impossible.

Am I saying it's possible to prove a negative?  Not at all.  You, however,
made the statement that it was an "easily demonstrable falsehood."  I was
commenting that no single revisionist has ever managed to demonstrate its
falsity, regardless of how "easily demonstrable" it is.  And I asked a
question: Why is it that this "easily demonstrable falsehood" has not been
demonstrated false?

With regard to whether Deborah Lipstadt would answer you if you asked her a
question, I cannot answer for her.  Perhaps if you asked her a serious
question, she would.  My real point was that it seems odd for you to accept
statements from Holocaust historians at face value when they support your
positions, but discount them out of hand or require evidence (to a
mysterious and evasive standard of proof) whenever they disagree with you. 
Hence my "expect you to challenge" comment.  See, it was sarcasm, Greg. 
You know, like irony.  Like...oh hell, if I have to explain it, it just
ain't worth it.

-- 
D. J. Schaeffer |       The Todal looks like a blob of glup.
golux@mcs.com   |     It makes a sound like rabbits screaming,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^        and smells of old, unopened rooms.
                            -- Thurber, _The 13 Clocks_


Article 15030 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!panix!ddsw1!golux.pr.mcs.net!user
From: golux@mcs.com (The only Golux in the World, and not a mere Device)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: A partial answer for Greg Raven (Auschwitz figures)
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 1994 23:59:19 -0600
Organization: MCSNet Services
Lines: 77
Message-ID: 
References: <1994Jul25.020700.2018@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: golux.pr.mcs.net

In article , greg.ihr@kaiwan.com
(Greg Raven) wrote:

> In article ,
> k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:
> 
> > greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:
> > 
> > > Those who do not wish to become bogged down in the
> > > numbers game over "Holocaust" "victims" should simply come clean on the
> > > matter and move on to something that can be proven/supported with evidence.
> > 
> > Evidence...you mean like the ten documents we provided for you over three
> > months ago, each of which demonstrates the reality of the Holocaust,
> > none of which you have yet addressed?
> > -- 
> >  Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
> >  I speak for no one but myself.
> 
> Yes, ten, when I asked for one or two. And when I asked (about each
> document I saw) whether this was the best evidence, I never received a
> response in the affirmative. As soon as you and others make up your minds
> about what you yourselves consider to be the best evidence, we can continue
> the discussion. It's only been about four months since I first stated my
> desire to discuss the evidence, one piece at a time. If, as is commonly
> stated, there exists a mountain of evidence to support claims that the
> Nazis had a plan or policy to exterminate Jews in gas chambers, then
> certainly it should take less than four months to present either the
> evidence or a reference to same.

See, here's what we're all on about.  You've made two insupportable
assumptions in this newsgroup, and we're not buying either of them.

Your first assumption is that it is possible to conduct historical analysis
or research by examining a single document or piece of historical evidence
in isolation from every other document and piece of evidence.  As many
people have pointed out to you, this is not how one "does" history.  Have
you ever heard the expression "unable to see the forest for the trees"? 
You have asked us to prove the existence of the forest by showing you one
tree.  No matter how wonderful a tree it is, it can't possibly prove the
whole forest.  (As others have done, I defy you to provide the single best
piece of evidence that any historical event -- World War II, for example --
happened.  This is not "off-topic" as it addresses directly your first
insupportable assumption.)  [By the way, it is disingenuous for you to say
that you requested "one or two" pieces of best evidence.  Your posts have
consistently asked for the single best piece of evidence.]

Your second assumption, also erroneous, is that you can control or dictate
the shape and structure of the "debate" in this newsgroup.  That ain't the
way it works, Greg.  You have shown many times that you are unwilling to
engage in honest discussion of any issues surrounding the Holocaust, and
you hide behind a claim that you are only willing to discuss things on your
terms.  Well, sometimes you don't get to set the rules.

You have been presented with ten pieces of evidence.  It's not an
unreasonably large mountain of documents, it's not a flood of testimonies. 
Ten items.  If it makes it easier for you, I'm sure we could arrange for
ten participants in this newsgroup to claim that a different one of those
ten items is the "best evidence" of the Holocaust.  Then you could address
them one at a time, the way you want to.  Would that help?  In any event,
if you have something to add to the discussion, please feel free; but
trying to dictate the shape of the table is not the same as engaging in
honest debate.  It's merely obfuscation, and can only lead people to wonder
if you really have anything to say of substance.

> -- 
> 
> Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
> Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
> The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
> The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping

-- 
D. J. Schaeffer |       The Todal looks like a blob of glup.
golux@mcs.com   |     It makes a sound like rabbits screaming,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^        and smells of old, unopened rooms.
                            -- Thurber, _The 13 Clocks_


Article 15031 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!panix!ddsw1!golux.pr.mcs.net!user
From: golux@mcs.com (The only Golux in the World, and not a mere Device)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 1994 00:12:31 -0600
Organization: MCSNet Services
Lines: 52
Message-ID: 
References:  <3220rd$29s@search01.news.aol.com>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: golux.pr.mcs.net

In article , greg.ihr@kaiwan.com
(Greg Raven) wrote:

> In article , bzs@world.std.com (Barry
> Shein) wrote:
> > (text deleted)
> > Apparently the Nazis, specifically Himmler, were worried about losing
> > Poland and thus having evidence of this mass murder in the hands of
> > whoever pushed them out, probably the Soviets.
> > 
> > Would they exhibit the same concern regarding locations in the
> > Altreich?
> > 
> > Apparently not. And does this make sense? I think so, if the Allies
> > were in Munich there really wouldn't be much point in hiding anything,
> > the game was over.
> 
> Let me get this straight: The Nazis destroyed the functioning gas chambers,
> that is, the ones that were killing the Jews they had been ordered from on
> high to kill, but they left intact gas chambers that had never been used,
> even though there was a policy of exterminating all Jews?
> 
> This is incredible on the face of it. But if by some stretch of the
> imagination it is correct, then are you saying that the other gas chambers
> in the Soviet over-run territories were similarly destroyed, or is there
> yet another special case for them?

Oh come on, Greg, this is too easy.

It is clear, from the moutnains of evidence (much of which can be produced
for you on request), that the Nazis had a policy of extermination of the
Jews and other "undesirables."

It is apparent, however, that the Nazis did *not* have a policy of gas
chamber destruction in the closing days of the war.  This is not entirely
surprising, given the likely disarray of the Nazi armed forces and command
structure.

Barry Shein's idea is also a workable alternative.  But since there isn't
much evidence, we may never know why some gas chambers were destroyed and
others were not.  (Unless you have some evidence on the subject.)

(Oh, and just because something does not appear to make "common sense,"
that doesn't mean it isn't so.  Didn't you say something to that effect
here once?  I know somebody -- Michael Stein?  Jamie McCarthy? -- has
posted the quote recently.)

-- 
D. J. Schaeffer |       The Todal looks like a blob of glup.
golux@mcs.com   |     It makes a sound like rabbits screaming,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^        and smells of old, unopened rooms.
                            -- Thurber, _The 13 Clocks_


Article 15033 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: Brian Harmon 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: A partial answer for Greg Raven (Auschwitz figures)
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 94 02:18:30 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 67
Message-ID: 
References: <1994Jul25.020700.2018@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1g.delphi.com
X-To: Greg Raven 

Greg Raven  writes:
 
>In article ,
>k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:
>
>> greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:
>> 
>> > Those who do not wish to become bogged down in the
>> > numbers game over "Holocaust" "victims" should simply come clean on the
>> > matter and move on to something that can be proven/supported with evidence.
>> 
>> Evidence...you mean like the ten documents we provided for you over three
 
 
>> months ago, each of which demonstrates the reality of the Holocaust,
>> none of which you have yet addressed?
>> -- 
>>  Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
>>  I speak for no one but myself.
>
>Yes, ten, when I asked for one or two. And when I asked (about each
>document I saw) whether this was the best evidence, I never received a
>response in the affirmative. As soon as you and others make up your minds
>about what you yourselves consider to be the best evidence, we can continue
 
 
>the discussion. It's only been about four months since I first stated my
>desire to discuss the evidence, one piece at a time. If, as is commonly
>stated, there exists a mountain of evidence to support claims that the
>Nazis had a plan or policy to exterminate Jews in gas chambers, then
>certainly it should take less than four months to present either the
>evidence or a reference to same.
 
 
	We did present evidence supporting the holocaust: ten pieces.  Yiu
didn;'t deal with them.
 
	I'm growing very weary of this.  You've been asking for us to pick
the one piece of evidence that best sunstantiates the holocaust because
you know that no historical even t or occurrence of any kind can be
verified with just one piece of evidence.
 
	Remember when we asked you to give us the single piece of evidence
that World War Two happened?  You gave us several pieces.  We wanted just
one.
 
	In reality , you;ve been changing the argument.  Four months ago,
you posted via Ross Vicksellclaiming that there was little or no actual
documentation on the Holocaust.  When I posted a (small) list of
thiryty five documents full of nothing but documents, you responded that
I had provided far too many, and couldn't I just pick the best one or two?
 
	Instead, we provided ten, as your request was silly.  It was also
a feeble attempt to extricate yourself from your earlier claim that
very little documentaion on the Holocaust existed.
 
	I for one am not going to jump whenever you say so.  You've got
ten pieces, now deal with them.
 
	or go away.
 
BRIANHARMON@delphi.com
 
Brian Harmon  
------
Human memory is the glue that bonds the massive physical evidence
into a coherent and unified history.     


Article 15034 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!news.funet.fi!news.tele.fi!uunet!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: Brian Harmon 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 94 02:40:16 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 50
Message-ID: 
References:  <3220rd$29s@search01.news.aol.com> <1994Aug08.030837.22458@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> <32g8lc$2mb@csi0.csi.UOttawa.CA> <32grsi$68h@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1g.delphi.com
X-To: Greg Raven 

Greg Raven  writes:
 
>In article <32grsi$68h@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
>wrote:
 
 
>> The SS did not succeed to kill *all* the internees; it did not succeed
>> to destroy *all* the documents; it did not succeed to burn *all* the
>> corpses; it did not succeed to destroy *all* the murder machinery.
 
 
>> 
 
 
Greg Raven responds:
 
>This is an extremely misleading response. Apparently, the Nazis were able
>to destroy all traces of the so-called gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau.
>There are no authentic documents, buildings, etc. there for researchers to
>examine. About the closest there is is a "reconstructed" gas chamber, for
>which there are no original plans to show why it was "reconstructed" in its
>current manner.
 
 
	If the Nazis destroyed all of the extermination facil. at the
Auschwtiz, Birkenau complex, then where did Leuchter take his samples
from?  There are aerial photos of the camps in operation.
	There are also affadavits, testimonies, memiors,etc. from NAzis
who were in a position to know that confirm what these buildings were for.
(Ho"ss, Eichmann, Broad, to name a few).
 
	The facilities were not completely dest/list
 
	(ahem) the facilities were not completely destroyed, the foundations
and rubble still remain.  (with the execption of Bunkers I and II, as
no trace of them remain).
 
 
>In fact, there are no documents anywhere showing evidence of a homicidal
>gas chamber. This means that not only are there no German documents, but
>there are also no Allied documents of code intercepts, stolen plans, etc.
 
 
	nonsense.
 
	Letters from the auschitz construction dept. to SS general Kammler
speak rather explicitly about a "gassing cellar." (dated 1/29/43).  They're
reproduced in the "Original NAzi Documents" file of Reitlinger's _The
final solution_.  (thanks to the Leuchter faq).
 


Article 15035 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!gumby!yale!news2.near.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: Brian Harmon 
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 94 02:59:30 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 33
Message-ID: 
References:   
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1g.delphi.com
X-To: Greg Raven 

Greg Raven  writes:
 
>By the way, thank you for admitting that there is no direct evidence of the
>existence of the gas chambers. This points up my argument that the
>so-called Holocaust gas chambers are unique in that their existence can
>only be shown through testimonies, interviews, "confessions," etc.
>Virtually every other event in western history is accompanied by actual
>tangible, contemporaneous evidence.
 
 
	Mr. McCarthy admitted no such thing. Your statement is rubbish
even without any physical evidence fro the gas chambers.  There are
numerous historical events that are commonly believed without much
"tangible" evidence.
 
	How about much of the U.S. civil war?
	How about the 100 years war?
	How about the american revolution/ The battle fileds could have
been faked easier than any gas chamber.
 
	How about Pearl Harbor?  everybody knows that teh Arizona is really
just an old frieghter that ran aground.
 
	How about the moon landing?  have you ever actually _seen_ a
moonrock?
 
	sheesh.
 
Brian Harmon  
------
Human memory is the glue that bonds the massive physical evidence
into a coherent and unified history.     
 


Article 15036 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!panix!ddsw1!news.kei.com!eff!wariat.org!malgudi.oar.net!sun!oucsace!dspiegel
From: dspiegel@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Dan Spiegel)
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Message-ID: 
Organization: Ohio University CS Dept,. Athens
References:  <32offf$irl@access1.digex.net> 
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 1994 21:28:49 GMT
Lines: 36

In article  greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes:
>In article <32offf$irl@access1.digex.net>, mstein@access1.digex.net
>
>> (text deleted)
>>     What about the Franke-Gricksch report?  So far Fritz Berg's best
>> evidence that it's a fake seems to be that the person who found it - an
>> American, by the way, not a Russian - has a last name which *might* be 
>> Jewish.  Is that your best evidence as well?
>
>Please tell me that you feel the Franke-Gricksch Report is your idea of the
>best evidence that the Nazis had a plan to exterminate Jews in gas
>chambers. Please! I love talking about the F-G Report

   So, then go ahead already! Afraid of having more of your 
distortions and lies pointed out? 
   Your "reason" for not discussing it shows exactly why you have
no credibility outside your little denier world.

>							, as anyone who
>followed my GEnie debate on this topic a couple of years ago can tell you.
>
>-- 
>
>Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
>Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
>The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
>The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping

   Still advertising. Care to list the academic institutions that
subscribe to your "scholarly" journal?


-DS
I speak for myself only.
No unsolicited e-mail, please. I'll read your flames with everyone else.
Please do not use my name in any subject headers.


Article 15041 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.cic.net!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!darkstar.UCSC.EDU!news.hal.COM!olivea!uunet!news1.digex.net!access.digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Raven's reading skills are as poor as ever
Date: 17 Aug 1994 12:44:38 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <32tepm$4k9@access2.digex.net>
References:   
NNTP-Posting-Host: access2.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote [in response to Jamie McCarthy]:
>By the way, thank you for admitting that there is no direct evidence of the
>existence of the gas chambers.

    How nice that Jamie McCarthy has you to speak for him - he hardly need
post himself!

    Quote the text where he does this, Greg.  QUOTE THE TEXT.  Where is
it, Greg?  Where?

-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15043 of alt.revisionism:
Xref: oneb misc.test:38252 alt.revisionism:15043
Newsgroups: misc.test,alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!gumby!kzoo!k044477
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie R. McCarthy)
Subject: Re: A partial answer for Greg Raven (Auschwitz figures)
Message-ID: <1994Aug17.210402.2284@hobbes.kzoo.edu>
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Organization: Kalamazoo College, Kalamazoo MI 49006
References:  <1994Jul25.020700.2018@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>  
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 1994 21:04:02 GMT
Lines: 36

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

[to Greg Raven]

> [By the way, it is disingenuous for you to say
> that you requested "one or two" pieces of best evidence.  Your posts have
> consistently asked for the single best piece of evidence.]

Actually, that's not the case;  in his original April 20 article, Mr. Raven
asked for the "one or two best pieces of evidence" and said "I want one or
two pieces of evidence."

Just keeping you honest.  :-)  Now Mr. Raven can't single out that line
from your article and ignore the rest, which was right on target.

> See, here's what we're all on about.  You've made two insupportable
> assumptions in this newsgroup, and we're not buying either of them.
> 
> Your first assumption is that it is possible to conduct historical analysis
> or research by examining a single document or piece of historical evidence
> in isolation from every other document and piece of evidence.  [...]
> 
> Your second assumption, also erroneous, is that you can control or dictate
> the shape and structure of the "debate" in this newsgroup.  [...]
> 
> You have been presented with ten pieces of evidence.  It's not an
> unreasonably large mountain of documents, it's not a flood of testimonies. 
> Ten items.  [...]
> ...if you have something to add to the discussion, please feel free; but
> trying to dictate the shape of the table is not the same as engaging in
> honest debate.  It's merely obfuscation, and can only lead people to wonder
> if you really have anything to say of substance.
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 If your email is related to my job, please send it to mccarthy@lpi.com.
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 15048 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!news.duke.edu!eff!news.kei.com!ddsw1!golux.pr.mcs.net!user
From: golux@mcs.com (The only Golux in the World, and not a mere Device)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: A partial answer for Greg Raven (Auschwitz figures)
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 1994 23:02:17 -0600
Organization: MCSNet Services
Lines: 30
Message-ID: 
References:  <1994Jul25.020700.2018@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>   <1994Aug17.210402.2284@hobbes.kzoo.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: golux.pr.mcs.net

In article <1994Aug17.210402.2284@hobbes.kzoo.edu>, k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu
(Jamie R. McCarthy) wrote:

> golux@mcs.com (The only Golux in the World, and not a mere Device) wrote:
> 
> [to Greg Raven]
> 
> > [By the way, it is disingenuous for you to say
> > that you requested "one or two" pieces of best evidence.  Your posts have
> > consistently asked for the single best piece of evidence.]
> 
> Actually, that's not the case;  in his original April 20 article, Mr. Raven
> asked for the "one or two best pieces of evidence" and said "I want one or
> two pieces of evidence."

My mistake.  Mea culpa.  I bow to the keepers of the archived posts. 
Thanks for the correction.

> Just keeping you honest.  :-)  Now Mr. Raven can't single out that line
> from your article and ignore the rest, which was right on target.

Greg, you can now forget about calling me a liar and demanding that I
retract my heinous lie about you.  I was mistaken.  Please move on to the
remainder of my post.  Thank you.

-- 
D. J. Schaeffer |       The Todal looks like a blob of glup.
golux@mcs.com   |     It makes a sound like rabbits screaming,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^        and smells of old, unopened rooms.
                            -- Thurber, _The 13 Clocks_


Article 15052 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!news1.census.gov!info.census.gov!not-for-mail
From: lnyman@info.census.gov (Lisa Nyman)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: A partial answer for Greg Raven (Auschwitz figures)
Date: 17 Aug 1994 15:01:01 -0400
Organization: US Census Bureau
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <32tmpd$87e@info.census.gov>
References: <1994Jul25.020700.2018@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: info.census.gov

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>
>Yes, ten, when I asked for one or two. And when I asked (about each
>document I saw) whether this was the best evidence, I never received a
>response in the affirmative. As soon as you and others make up your minds
>about what you yourselves consider to be the best evidence, we can continue
>the discussion. It's only been about four months since I first stated my
>desire to discuss the evidence, one piece at a time. If, as is commonly
>stated, there exists a mountain of evidence to support claims that the
>Nazis had a plan or policy to exterminate Jews in gas chambers, then
>certainly it should take less than four months to present either the
>evidence or a reference to same.
>

Polly want a cracker?

Ok, let's adopt Raven's method to out justice system.  From now on
a prosecutor can only use one bit of evidence to convict.  Oh,
and eyewitnesses don't count.

This Parrot is really get too pathetic.


-- 
Lisa Wolfisch Nyman  301-763-6005 |   I don't do TIGER!   |
-----------------------------------------------------|-----------------------|
SF-19902.95-xy7/23(g) Standard Disclaimer on file    | Now accepting appli-  |
in the Central Office. I speak for me, Not U.S.      |cations for .sig quote.|


Article 15074 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!agate!darkstar.UCSC.EDU!news.hal.COM!decwrl!pacbell.com!UB.com!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Can Kleim go where Raven is afraid to?
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 1994 07:39:35 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 33
Message-ID: 
References: <32vitp$fhr@umd5.umd.edu> <1994Aug18.155450.1327@msus1.msus.edu> <330off$svp@agate.berkeley.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <330off$svp@agate.berkeley.edu>, schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu
(Richard Schultz) wrote:

> In article <1994Aug18.155450.1327@msus1.msus.edu>,
> MILTON JOHN KLEIM, JR.  wrote:
> 
> >[Raven] is requesting the Holosophists [sic] to 
> >present their single _strongest_ piece of evidence which supports their 
> >allegation of genocide against the Jews.  He is _not_ claiming that there is
> >only one piece of evidence, rather that we must look at each piece individ-
> >ually, and he has asked for the _strongest_ one first.
> 
> Then maybe you'll be willing to do something for us that Raven seems to
> be unwilling to:  give us your single strongest piece of evidence that
> World War II occurred.  This shouldn't be too difficult.

No, it shouldn't. Not nearly as difficult as it seems to be for the
exterminationists here in alt.revisionism to respond to my original posts,
and stay on the topic. If you are ready to concede that you have no
evidence to support your views on the Holocaust story, and if you are ready
to state that you do not believe the the Second World War took place, let
me know and we can spend some time on evidence that contradicts your
position, although as it is hardly revisionist, I won't have much time to
dedicate to it. Fortunately, it shouldn't take too much time.

Well?

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15075 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!uhog.mit.edu!news.kei.com!travelers.mail.cornell.edu!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.graphics.cornell.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!gopher.sdsc.edu!news.cerf.net!nntp-server.caltech.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another question Raven has avoided
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 1994 07:29:08 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 31
Message-ID: 
References: <32s8fu$ilb@access3.digex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <32s8fu$ilb@access3.digex.net>, mstein@access3.digex.net
(Michael P. Stein) wrote:

>     Greg, when you say there is no "proof" of killing Jews in gas 
> chambers, what standard of proof are you talking about?  Proof beyond a 
> reasonable doubt as established by the unanimous vote of an impartial 
> jury?  Proof beyond a shadow of a doubt?  A mathematical proof?  Proof 
> sufficient to get *Greg Raven* to say that yes, Jews were killed in gas 
> chambers after all?  You never gave an unquivocal answer to that 
> question.  What standard of proof do you require, and do you require that 
> same standard for any other historical event?

To start with, I would like to have something more than the hysterical
accounts of so-called eyewitnesses, eyewitnesses who typically get other
details about the so-called gassing process wrong.

A forensic test would be nice, showing that the corpse had been gassed to
death. It would be nice to be shown a room or Nazi drawing of a room
designed for homicidal gassings. It would be nice to see a Nazi document
describing the use of such a gas chamber.

Faurisson claims he will accept as proof any single document or piece of
evidence that the exterminationists will accept as proof. That might not be
a bad place to start.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15076 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!wp-sp.nba.trw.com!acsc.com!gopher.sdsc.edu!news.cerf.net!nntp-server.caltech.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 1994 07:29:53 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 37
Message-ID: 
References:  <3220rd$29s@search01.news.aol.com> <1994Aug08.030837.22458@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> <32g8lc$2mb@csi0.csi.UOttawa.CA> <32grsi$68h@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article , Brian Harmon
 wrote:

> 	If the Nazis destroyed all of the extermination facil. at the
> Auschwtiz, Birkenau complex, then where did Leuchter take his samples
> from?  There are aerial photos of the camps in operation.

I am not saying that there are not still buildings and portions of
buildings extant that are presented as being or having been homicidal gas
chambers, I am saying that there is no trace of anything that would lead an
expert to conclude that these facilities actually were homicidal gas
chambers. When the buildings are examined, they show no evidence of their
alleged use, therefore, the Nazis must have destroyed all traces, yes? Of
course, they left the "gas chambers" standing at Majdanek and other camps.

> >In fact, there are no documents anywhere showing evidence of a homicidal
> >gas chamber. This means that not only are there no German documents, but
> >there are also no Allied documents of code intercepts, stolen plans, etc.
>  
> 	nonsense.
>  
> 	Letters from the auschitz construction dept. to SS general Kammler
> speak rather explicitly about a "gassing cellar." (dated 1/29/43).  They're
> reproduced in the "Original NAzi Documents" file of Reitlinger's _The
> final solution_.  (thanks to the Leuchter faq).

As Butz and others have pointed out, there are any number of reasons why a
room might be called a "gassing cellar" (translated from the German). Is
this reference what you believe to be the best evidence that the Nazis had
a plan or policy of extermination Jews in homicidal gas chambers?

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15077 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!wp-sp.nba.trw.com!acsc.com!gopher.sdsc.edu!news.cerf.net!nntp-server.caltech.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 1994 07:34:58 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 21
Message-ID: 
References:  <32offf$irl@access1.digex.net>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article , dspiegel@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu
(Dan Spiegel) wrote:

> >Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
> >Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
> >The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
> >The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping
> 
>    Still advertising. Care to list the academic institutions that
> subscribe to your "scholarly" journal?

If you are really that interested, I believe that some of the institutions
were listed in a recent Journal article. Hint: the list of names might
surprise you.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15078 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!wp-sp.nba.trw.com!acsc.com!gopher.sdsc.edu!news.cerf.net!nntp-server.caltech.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Raven's reading skills are as poor as ever
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 1994 07:37:22 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 23
Message-ID: 
References:    <32tepm$4k9@access2.digex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <32tepm$4k9@access2.digex.net>, mstein@access.digex.net (Michael
P. Stein) wrote:

> In article ,
> Greg Raven  wrote [in response to Jamie McCarthy]:
> >By the way, thank you for admitting that there is no direct evidence of the
> >existence of the gas chambers.
> 
>     How nice that Jamie McCarthy has you to speak for him - he hardly need
> post himself!
> 
>     Quote the text where he does this, Greg.  QUOTE THE TEXT.  Where is
> it, Greg?  Where?

If your read Mr. McCarthy's post, you will see exactly what I mean. Didn't
I post his original text just above my reply?

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15081 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!uhog.mit.edu!news.kei.com!eff!news.duke.edu!convex!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Date: 19 Aug 1994 15:49:10 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <332k9m$lj@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:    
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu
X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: alt.revisionism

Greg Raven  wrote:

# As Butz and others have pointed out, there are any number of reasons
# why a room might be called a "gassing cellar" (translated from the
# German). 

Such as what?


-Danny Keren.



Article 15083 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another question Raven has avoided
Date: 19 Aug 1994 16:31:02 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <332mo6$44t@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References: <32s8fu$ilb@access3.digex.net> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu
X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: alt.revisionism

Greg Raven  wrote:

# To start with, I would like to have something more than the hysterical
# accounts of so-called eyewitnesses

What is "hysterical" about the testimonies, say, of Boeck, Kremer,
Stangl, Brack, Bahr, Stark, Mentz, Franz, Klein, Hoessler, Muench,
Fuchs, Bauer, Burmeister, Pfannenstiel, Bolender, Wochner, 
Malzmueller, Oberhauser, Matthes, Lambert, Prufer, Sander, and
Schultze, to name a few?

Of course, some people might testify about mass gassings with a
little more emotion that they would testify about other
things - that is understandable. Yet, I see nothing "hysterical"
about the testimonies of the people I mentioned above.

What about related documents? Are they "hysterical"? Not at all.

# A forensic test would be nice, showing that the corpse had been gassed 
# to death. 

Does this strange person think that the Nazis wasted their time in
conducting autopsies on the corpses taken out from the gas chambers?
I think they knew pretty well what the cause of death was.

# Faurisson claims he will accept as proof any single document or piece of
# evidence that the exterminationists will accept as proof. That might not
# be a bad place to start.

Is this the same Faurisson who was quoted here as having analyzed "the
anal complex of the Jews"? The man is obviously insane. Also, Raven's
above statement makes no sense. Documents about the construction and
use of the Kremas exist. 


-Danny Keren.


Article 15086 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!access.digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Raven's reading skills are as poor as ever
Date: 19 Aug 1994 12:33:19 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <332msf$p3d@access2.digex.net>
References:   <32tepm$4k9@access2.digex.net> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: access2.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>In article <32tepm$4k9@access2.digex.net>,
>mstein@access.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) wrote:
>
>> In article ,
>> Greg Raven  wrote [in response to Jamie McCarthy]:
>> >By the way, thank you for admitting that there is no direct evidence of the
>> >existence of the gas chambers.
>> 
>>     Quote the text where he does this, Greg.  QUOTE THE TEXT.  Where is
>> it, Greg?  Where?
>
>If your read Mr. McCarthy's post, you will see exactly what I mean. Didn't
>I post his original text just above my reply?

    Here's what you quoted, Greg:

> ...ah, what's the use.  You could dump a truckload of documents in these
> guys laps, show them confessions and testimonies and interviews and
> court transcripts, and there would never be enough "proof" for them.

    Please define "direct evidence."  Documents such as the memo
containing the word "Vergasungskeller" (gassing cellar) are not direct
evidence?  Please tell me which of these words translate as "I admit there
is no direct evidence of the Holocaust."  Please tell me what dictionary
you use to get the definitions that support such an interpretation.

    All I see McCarthy "admitting" is that revisionists are either morons,
lunatics, or dishonest.

    Oh, while you're at it, why don't you tell me how you came up with
that paraphrase of p. 181 of Pressac, concerning the testimony of Bo"ck? 
Need me to remind you of what Pressac actually said, and what *you*
claimed Pressac said?  (It's been posted; it hasn't expired off my system 
yet.)
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15087 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!access.digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: JHR subscribers
Date: 19 Aug 1994 12:40:42 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <332naa$p9p@access2.digex.net>
References:    
NNTP-Posting-Host: access2.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>In article , dspiegel@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu
>(Dan Spiegel) wrote:

>>    Still advertising. Care to list the academic institutions that
>> subscribe to your "scholarly" journal?
>
>If you are really that interested, I believe that some of the institutions
>were listed in a recent Journal article. Hint: the list of names might
>surprise you.

    Wouldn't surprise me.  The fact that there is a list of names in the
JHR does not constitute evidence that the names listed actually requested
the publication.  Even if the institutions actually do receive the JHR,
they could have been given freebie subs by the IHR in an attempt to gain
false credibility.  Can Mr. Raven produce authentic signed documents from
those institutions containing a request for a paid subscription?
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15088 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz
From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Can Kleim go where Raven is afraid to?
Date: 19 Aug 1994 17:06:27 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <332oqj$nop@agate.berkeley.edu>
References: <32vitp$fhr@umd5.umd.edu> <1994Aug18.155450.1327@msus1.msus.edu> <330off$svp@agate.berkeley.edu> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>In article <330off$svp@agate.berkeley.edu>, schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu
>(Richard Schultz) wrote:
>
>> Then maybe you'll be willing to do something for us that Raven seems to
>> be unwilling to:  give us your single strongest piece of evidence that
>> World War II occurred.  This shouldn't be too difficult.
>
>No, it shouldn't. Not nearly as difficult as it seems to be for the
>exterminationists here in alt.revisionism to respond to my original posts,
>and stay on the topic.

Except that your original posts *were* responded to, and I have explained
at least twice why this request is squarely on the topic.  It's you
who keep ignoring things.

>If you are ready to concede that you have no
>evidence to support your views on the Holocaust story, and if you are ready
>to state that you do not believe the the Second World War took place, let
>me know and we can spend some time on evidence that contradicts your
>position, although as it is hardly revisionist, I won't have much time to
>dedicate to it. Fortunately, it shouldn't take too much time.

I normally go to great lengths to avoid losing my temper on the net, but
I really have to ask:  are you actually that dense, or are you just pretending?
I find it hard to believe that anyone can actually be that stupid, but I
keep getting surprised.  How many times must you be told?  (minor violation
of good posting practice to follow)  HOW CAN WE GET IT THROUGH YOUR THICK
SKULL THAT THE ISSUE AT HAND IS DETERMINING STANDARDS FOR HISTORICAL PROOF?
(sorry about that)  You claim that you don not believe the Holocaust 
occurred and want "one or two" pieces of evidence that it did.  Since 
most people who got past high school history classes realize that proving
the reality of a particular historical event rarely if ever relies on a
single source (heck, there are even multiple *original* copies of the
Magna Carta), most reasonable people just laughed off your request as the
completely bogus and ludicrous flimflammery it is.  But some of us (the
young and idealistic types, I guess) thought that maybe, just maybe, we
could get you to understand why your request (well, actually, let's be 
honest, it's Faurrisson's request) for "one piece of evidence" is so 
fundamentally silly.  To do this, a number of us independently came up
with the idea (this is semi-Socratic method, I suppose) of asking you to
come up with a single piece of evidence that World War II happened.
Either you would concede that that is not possible (see my reply to 
Kleim's rather pathetic attempt), or you would list a single piece of
evidence which would be refuted as proof positive that World War II 
happened, and you would thus eventually have to agree that it is not
possible to prove an historical event by a single piece of evidence
(in general).

Instead, you have taken your usual tactic of doing two contradictory
things.  First you gave a *list* of what you would consider best 
evidence for World War II -- not a *single* piece of evidence.  Then
you keep telling us (more than once) how you really don't have time for
this kind of thing.  If, however, as you agree above, it shouldn't take
too much time to present the *single* best piece of evidence that World
War II occurred -- why waste time telling us how little time it would
take?  In the amount of time it took you to type in your post, you 
could have simply typed in the evidence for which I have been asking
you.  How about it?

Or, in the words of a famous philosopher, "what a maroon."

					Richard Schultz


Article 15091 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!access.digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Can Raven succeed where Kleim failed?
Date: 19 Aug 1994 14:28:40 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <332tko$uf@access2.digex.net>
References: <32vitp$fhr@umd5.umd.edu> <1994Aug18.155450.1327@msus1.msus.edu> <330off$svp@agate.berkeley.edu> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: access2.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>In article <330off$svp@agate.berkeley.edu>, schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu
>(Richard Schultz) wrote:
>
>> Then maybe you'll be willing to do something for us that Raven seems to
>> be unwilling to:  give us your single strongest piece of evidence that
>> World War II occurred.  This shouldn't be too difficult.
>
>No, it shouldn't.

    One would think so given how we are told that there are mountains of
evidence to support the World War II story.  Yet Kleim seems to be having
some difficulty.  He responded with a declaration of war by the US on
Japan.  Even if this alleged war took place - does a piece of paper prove
that shots were actually fired? - does he seriously believe that the world
consists of just those two countries?  There have been many declarations
of war which were not called "World War."  How does this declaration prove
a "World War" any more than the declaration of the War of 1812? 

    No, Kleim's post was both worthless and unresponsive.  Perhaps you can
do better.


>If you are ready to concede that you have no
>evidence to support your views on the Holocaust story,

    I think I have *at least* as much evidence to support the Holocaust
story as you have to support your contention that "World War II" occurred. 


>and if you are ready to state that you do not believe the the Second 
>World War took place,

    I do not deny that there may have been fighting between individual
countries.  But a "World War?"  Do you mean to say you have evidence of
battles which took place in Brazil, or involving Brazilian troops, during
the period 1941-45?  Even if you take the rather myopic view of
mislabeling Europe as the world, what evidence do you have for Swiss or
Swedish participation?  None at all!  Are you seriously suggesting that
Switzerland and Sweden are not part of Europe, let alone the "world?"  So
I believe I can say with perfect accuracy that no, there was *not* a
"World War" (no matter *what* number you put on it) during the period
1941-1945, although individual battles may have taken place. 


>let me know and we can spend some time on evidence that contradicts your
>position, although as it is hardly revisionist, I won't have much time to
>dedicate to it. Fortunately, it shouldn't take too much time.

    Fine.  I have stated my position.  Let's have your best piece of
evidence (two, if you absolutely must) for this alleged "World War II"
then, and we'll examine them.
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15097 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!access.digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: More forgery!
Date: 19 Aug 1994 14:34:48 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <332u08$1ca@access2.digex.net>
References: <32vitp$fhr@umd5.umd.edu> <330off$svp@agate.berkeley.edu>  <332oqj$nop@agate.berkeley.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: access2.digex.net

In article <332oqj$nop@agate.berkeley.edu>,
Richard Schultz  wrote:
>(heck, there are even multiple *original* copies of the Magna Carta)

    You realize, of course, that the Magna Carta is a Soviet forgery,
don't you?  How can multiple "copies" be "original?"  Absurd!  The fact
that there are multiple versions should make us very suspicious indeed of
the authenticity of this document.
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15099 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!via.kz.merit.edu!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Raven's reading skills are as poor as ever
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 1994 16:21:45 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 88
Message-ID: 
References: 
   
   
   <32tepm$4k9@access2.digex.net>
   
NNTP-Posting-Host: 35.132.2.9

greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:
> mstein@access.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) wrote:
> > Greg Raven  wrote [in response to Jamie McCarthy]:
> > >By the way, thank you for admitting that there is no direct evidence of the
> > >existence of the gas chambers.
> >
> >     How nice that Jamie McCarthy has you to speak for him - he hardly need
> > post himself!
> > 
> >     Quote the text where he does this, Greg.  QUOTE THE TEXT.  Where is
> > it, Greg?  Where?
> 
> If your read Mr. McCarthy's post, you will see exactly what I mean. Didn't
> I post his original text just above my reply?

(sigh)  No, Greg, you did not.  You deleted all but the last paragraph of it.

As a matter of fact, the article of mine you replied to, the one with ID
, said nothing at all about
"direct evidence" of the gas chambers.

Come on, Greg.  This lying stuff works on half-hour TV programs, but not on
the net.  Anyone with a newsreader can search backwards on that ID above,
and read for themselves what I wrote.  And they'll see that I said zip about
"direct evidence of the existence of the gas chambers."

Or perhaps you were thinking of another article of mine, the one with ID
 , in which I explicitly wrote
"We can deal with the truth or falsity of this statement later."  Does that
sound like an "admission" to you, Mr. Raven?

It's been clear, Mr. Raven, to everyone but you, that I'm certainly not
admitting what you want me to admit.  (At least, not yet -- there! that
should keep your curiosity piqued!)  You changed the subject when you
alleged this "admission" of mine.  Will you kindly first address the
question I originally raised?

That question being:  _assuming for the sake of argument_ that the gas
chambers are totally reconstructions, isn't the section of Mr. Leuchter's
report that deals with the chemical analysis of their walls either (1)
a fraudulent worthless sham, or (2) evidence of Mr. Leuchter's complete
ineptitude and ignorance?

Answer that question satisfactorily, Mr. Raven, and _then_ I'll let you
change the subject and I'll talk about whether or not or how much of
the gas chambers are really reconstructions.


I'd also like you to answer the question about your contradicting yourself
about denying the Holocaust, which I most recently put to you in
.

I'd also like you to explain where Browning and Lipstadt, especially
Lipstadt, have, in your words, "admitted that the Hoess statements are
useless."  That request was made several times, most recently in
<1994Aug16.175622.15048@hobbes.kzoo.edu>.

I'd also like you to produce for me the article you wrote that asked to
know whether the evidence presented to you on May 4th was the best
evidence -- I still assert that you are a blatant liar, and that you
have never asked any such thing.  That request of mine was in
.

I'd also like you to answer Mr. Stein's charge to you about misrepresenting
p. 181 of Pressac, most recently found in <32qd23$luj@access2.digex.net>.

I'd also like you to tell me whether _all_ evidence hailing from the
Soviet Union should be considered false, prima facie, as you seemed to
imply with a comment.  And, whether you're aware of the difference between
"quadrangular" and "rectilinear."  Those issues were brought up in
.

I'd like you to answer D.J. Schaeffer's charge about misrepresenting a
section of the book _Night_, by Elie Wiesel.  Your, shall we say, lack of
reading comprehension was documented in .

Not to mention, I'd like you to stop asking which evidence is the "best
evidence," over and over, like a parrot.  There is no such thing as
"best evidence," as has been explained to you many times.  But if you
feel an insane need to attack the innumerable pieces of evidence that
indicate that the Holocaust occurred, you have my blessing to start with
the ten documents posted on May 4th -- as has been explained to you
many times.

Mr. Raven, you seem to have your work cut out for you!  Get cracking!
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 15102 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!kmcvay
From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay)
Subject: Re: Can Kleim go where Raven is afraid to?
References: <1994Aug18.155450.1327@msus1.msus.edu> <330off$svp@agate.berkeley.edu> 
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac
Message-ID: <1994Aug21.115623.18126@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 94 11:56:23 GMT

In article  greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes:

>No, it shouldn't. Not nearly as difficult as it seems to be for the
>exterminationists here in alt.revisionism to respond to my original posts,
>and stay on the topic. If you are ready to concede that you have no
>evidence to support your views on the Holocaust story, and if you are ready
>to state that you do not believe the the Second World War took place, let
>me know and we can spend some time on evidence that contradicts your
>position, although as it is hardly revisionist, I won't have much time to
>dedicate to it. Fortunately, it shouldn't take too much time.

>Well?

Archive/File: holocaust/usa/ihr raven.002
Last-Modified: 1994/05/05

From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie R. McCarthy)
Subject: A response to Greg Raven's request
Message-ID: <1994May4.183336.1331@hobbes.kzoo.edu>
Date: Wed, 4 May 1994 18:33:36 GMT
Lines: 631

On April 20th, Greg Raven posted a challenge.  He asserted, without
evidence, that the Holocaust never happened - and he challenged those
of us who disagree to _prove_otherwise_!
 
Things are certainly getting interesting, now that the Institute for
Historical Review has an important member on the net.  Perhaps, soon, the
Flat-Earth Society will enter into sci.geology discussions and ask the
participants to "provide evidence" that the planet is a sphere. Then, the
editorial board of the National Enquirer will ask the readers of rec.music
to "provide evidence" that Elvis is not being held in suspended animation
at the North Pole by space aliens.
 
But preposterous challenges like those could be simply cross-posted to
alt.usenet.kooks and laughed off.  Sadly, the equally-preposterous
claims of Greg Raven and his compatriots cannot.  They are a serious
matter, and must be addressed seriously.
 
Greg Raven wrote:
 
>...I would like to get this 
>discussion back on track, at least as far as Holocaust revisionism is 
>concerned..... To this end, I would like to make a few simple statements 
>concerning my position, and then ask for a fairly specific response, in 
>order to prevent a splintering of discussions and energies.
 
We welcome focus.  Education is our goal, and confusion hinders education.
 
>First, I do not deny the Holocaust happened. Let me repeat that. I do not 
>deny the Holocaust happened. For the purposes of this discussion, I am 
>using a fairly generic definition of the word "Holocaust," which is "the 
>murder of six million Jews as a central act of state by the Nazis during 
>the Second World War, many in gas chambers." If anyone has a problem with 
>this definition, I invite you to provide your version.
>
>Second, here is what Holocaust revisionists REALLY say: The Jews of Europe 
>suffered a great tragedy before and during the Second World War. Many were 
>mistreated, and many died under horrific conditions. However, a) there is 
>no evidence that the Nazis had a plan or policy of exterminating the Jews, 
>b) there is no evidence that there were homicidal gas chambers for murder 
>Jews, and c) the figure of six million Jewish victims is an exaggeration.
>
>I imagine that some of you will take exception to at least some of these 
>statements. What I ask from those who do is simply this: Provide me with 
>what you think is the one or two best pieces of evidence that the Nazis had
>a plan to exterminate millions of Jews in homicidal gas chambers. Once you 
>provide what you think is the best evidence, I will respond.
>
>You will note that I do not want long collages consisting of snippets of 
>speeches, fragments of documents, etc. I want one or two pieces of 
>evidence. I will not consider personal attacks, discussions of race, 
>discussions about the meta-meaning of Holocaust "denial," or other 
>non-substantive, off-topic posts to address the issue at hand. I look 
>forward to hearing from all who have something to say.
>
>P.S. I do not have a lot of time to put into this discussion, but I will do
>the best I can. I hope you understand, and try not to get too surly with me
>if I skip a day or two while I attempt to meet my many deadlines.
>
>Greg Raven
>greg.ihr@kaiwan.com
 
 
Point one:
 
It is not for _Raven_ to be challenging _us_.
 
No reputable historian believes the claims in his fourth paragraph - that
much quickly becomes clear to anyone taking the time to research the
matter.  The Holocaust, the deliberate murder of about six million Jews
along with about five million others, is a historical fact, as certain and
undeniable as World War II itself.
 
Suppose a competent adult said to you "I do not believe that the United
States ever landed a person on the moon - please present your best
evidence that they did."  Where to begin?  You would have to begin with
the question that comes to mind, which is "why does this person contradict
every authority on the subject?"  We need more information from Mr. Raven.
We need to know why he doubts the thousands of testimonials, the physical
evidence still present half a century later, the confessions, the memos,
the letters, the recordings - the tons upon tons of evidence that
inevitably collects after any historical calamity of such a scale.  It is
there, it is irrefutable, why on earth does he doubt its veracity?
 
Now, of course, we are not naive.  We have seen enough of the IHR's
material to guess much of what he will say on any given topic.
 
But the burden of proof is _his_.  Reality does not need to be pinned down
- it's available, in as much detail as desired, to anyone with the time to
visit a library.  Mr. Raven's claims, however, are at this point
impossibly, and perhaps deliberately, vague.
 
Therefore, we pose the question as it should be.  What we ask from him
(or anyone who denies the Holocaust) is simply this:  provide us with what
he thinks are the one or two best pieces of evidence that the Nazis did
_not_ exterminate millions of people in homicidal gas chambers. Once he
provides what he thinks is the best evidence, we will respond.
 
For the last two years, repeatedly, Jamie McCarthy has been asking this
question of Dan Gannon, both on Usenet and on Gannon's personal BBS.  He
has yet to receive an answer.  We hope Mr. Raven will better assist us.
 
 
Point two:
 
In his efforts to whitewash Holocaust-denial, Mr. Raven has posted a
glaring contradiction, perhaps without even noticing that he's done so.
His third paragraph defines "Holocaust" as "the murder of six million Jews
as a central act of state by the Nazis during the Second World War, many
in gas chambers."  (This definition will suffice, but we will concern
ourselves with _all_ the victims of the Nazi mass murderers - they took
the lives of about five million non-Jews, as well.)  And he writes, twice,
"I do not deny the Holocaust happened."
 
Then, in his fourth paragraph, he denies the Holocaust happened.  He writes
that "there is no evidence that the Nazis had a plan or policy of
exterminating the Jews."  He writes that "there is no evidence that there
were homicidal gas chambers for murder [sic] Jews."  And he writes that
"the figure of six million Jewish victims is an exaggeration."
 
One wonders how he will reconcile these two opposing viewpoints.
 
We suspect that he would like us to believe that he does not deny the
Holocaust - rather, that he merely has an "open mind" on the subject,
and is simply waiting to see sufficient evidence either way.
 
Of course, that would fool no one.  The readers of alt.revisionism have
seen Mr. Raven's name on enough articles from the IHR to know what his
beliefs are.  They've read comments from him on the GEnie network saying
that Hitler was a "great man, the best thing that could have happened to
Germany."  His mind is clearly made up.
 
What should we think if we encountered someone who claimed:  "Based on
intense studies for the last twenty years, I do not believe that the
United States ever landed a person on the moon - but my mind is open on
the subject."  We would conclude, of course:  that person is not merely
wrong, that person is also deliberately misrepresenting his or her
beliefs, for some reason.
 
 
Point three:
 
We understand Raven's plea that he does not have "a lot of time to put into
this discussion."  We know where he's coming from.  We have full-time
occupations that demand most of our schedule.  All of our efforts to
combat Holocaust-denial are in our spare time;  none of us has been paid a
dime for doing it.

Greg Raven, on the other hand, is an editor at the Institute for Historical
Review, the largest Holocaust-denial-promoting organization in the world.
His email address is "greg.ihr".  He are unquestionably a professional at
this - he does it for a living.  We wonder how much he gets paid.
 
And, we hope he won't use his other commitments as an excuse to back out of
this discussion.
 
 
Point four:
 
As we say - this is a serious matter, and must be dealt with seriously.
 
We know the Holocaust happened;  it's undeniable.  "How do we know?" is a
valid question - it's more of an epistemological than a historical
question, but it's valid nonetheless.  "How do we know that Washington was
the first President of the United States?" is an equally valid question.
 
We know because we have _tremendous_ amounts of evidence telling us so.
 
Greg Raven has, in just a few weeks' time on Usenet, already exhibited
a tendency to downplay the amount of evidence.  This is one of the basic
tricks of Holocaust-deniers:  change the word "tremendous" above to
"not much," and hope no one will notice.  Then, attack the "not much."
 
For example, he wrote (through Ross Vicksell):  "The Germans were quite
good about documenting everything else (we know almost to the penny how
much they spent on dog kennels, for example), yet nothing about an
extermination program."  This is a lie:  we know a _tremendous_ amount
about the details of the various extermination programs.
 
When presented with a list of thirty-five books of documentation, Greg's
response was "Obviously, I cannot respond to each document contained in
all these books you mention.  Please select one document...."
 
No, Mr. Raven is right - he _can't_ respond to each document. There is
simply too much evidence.  It's overwhelming, it's too much for even
specialized historians to take it all in.  The simple fact is, we know too
much about that period of history for him or anyone else to deny it.
 
We want to stress this fact.  We will provide documents to examine, and we
will even tell Mr. Raven in which order he is to examine them.  But we
could spend years doing it and barely scratch the surface.  He has asked
us twice now to pick a single solitary document - to squabble over a tide
pool, and ignore the vast ocean.
 
Suppose we gave him a memo from Hitler detailing a plan to exterminate
millions of Jews, and suppose he proved conclusively that it was a
forgery.  What would he have proved?  Nothing.  Nothing at all.
 
D.J. Schaeffer anticipated this possibility on April 21st, when he
addressed Mr. Raven, saying:
 
> I suspect that what you want is the opportunity to knock down individual
> documents, and declare a revisionist "victory" by virtue of having
> eliminated the "best evidence."  As Barry Shein has pointed out here,
> however, unless you can eliminate every eyewitness testimony, every
> document, every piece of evidence, then you have not disproved the
> Holocaust.
 
It's worth noting that Schaeffer also pointed out Raven's contradiction,
our point two above.  And yet Raven dismissed Schaeffer's entire article
as "meaningless."  It is not, of course, meaningless - it's true, and it's
meaningful.  It's just that Mr. Raven does not like the implications.
Mr. Raven wants to channel "tremendous" into a few documents' worth of "not
much," and then deal only with those documents.  He expects that he'll be
able to quibble about the translations of a few words, ask a few questions
about authenticity, and then declare that he's cast doubt on all of them,
and that, Q.E.D., the "best evidence" for the Holocaust is untrustworthy.
 
Of course, we all know that won't wash.  Anyone could disprove anything
this way.  Let's try an example, shall we?  We'll ask for one or two
pieces of "best evidence" that Americans landed on the moon.  Let's say
we're handed a videotape of the event and testimony from Neil Armstrong
himself.  We question the authenticity of the tape (black and white
pictures are easily forged, just look at the film _2001_) and the
qualifications of the witness (any grounds will do). Instantly, we've cast
doubt upon the "best evidence" for the moon landing - and if this is the
_best_ evidence, why all the rest of it must be even _less_ trustworthy!
 
(It is, incidentally, perfectly acceptable for _us_ to ask _Raven_ for one
or two pieces of evidence.  His case consists solely of trying to "knock
holes" in the existing body of research.  The IHR's numerous claims are,
for the most part, totally independent of one another - they are attacks
upon what is known, but they do not join together into a cohesive theory
of what _did_ happen to those eleven million people in the early 1940s.
The case of the Holocaust-deniers is nothing but artillery shells fired at
the establishment, and there's nothing wrong with us asking them to name
which of those shells they find most effective.  But they won't want to
pick any one of them, because, upon examination, they all turn out to be
made of marshmallows, and their only viable strategy is to keep firing
more and more of them.)
 
We have not gone into detail about the moon landing, whereas Mr. Raven and
his colleagues have nothing _but_ details.  That is the only difference
between our example and the technique used by Holocaust-deniers.
 
We would hope that any reasonable observer, and indeed most unreasonable
ones, would be too smart to fall for such a simple trick, and that there
would be no need to waste time with answers to such sophistry. 
Unfortunately, that is exactly what Hitler's "Big Lie" technique counted
on - repeat a charge loud enough and often enough, hoping that any lack of
response will lead people to conclude that it must therefore be true.  It
is for this reason, and this reason alone, that we respond to Greg Raven
and his ilk.
 
So, we will indeed give him a document which we feel fairly represents the
massive collection of conclusive evidence that the Holocaust happened. And
then we will give him another.  And another, and another - because they
are all evidence:  statements from Hoess and Himmler and Boeck and Broad
and Kremer and Glowakci and others involved in the process, eyewitness
accounts from Wiesenthal and Kogon and Wiesel and Buki and the Paisikovics
and Mueller and Dragon and Rosenblum and Nyizli and Silberberg and
Mandelbaum and the thousands upon tens of thousands of relatively-unknown
others, plans for the chambers, plans for the vehicles, orders for the
equipment, inventories of the Krematoria, letters to the government,
letters from the government, letters between government officials,
memorandums, reports, diagrams, charts, speeches, statistics, diaries...
 
We are quite sure that he will attempt to explain away as many of these as
he can.  But this is one of his main errors:  while one or two die throws
cannot conclusively prove that the dice are loaded, one hundred thousand
consecutive throws of 7 cannot possibly be anything but.  And each time he
makes this error, or commits some other fallacy, or makes another
unsubstantiated assertion, or contradicts himself, we will be there to
point it out.
 
We encourage him to waste as much time as he likes, but we'll warn him:
there is too much evidence, and we've seen all his tricks.  He can't win.
 
 
Following are documents that demonstrate that, in his words, "the Nazis had
a plan to exterminate millions of Jews in homicidal gas chambers."  Please
note that several of them refer instead to the plan actually being carried
out, a technical quibble which we hope Mr. Raven will forgive.
 
We ask Mr. Raven to please apply himself first to document one.  When he
has finished attempting to convince his audience that document one does
not suit his needs, then he may proceed on to document two, and so on
until he reaches the end of the list.  We would hope that Mr. Raven would
limit his answers to one document per posted article, to facilitate any
further discussion that may take place, and that he would enumerate his
points, as we have done here.  As we say - we welcome focus.
 
 
Document one:
 
We begin with the document that was presented to the Nazi Ernst Zuendel on
the "60 Minutes" television show.  It is a speech delivered by Heinrich
Himmler.  The speech was both transcribed and recorded;  we have the
recording in the national archives in Washington, D.C., and we have
Himmler's notes for the speech.  Indeed, most Holocaust-deniers accept
this document as valid (with the notable exception of our own Milton
"Hermann" Kleim).
 
The speech is quite famous and its text may be found in many sources,
for example in the book _Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg
Military Tribunals_, published by the U.S. Government Printing Office,
1949-1953.
 
Speeches by Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler before senior SS officers in Poznan.
October 4 and 6, 1943.
 
    I am referring here to the evacuation of the Jews, the elimination
    of the Jewish people.  This is one of the things that is easily said:
    "The Jewish people are going to be exterminated," that's what every
    party member says, "sure, it's in our program, elimination of the
    Jews, extermination - it'll be done."  And then they all come along,
    the 80 million worthy Germans, and each one has his one decent Jew.
    Of course, the others are swine, but this one, he is a first-rate
    Jew.  Of all those who talk like this, not one has seen it happen,
    not one has had to go through with it.  Most of you men know what
    it is like to see 100 corpses side by side, or 500, or 1000. To have
    stood fast through this and - except for cases of human weakness - to
    have stayed decent, that has made us hard.
    
    I ask of you that what I say in this circle you really only hear and
    never speak about.  We come to the question: how is it with the women
    and children?  I have resolved even here on a completely clear
    solution.  That is to say, I do not consider myself justified in
    eradicating the men - so to speak killing or ordering them killed
    - and allowing the children to grow up and avenge our sons and
    grandsons.  The difficult decision has to be taken, to cause this
    race to disappear from the earth.
 
 
Document two:
 
>From the book _Hitler and the Final Solution_ by G. Fleming, University of
California Press, 1984, p. 142.
 
Report entitled "Resettlement of Jews" written by SS-Sturmbannfuehrer
Gricksch for SS-Col. von Herff and Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler, after
inspection of the Auschwitz camp on May 14-16, 1943.
 
    The unfit go to cellars in a large house which are entered from
    outside.  They go down five or six steps into a fairly long,
    well-constructed and well-ventilated cellar area, which is lined with
    benches to the left and right. It is brightly lit, and the benches
    are numbered.  The prisoners are told that they are to be cleansed
    and disinfected for their new assignments.  They must therefore
    completely undress to be bathed.  To avoid panic and to prevent
    disturbances of any kind, they are instructed to arrange their
    clothing neatly under their respective numbers, so that they will
    be able to find their things again after their bath.  Everything
    proceeds in a perfectly orderly fashion.  Then they pass through
    a small corridor and enter a large cellar room which resembles a
    shower bath.  In this room are three large pillars, into which
    certain materials can be lowered from outside the cellar room. When
    three- to four-hundred people have been herded into this room, the
    doors are shut, and containers filled with the substances are dropped
    down into the pillars.  As soon as the containers touch the base
    of the pillars, they release particular substances that put the
    people to sleep in one minute.  A few minutes later, the door opens on
    the other side, where the elevator is located.... Then the corpses
    are loaded into elevators and brought up to the first floor, where
    ten large crematoria are located.  (Because fresh corpses burn
    particularly well, only 50-100 lbs. of coke are needed for the whole
    process.)  The job itself is performed by Jewish prisoners, who never
    step outside this camp again.
 
 
Document three:
 
>From the book _The Goebbels Diaries 1942-1943_, edited by L.P. Lochner,
Doubleday & Co., 1948, p. 86.
 
Goebbels' diary, February 14, 1942.
 
    World Jewry will suffer a great catastrophe at the same time as
    Bolshevism. The Fuehrer once more expressed his determination to
    clean up the Jews in Europe pitilessly. There must be no squeamish
    sentimentalism about it.  The Jews have deserved the catastrophe that
    has now overtaken them.  Their destruction will now go hand in hand
    with the destruction of our enemies.  We must hasten this process
    with cold ruthlessness.
 
March 26, 1942.
 
    Beginning with Lublin, the Jews in the general government [Poland] are
    now being evacuated eastward.  The procedure is a pretty barbaric one
    and not to be described here more definitely.  Not much will remain
    of the Jews.  On the whole it can be said that about 60 per cent
    of them will have to be liquidated whereas only 40 per cent can
    be used for forced labor.
 
 
Document four:
 
Hoess' memoirs describe the gassing process clearly and unambiguously in
many places.  Here is one example.  The memoirs were published, among
other places, in the book _Kommandant in Auschwitz_, by Rudolf Hoess,
Deutsche Verlagsanstalt, Stuttgart, 1958.  English translation _Commandant
of Auschwitz: the Autobiography of Rudolf Hoess_, World Press, Cleveland,
1959, p. 123f.
 
    On the railroad ramp the Jews, who up till then had been under the
    supervision of the state police, were taken over by a squad from the
    camp.  They were led by the head of the detention camp, in two
    detachments, to the bunker.  That was what we called the extermination
    installations.  The luggage stayed on the ramp, from where it was
    carried to the sorting area - called Kanada - between the buildings
    of the DAW [weapons factory] and the courtyard.  The Jews had to
    undress near the bunker.  They were told that they had to go into
    what were called delousing rooms.  All these rooms, five in all, were
    filled simultaneously.  The doors were hermetically sealed, and the
    contents of the cans of gas were dropped in through the holes in the
    ceiling provided for this purpose.
    
    Half an hour later the doors were opened;  there were two in each
    room.  The corpses were removed and taken to the ditches on tip wagons
    that ran on rails.  Trucks carried the clothes to the sorting area.
    All the work, including help in undressing, filling the bunker,
    emptying the bunker, burying the corpses, as well as digging and
    filling up the mass graves, was done by a special detail of Jews who
    were housed separately and who, in accordance with Eichmann's
    instructions, were also exterminated after each big operation.
 
 
Document five:
 
Hoess not only wrote many pages detailing the extermination effort, he
testified about it under oath.  This segment of that testimony is quoted
in _Documents on Nazism, 1919-1945_, edited by Jeremy Noakes and G.
Pridham, Viking Press, New York, 1974, pp. 490-1.

    The 'final solution' of the Jewish question meant the complete
    extermination of all Jews in Europe.  I was ordered to establish
    extermination facilities at Auschwitz in June 1942.  At that time,
    there were already in the Generalgouvernement [the area of Poland not
    incorporated into Germany or Russia] three other extermination camps
    - Belzec, Treblinka, and Wolzek.  These camps were under the command
    of the task forces of the Security Police and SD.  I visited
    Treblinka to find out how they carried out their extermination. The
    Camp Commandant at Treblinka told me that he had liquidated 80,000 in
    the course of six months.  He was principally concerned with
    liquidating all the Jews from the Warsaw ghetto.  He used monoxide
    gas and I did not think that his methods were very efficient.  So
    when I set up the extermination building at Auschwitz, I used Cyclon
    B, which was a crystallized prussic acid which we dropped into the
    death chamber from a small opening.  It took from three to fifteen
    minutes to kill the people in the death chamber, depending upon
    climatic conditions. We knew when the people were dead because their
    screaming stopped. We usually waited about half an hour before we
    opened the doors and removed the bodies. After the bodies were
    removed our special squads took off the rings and extracted the gold
    from the teeth of the corpses.
    
    Another improvement on Treblinka that we made was building our gas
    chambers to accomodate 2000 people at a time, whereas at Treblinka
    their ten gas chambers only accomodated 200 people each. The way we
    selected our victims was as follows: we had two SS doctors on duty at
    Auschwitz to examine the incoming transports of prisoners.  The
    prisoners would be marched past one of the doctors who would make
    spot decisions as they walked by.  Those who were fit to work were
    sent into the camp.  Others were sent immediately to the
    extermination plants. Children of tender years were invariably
    exterminated since by reason of their youth they were unable to work.
    Still another improvement made on Treblinka was that at Treblinka the
    victims almost always knew that they were about to be exterminated
    whereas at Auschwitz we endeavoured to fool the victims into thinking
    that they were to go through a delousing process. Of course, they
    often realized our true intentions and owing to that we sometimes had
    riots and difficulties.  Very often women would hide their children
    under the clothes but of course when we found them we would send the
    children in to be exterminated.  We were required to carry out these
    exterminations in secrecy but of course the foul and nauseating
    stench from the continuous burning of bodies permeated the entire
    area and all the people living in the surrounding communities knew
    that exterminations were going on at Auschwitz.
 
 
Document six:
 
>From the book _The Good Old Days_, by Ernst Klee, W. Dressen, and V. Riess,
The Free Press, NY, 1988, p. 68.
 
Ereignismlrdung UdSSR No. 128 [Operational Situation Report from the USSR
No. 128], November 3, 1941.
 
    In Kiev, difficulties that arose during the execution of a major
    action of this type - particularly with regard to registration - were
    overcome by the use of posters annoncing that all Jews were to report
    for resettlement. Although it was initially thought that the action
    would only involve 5,000 to 6,000 Jews, more than 30,000 Jews
    reported, who as a result of extremely efficient organization still
    believed they were going to be resettled right up untill the time
    they were executed.
    
    Despite that fact that up to now a total of some 75,000 Jews have been
    liquidated in this way, it has nevertheless become apparent that this
    method will not provide a solution to the Jewish problem.
 
 
Document seven:
 
>From the book _The Final Solution: The Attempt to Exterminate the Jews of
Europe, 1939-1945_, by G. Reitlinger and T. Yosellof, South Brunswick, 
1968.
 
Letter from SS Major-General Stahlecker to SS General Heydrich,
January 31, 1942.
 
    The complete removal of Jewry from the eastern territories has been
    substantially attained, with the exception of white Russia, as a
    result of the execution up to the present time of 229,052 Jews.
 
 
Document eight:
 
>From the book _Trente-quatre mois dans les camps de concentration_
(Thirty-four months in the concentration camps), by Dr. Andre' Lettich,
L'Union Cooperative, Tours, 1946.  Translation appears in _Nazi Mass
Murder_, by Eugen Kogon, H. Langbein, and A. Rueckerl,
Yale University Press, New Haven and London, 1993, pp. 150-151.
 
    Up to the end of January 1943 there were no crematory ovens at
    Birkenau.  In the middle of a little birch wood, about two
    kilometers from the camp, was a peaceful-looking cottage in which
    a Polish family, expelled or murdered, had lived.  For a long time
    this cottage had been used as a gas chamber.
    
    More than five hundred meters from it were two barracks:  the men
    were grouped on one side, the women on the other.  Very politely,
    very amiably, a little speech was made to them.  "You've arrived
    after a trip;  you're dirty;  you're going to have a bath.  Undress
    quickly!"  Towels and soap were distributed, and then the brutes
    revealed themselves in their true colors:  with heavy blows this
    human herd, these men and women, were driven naked, winter or
    summer, across the hundred or so meters that separated them from
    the "shower room."  Above the entrance door was written "Brausebad"
    [showers].  Shower heads could even be seen on the ceiling;  they
    were cemented in, but water never flowed from them.
    
    These poor innocents were piled up, packed against one another,
    and it was then that panic began:  they finally understood what
    fate awaited them.  But blows with clubs and revolver shots quickly
    calmed things down, and all finally penetrated this mortal chamber.
    The doors were closed and, ten minutes later, the temperature had
    risen high enough for the hydrocyanic acid to volatize--it was with
    hydrocyanic acid that the condemned were gassed.  It was Zyklon B,
    diatomite impregnated with a 20 percent solution of hydrocyanic
    acid, that the German barbarians used.
    
    Then SS-Unterschardfuehrer Moll dropped the gas through a little
    window.  The cries that could be heard were frightening, but after
    a few moments complete silence reigned.  Twenty to twenty-five
    minutes later the windows and doors were opened to air the room, and
    the corpses were immediately thrown into ditches, where they were
    burned.
 
 
Document nine:
 
>From Dr. Johann Kremer's diary, published in _KL Auschwitz in den Augen
der SS_ (Auschwitz in the eyes of the SS), Auschwitz State Museum,
1973, pp. 215-217.  Translation appears in _Nazi Mass Murder_, by Eugen
Kogon, H. Langbein, and A. Rueckerl, Yale University Press,
New Haven and London, 1993, pp. 149-150.
 
    On 2 September 1942, at three o'clock in the morning, I was ordered
    to take part in a gassing, and I watched it.  This mass murder took
    place outside the Birkenau camp, in little houses located in the
    forest.  The SS men called them "bunkers" in their slang.  All the
    SS doctors in the camp health service took part in these gassings,
    each in his turn.  As a doctor, my participation in these gassings,
    called "special operations," consisted of standing at a spot near
    the bunker, ready to intervene should my assistance be necessary.
    I was taken there by car.  I sat next to the driver, and behind me
    was an SS hospital orderly (a noncommissioned officer), provided
    with an oxygen tank so as to be able to give first aid to the SS
    men taking part in the gassings in case any of them should be
    victims of asphyxiation....
    
    I followed one convoy to the bunker.  The prisoners were first taken
    to barracks where they undressed;  from there they went, naked, to
    the gas chambers.  Most of the time things proceeded calmly, for the
    SS men reassured the people by telling them they were going to have
    a bath and be deloused.  When all had been pushed into a gas
    chamber, the door was closed and an SS man wearing a gas mark threw
    the contents of a can of gas through an opening in the side wall.
    Through this opening we could hear the cries and wailing of the
    victims;  we could hear their death throes.
 
 
Document ten:
 
>From Dr. Kremer's testimony regarding his diary, published in _The Good
Old Days_, by Ernst Klee, W. Dressen, and V. Riess, The Free Press, New
York, 1988, p. 258.
 
    I remember I once took part in the gassing of one of these groups
    of women [from the women's camp in Auschwitz].  I cannot say how big
    the group was.  When I got close to the bunker I saw them sitting
    on the ground.  They were still clothed.  As they were wearing
    worn-out camp clothing they were not left in the undressing hut but
    made to undress in the open air.  I concluded from the behavior of
    these women that they had no doubt what fate awaited them, as they
    begged and sobbed to the SS men to spare them their lives.  However,
    they were herded into the gas chambers and gassed.  As an anatomist I
    have seen a lot of terrible things:  I had had a lot of experience
    with dead bodies, and yet what I saw that day was like nothing I had
    ever seen before.  Still completely shocked by what I had seen I wrote
    on my diary on 5 September 1942:  "The most dreadful of horrors.
    Hauptscharfuehrer Thilo was right when he said to me today that this
    is the 'anus mundi', the anal orifice of the world".  I used this
    image because I could not imagine anything more disgusting and
    horrific.
 
 
Again - and most importantly - we ask Mr. Raven to provide us with what he
thinks are the one or two best pieces of evidence that the Nazis did _not_
exterminate millions of people in homicidal gas chambers.
 
 
Brian Harmon (bpharmon@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu)
Danny Keren (dzk@cs.brown.edu)
Jamie McCarthy (k044477@kzoo.edu)
Ken McVay (kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca)
Michael Stein (mstein@access.digex.net)
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 If your email is related to my job, please send it to mccarthy@lpi.com.
 I speak for no one but myself.


-- 

"However, it is sophistry to proclaim that something must have happened a
certain way because your `reason' demands it." (Greg Raven, Institute for
Historical Review)


Article 15112 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!access.digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Another question Raven has avoided
Supersedes: <333c1e$bed@access2.digex.net>
Date: 19 Aug 1994 18:43:58 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 75
Message-ID: <333cje$bnt@access2.digex.net>
References: <32s8fu$ilb@access3.digex.net> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: access2.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>In article <32s8fu$ilb@access3.digex.net>, mstein@access3.digex.net
>(Michael P. Stein) wrote:
>
>> What standard of proof do you require, and do you require that 
>> same standard for any other historical event?
>
>To start with, I would like to have something more than the hysterical
>accounts of so-called eyewitnesses, eyewitnesses who typically get other
>details about the so-called gassing process wrong.

    I have twice asked you what your best evidence is that the testimony 
of Franz Suchomel is hysterical.  I couldn't tell whether it was the fact 
that Danny Keren misspelled the film director's name, or the fact that he 
translated the name of the film when it was actually marketed under the 
untranslated title "Shoah."  You have not responded.


>A forensic test would be nice, showing that the corpse had been gassed to
>death.

    So if the murderers cremated the corpses, making it impossible to 
perform such an autopsy, then no proof is possible?


>It would be nice to be shown a room or Nazi drawing of a room
>designed for homicidal gassings.

    You can certainly be shown the dynamited remains of a room designed
for homicidal gassings.  Of course, you will just say, "So what?  How do I
know what that room was used for?"  You can certainly be shown a Nazi
drawing of such a room; Pressac found them.  Of course, you will say, "So
what?  The drawing doesn't *say* "Homicidal Gassing Room."

    You can get away with this, of course, only as long as you insist on
looking at only one document at a time.  If you note that this drawing,
which shows no plumbing for showers, is referred to in another document as
containing showers (and an inadequate number of showers for use as a
shower room), and in yet another document as having a gas-tight door, and
in another as having four wire-mesh introduction devices with wooden
covers, and in another as a "Vergasungskeller," the game will be up - as
you well know. 

>It would be nice to see a Nazi document describing the use of such a gas 
>chamber.

    How about a gassing *van*?  (Oh, yes, that's a forgery.  Where are the
documents ordering the forgery to be made?  Where is the physical evidence
showing it's a forgery - the forensic tests showing the paper was of
Soviet origin, for example?  Or is the proof for you simply that it came
from the Soviet Union?  You demand proof, but have not supplied any that 
the letter from Becker to Rauff is a forgery.)
 

>Faurisson claims he will accept as proof any single document or piece of
                                              ^^^^^^
>evidence that the exterminationists will accept as proof. That might not be
>a bad place to start.

    So you admit that you are trying to insist the proof must be contained
in a *single* document or piece of evidence, despite your earlier attempt
to deny you were doing this.  You have been challenged to supply a proof
for World War II which can meet such a stringent standard.  I claim you
cannot do it.  Milton Kleim has already tried once and failed.

    I also have one other question.  Besides the *nature* of evidence,
what level of certainty are you insisting on, and who is to judge whether
the standard of proof you articulate has been satisfied?  Do you insist on
being the judge?  Since you are playing defense attorney, you would seem
to be disqualified.
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15114 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!swiss.ans.net!malgudi.oar.net!sun!oucsace!dspiegel
From: dspiegel@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Dan Spiegel)
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Message-ID: 
Organization: Ohio University CS Dept,. Athens
References:   
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 1994 22:38:13 GMT
Lines: 32

In article  greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes:
>In article , dspiegel@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu
>(Dan Spiegel) wrote:
>
>> >Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
>> >Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
>> >The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
>> >The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping
>> 
>>    Still advertising. Care to list the academic institutions that
>> subscribe to your "scholarly" journal?
>
>If you are really that interested, I believe that some of the institutions
>were listed in a recent Journal article. Hint: the list of names might
>surprise you.

   But, I'm not surprised that you didn't list any.
>

   Still waiting for you to explain why you distorted that portion of
_Night_ that I posted.

>
>Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
>Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
>  [Inappropriate advertisement deleted]


-DS
I speak for myself only.
No unsolicited e-mail, please. I'll read your flames with everyone else.
Please do not use my name in any subject headers.


Article 15115 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!world!bzs
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Can Kleim go where Raven is afraid to?
In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Fri, 19 Aug 1994 07:39:35 -0800
Message-ID: 
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Organization: The World
References: <32vitp$fhr@umd5.umd.edu> <1994Aug18.155450.1327@msus1.msus.edu>
	<330off$svp@agate.berkeley.edu>
	
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 1994 23:57:47 GMT
Lines: 89


From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
>No, it shouldn't. Not nearly as difficult as it seems to be for the
>exterminationists here in alt.revisionism to respond to my original posts,
>and stay on the topic. If you are ready to concede that you have no
>evidence to support your views on the Holocaust story, and if you are ready
>to state that you do not believe the the Second World War took place, let
>me know and we can spend some time on evidence that contradicts your
>position, although as it is hardly revisionist, I won't have much time to
>dedicate to it. Fortunately, it shouldn't take too much time.


See, here Raven reveals himself for what he really is; a liar and
two-bit propagandist.

He's seen tons of evidence any number of times, yet he will "hold to
his guns" and deny having ever seen any of it, deny that it exists,
attempt to make cutting little remarks, claim (as he did a few notes
back) that it's only questionable eyewitness evidence (whatever in
hell that means, landpost@clark.net unabashedly asserts that the only
evidence ever presented for the holocaust derives from nuremberg war
crime proceedings, yeah, right), etc no matter how ludicrous his
position becomes.

Who do you think you're kidding Raven? Haven't you noticed almost no
one on God's green earth considers you anything more than a raving
nutcase?

Probably not, it's generally one of the most important symptoms, an
overly developed "everyone is kwazy but me" gene...

I think it's time the rest of us accepted these guys for what they
are:

	Pathological liars without the slightest, tiniest
	interest in the truth, only the axe they have to
	grind which consistently pokes its head above the
	surface as being the cheapest and most vile sort
	of anti-semitism.

I mean, c'mon, it's so damn transparent it's laughable. And continuing
to even appear to argue with these clowns is only embarrassing.

How about that Bradley Smith "Whiteway" bullshit? The only piece of
evidence of the holocaust *he's* interested in is this one line quote
from a goddamned glossy coffee-table book on the Holocaust where
Berenbaum suggests that Whiteway's (a US soldier who participated in
the invasion of Nazi Germany) describes a gassing facility he saw.

Whiteway doesn't remember where it was exactly (not entirely shocking
when you're moving along in an invasion of a, to you, foreign
country), Berenbaum speculates that perhaps it was Hadamar, Near
Giessen. Smith demands (from who? well, anyone but Berenbaum) to know
why Berenbaum suggested this, and acts as if the truth or falsity of
the entire holocaust hinges on this one sentence in one glossy
mass-media book obviously (to be honest) tossed together to raise a
few bucks for the holocaust museum.

And then we have Hermann, Mr "Proud to be Nazi" who accuses *others*
of having less than honorable reasons for merely repeating a well-worn
tale of history, BUT ARE YOU JOOSH OR DO YOU WORK FOR ANY JOOOSH
ORGANIZATIONS?! is this guy's idea of a withering come back.

And Dan Gannon (er, Ralph Winston, er, George Martin, er, Maynard the
Main Nerd, er, ...) who writes goddamned pissante poetry for us all
about how the GREAT AND ALL ENCOMPASSING MIND-ALTERING WORLDWIDE
IRRESISTABLE JOOOOSH CONSPIRACY is, well, whatever bothers him today,
totally controls The Media / Congress / Publishing / Hollywood, and
has been doing so FOR 2000 YEARS! Semper Fidelis you sick sonofabitch.

Oh and let's not forget Fredrich Berg who lets us all know that those
who disagree with him are JEWISH TRASH (tm), has informed us that the
world is *really* controlled by Jewish Taxicab drivers in Cracow,
Poland (and that all or almost all Jews are ugly, thank you Mr Berg
for *that* stunning and brilliant insight!)

I mean, c'mon, these people are *FUCKING FRUITCAKES*. Period.

It's a wonder they can get exhaling AND inhaling straight often enough
to stay alive.

GAK!


-- 
        -Barry Shein

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


Article 15116 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!world!bzs
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Fri, 19 Aug 1994 07:34:58 -0800
Message-ID: 
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Organization: The World
References:  <32offf$irl@access1.digex.net>
	
	
	
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 1994 00:50:00 GMT
Lines: 52


From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
>>    Still advertising. Care to list the academic institutions that
>> subscribe to your "scholarly" journal?
>
>If you are really that interested, I believe that some of the institutions
>were listed in a recent Journal article. Hint: the list of names might
>surprise you.

This is an absolutely ridiculous boast.

I know, for example, that a few big-name Ivy League universities (and
other large research institutions but I have first-hand experience
with these) get funding from the federal govt *specifically* to
subscribe to off-beat periodicals.

I once ran into a bunch of these in one library and a librarian I
asked about it said that folks like the FBI call them because, say,
someone they're investigating once published something or appeared in
a photo in one of these. *Someone* has to keep a collection (well,
maybe no one does, but someone does.)

So for example I ran into stacks full of things like "Big Butts" and
"Dykes on Bykes" (well I'm making those up but you get the idea) which
prompted my question.

So that some "prominent institution" subscribes to some nut-case
periodical means absolutely nothing.

Put another way, places like Cornell and Harvard (eg) subscribe to
virtually EVERYTHING. Even if just to support those doing research in
deviant behavior.

I know, I've done research at both of those institutions, if you have
the right "passes" you can pick up practically anything with a
bibliography and in a short while have every single article, magazine,
book, etc mentioned in your carrel. Lipstadt included, for
example. It's hard to express how mind-bogglingly complete some of
these libraries are.

What bullshit that was Raven tho in this case I'll grant that your
third-rate brain probably doesn't know better and was no doubt
impressed when you got your FBI-funded subscription request from some
big-name research institution.

Wotta joke.

-- 
        -Barry Shein

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


Article 15123 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!kmcvay
From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay)
Subject: Raven's misrepresentations..
References:   
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac
Message-ID: <1994Aug21.221505.20996@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 94 22:15:05 GMT

In article , Dan Spiegel responds
to Greg "Without the Holocaust, I'd be unemployed" Raven:

>   Still waiting for you to explain why you distorted that portion of
>_Night_ that I posted.

Not to mention his blatant misrepresentation of Pressac... he's
running up an interesting track record, eh?

-- 

"However, it is sophistry to proclaim that something must have happened a
certain way because your `reason' demands it." (Greg Raven, Institute for
Historical Review)


Article 15170 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!sun4nl!hacktic!musmint
From: musmint@xs4all.nl (musmint)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Date: 23 Aug 1994 07:15:24 GMT
Organization: Hack-Tic, Networking for the masses
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <33c7me$q2o@news.xs4all.nl>
References:    <332k9m$lj@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xs1.xs4all.nl

In article <332k9m$lj@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, Danny Keren  wrote:
>Greg Raven  wrote:
>
># As Butz and others have pointed out, there are any number of reasons
># why a room might be called a "gassing cellar" (translated from the
># German). 
>
>Such as what?
>
>
>-Danny Keren.
>

Mister Keren, surely you are not saying that you never did read
Butz' book? And if you did, then why ask this question. And if 
you didn't, you cannot be a serious party in the discussion?

A.M.



Article 15174 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!kmcvay
From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay)
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
References:  <332k9m$lj@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> <33c7me$q2o@news.xs4all.nl>
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac
Message-ID: <1994Aug23.233544.573@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 94 23:35:44 GMT

In article <33c7me$q2o@news.xs4all.nl> musmint@xs4all.nl (musmint) writes:

>In article <332k9m$lj@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, Danny Keren  wrote:
>>Greg Raven  wrote:

>># As Butz and others have pointed out, there are any number of reasons
>># why a room might be called a "gassing cellar" (translated from the
>># German). 

>>Such as what?

>Mister Keren, surely you are not saying that you never did read
>Butz' book? And if you did, then why ask this question. And if 
>you didn't, you cannot be a serious party in the discussion?

What I have seen of Mr. Butz' "scholarship" makes it clear that, at
best, his data is questionable, his conclusions nonsense.

If you'd really like to see Butz' specific text dissected here,
please post it.. given his track record, however, I suggest you
might better spend your time reading historians instead.

-- 

"However, it is sophistry to proclaim that something must have happened a
certain way because your `reason' demands it." (Greg Raven, Institute for
Historical Review)


Article 15175 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!torn!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Date: 23 Aug 1994 10:52:35 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <33ckdj$cg6@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:   <332k9m$lj@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> <33c7me$q2o@news.xs4all.nl>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu

In article <33c7me$q2o@news.xs4all.nl>, musmint  wrote:

# Mister Keren, surely you are not saying that you never did read
# Butz' book? And if you did, then why ask this question. And if 
# you didn't, you cannot be a serious party in the discussion?

Butz wasn't in the camps while they operated, is this correct?

According to your previous article, on unreliability of witnesses,
it really implies no one can ever prove any atrocity really
happened, right?

Another thing - you posted about alleged killing of 10,000 Germans
by Poles in 1939. Where is your proof, "revisionist scholar"? I want
to see it.

Lastly, perhaps you can explain to me what a "gassing cellar" in
Krema III meant?


-Danny Keren.





Article 15384 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.duke.edu!solaris.cc.vt.edu!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: My best evidence that Greg Raven is dishonest
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 1994 07:44:27 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 67
Message-ID: 
References: <33hbmn$pch@access1.digex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <33hbmn$pch@access1.digex.net>, mstein@access1.digex.net
(Michael P. Stein) wrote:

> On the subject of Bo"ck, you wrote:
> 
>      "Pressac himself casts doubt on some of the aspects
>      of this statement, pointing out, for example, that
>      Boeck could only have witnessed one such gassing (at
>      most)."
> 
>      Here is the full text of Pressac's comments on Bo"ck's testimony, found 
> on page 181 of the English language edition:
> 
>      "There is only one clue to show that the scene took place at Bunker 
>      2: 'a long farmhouse'.  In this type of account, this is already a 
>      good deal.  SS Bo"ck seems to have been a decent enough man.  The 
>      gassing of children upset him so much that he saw the SS medical 
>      orderlies 'climb on the roof' (they did not climb so high) and did 
>      not look at his wife for four weeks.  Not everyone is cut out to be 
>      an executioner.  Hermann Langbein writes: 
> 
>          'Bo"ck is the only witness who demonstrated a sincere aversion 
>          before the court.' 
> 
>      I would ask just one question: 'How many gassings did Bo"ck see?'  
>      If he only saw the one described before the court, it is not so 
>      surprising that his 'aversion' should remain intact.  If he had 
>      been forced by his duties to see them regularly, his attitude might 
>      be different.  It is all too easy to become hardened." 
> 
> 
> 
>     The only aspect Pressac truly disputes is how high the orderlies
> climbed, a trivial detail.  Pressac most emphatically does *not* state
> that Bo"ck could only have witnessed one gassing - as suspected, the "at
> most" is your own totally fraudulent insertion, not Pressac's words.  What
> Pressac wonders about (but does *not* flatly deny) is if Bo"ck could have
> maintained his moral character if he had been forced to witness such
> activities on a *regular* basis. 
> 
>     There you are, Greg.  I am really looking forward to seeing how you
> try to salvage your credibility from this fiasco, especially given your
> pathetic (and futile) attempt to keep people from knowing what the actual
> text said by refusing a direct request to reveal the page number,
> something no *honest* historian would do.  (I trust you've now learned
> that you cannot bluff someone who has access to both the Library of
> Congress and the Holocaust Museum library?)

I don't see what you are getting at. I believe this all came up because
Keren claimed that Boeck's statement was evidence of a Nazi plan or policy
to exterminate the Jews in gas chambers. I pointed out that, according to
Pressac, Boeck did not seem to have been a witness to more than one
"gassing." Therefore, even if one gassing had taken place, which I do not
admit, and Boeck saw it, this is hardly proof of a plan to exterminate
millions of people.

However, if this is important to you, all you need to do is tell me that
you consider the Boeck statement to be the BEST evidence that the Nazis had
a plan or policy to exterminate millions of Jews in homicidal gas chambers.
Then we can talk about it all you want.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15385 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: HELP With Newsreader
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 1994 07:48:36 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 22
Message-ID: 
References: <33koqo$fsi@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <33koqo$fsi@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
wrote:

> Is anyone familiar with the "Tin" newsreader? Is there any way
> to make it look like "rn", or "trn"?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> -Danny Keren.

Sorry, I use NewsWatcher. But, as long as there is a little off-topic
thread going here, does anyone know how to E-mail messages to this
newsgroup? I think someone told me how to do this when I first got
connected, but I have lost the message. Thanks.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15387 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!torn!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 1994 07:50:20 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 37
Message-ID: 
References:  <332k9m$lj@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> <33c7me$q2o@news.xs4all.nl> <1994Aug23.233544.573@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <1994Aug23.233544.573@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>,
kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay) wrote:

> In article <33c7me$q2o@news.xs4all.nl> musmint@xs4all.nl (musmint) writes:
> 
> >In article <332k9m$lj@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, Danny Keren  wrote:
> >>Greg Raven  wrote:
> 
> >># As Butz and others have pointed out, there are any number of reasons
> >># why a room might be called a "gassing cellar" (translated from the
> >># German). 
> 
> >>Such as what?
> 
> >Mister Keren, surely you are not saying that you never did read
> >Butz' book? And if you did, then why ask this question. And if 
> >you didn't, you cannot be a serious party in the discussion?
> 
> What I have seen of Mr. Butz' "scholarship" makes it clear that, at
> best, his data is questionable, his conclusions nonsense.
> 
> If you'd really like to see Butz' specific text dissected here,
> please post it.. given his track record, however, I suggest you
> might better spend your time reading historians instead.

Butz' treatment of this subject is contained in his presentation to the
11th Revisionist Conference in 1992, and was subsequently published in the
Journal of Historical Review. It is a very long discussion of German
terminology, so that besides being copyrighted by Butz, is probably
unwieldy for a forum such as Internet.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15388 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!torn!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The "Fuhrer Order" (was: Re: TO ALL REVISIONISTS:)
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 1994 07:58:24 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 58
Message-ID: 
References:  <33fp1n$1tb@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> <1994Aug25.082224.1541@msus1.msus.edu>  <33kf7j$97l@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article <33kf7j$97l@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>, dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
wrote:

> The following document is also interesting. It shows that Hitler's
> long-range plans included not only the extermination of Europe's
> Jews, but also of those living in the Arab countries (at that time,
> there were about a million Jews living in the Arab world, before
> they fled or were deported during the late 1940's and early 
> 1950's).
> 
> 
> 
> Excerpts from the meeting between Hitler and the Mufti,
> Haj Amin Husseini, on 28 November 1941. The notes were taken by
> Dr. Paul Otto Schmidt and are quoted in Fleming's "Hitler and the
> Final Solution", p. 101-104. Also geheime Reichssache 57 a/41, Records 
> Dept. Foreign and  Commonwealth Office Pa/2.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> The Fuehrer then made the following declaration, requesting
> the Mufti to lock it deep in his heart:
> 
> 1) He (the Fuehrer) would carry on the fight until the last
>    traces of the Jewish-Communist European hegemony had been
>    obliterated.
> 
> 2) In the course of this fight, the German army would - at a
>    time that could not yet be specified, but in any case in
>    the clearly foreseeable future - gain the southern exit of
>    Caucasus.
> 
> 3) As soon as this breakthrough was made, the Fuehrer would
>    offer the Arab world his personal assurance that the hour
>    of liberation had struck. Thereafter, Germany's only
>    remaining objective in the region would be limited to the
>    annihilation of the Jews living under British protection
>    in Arab lands.
> 
> 

I will not repost the entire text of Mark Weber's "The Holocaust: Let's
Hear Both Sides" because some have complained that they have seen it
before, however, I would like to direct everyone's attention to the
following passage from same:

> Hitler and the "Final Solution"
>
> There is no documentary evidence that Adolf Hitler ever gave an order to exterminate the Jews, or that he knew of any extermination program. Instead, the record shows that the German leader wanted the Jews to leave Europe, by emigration if possible and by deportation if necessary.
> 
> A document found after the war in the files of the Reich Ministry of Justice records his thinking on the Jews. In the spring of 1942, State Secretary Franz Schlegelberger noted in a memorandum that Hitler's Chief of Chancellery, Dr. Hans Lammers, had informed him: "The Fuehrer has repeatedly declared to him [Lammers] that he wants to see the solution of the Jewish problem postponed until after the war is over." (note 6)
>
> And on July 24, 1942, Hitler emphasized his determination to remove all Jews from Europe after the war: "The Jews are interested in Europe for economic reasons, but Europe must reject them, if only out of self-interest, because the Jews are racially tougher. After this war is over, I will rigorously hold to the view... that the Jews will have to leave and emigrate to Madagascar or some other Jewish national state." (note 7)

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15392 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz
From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: My best evidence that Greg Raven is dishonest
Date: 26 Aug 1994 17:04:39 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <33l7b8$8g9@agate.berkeley.edu>
References: <33hbmn$pch@access1.digex.net> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:

I am leaving Raven's obfuscation regarding his continaul misrepresentation
of the passage from Pressac to to other hand, but. . .

>However, if this is important to you, all you need to do is tell me that
>you consider the Boeck statement to be the BEST evidence that the Nazis had
>a plan or policy to exterminate millions of Jews in homicidal gas chambers.
>Then we can talk about it all you want.

I have explained several times that before anybody can provide you
with "one or two" "BEST" pieces of evidence that the Nazis had a plan, etc.,
we need to understand your criteria for historical proof.  To that end,
I once again ask you to provide us with the one or two BEST pieces of evidence
that World War II occurred.
-- 
				Richard Schultz

"It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean.  Do you have to salt your
truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?"


Article 15393 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!kmcvay
From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay)
Subject: Ravenesue Butz
References: <33c7me$q2o@news.xs4all.nl> <1994Aug23.233544.573@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> 
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac
Message-ID: <1994Aug28.020501.1883@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 94 02:05:01 GMT

In article  greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes:

>Butz' treatment of this subject is contained in his presentation to the
>11th Revisionist Conference in 1992, and was subsequently published in the
>Journal of Historical Review. It is a very long discussion of German
>terminology, so that besides being copyrighted by Butz, is probably
>unwieldy for a forum such as Internet.

Translation for the thought-impaired: "Mr. Butz' work is
thought-damaged to the point where I am afraid to raise the issue in
this arena. He is, in short, a total fraud and fool, and I simply
cannot afford to reproduce his nonsense here, in front of an
audience that has time to shoot him down in shreds."

This translation brought to you by:

Friends of Raven Society, Butzville, NY.

-- 
"Mr Kaufman is obviously Jewish and a living  example of why the Nazis 
tried to remove Jews from Europe and short of that, into concentration 
camps for the duration of the war."        (Fritz Berg, June 26, 1994)


Article 15394 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Whiteway's story
Date: 26 Aug 1994 17:51:41 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <33la3d$3ou@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:  <33c7me$q2o@news.xs4all.nl> <1994Aug23.233544.573@oneb.almanac.bc.ca> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu
X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: alt.revisionism

It's very hard to hold any kind of debate with IHR employee
and Hitler admirer Greg Raven, because he usually pops up,
posts something, disappears for a week or a month, and then
resurfaces without answering any question directed to him.

Anyway, Raven accused me of quoting non-existing sources.
I never did that. Maybe I got a page number wrong, but I
doubt it, as I always recheck before I post. Maybe this clown
can finally say which pieces of evidence I posted are "non-
existent". This is the fifth time I ask this of him.

Also, Raven claimed to have seen aerial photos of Treblinka
from which he draws several conclusions (it is not clear
what these conclusions are). He said he mainly relies on
a photo taken at Sept. 1944. However, the camp was dismantled
and destroyed in the end of 1943.


-Danny Keren.


Article 15395 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!uhog.mit.edu!news.kei.com!eff!news.duke.edu!solaris.cc.vt.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!access.digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Posting via email
Date: 26 Aug 1994 14:11:02 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <33lb7m$su0@access2.digex.net>
References: <33koqo$fsi@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: access2.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>Sorry, I use NewsWatcher. But, as long as there is a little off-topic
>thread going here, does anyone know how to E-mail messages to this
>newsgroup? I think someone told me how to do this when I first got
>connected, but I have lost the message. Thanks.

    Mail your message to alt-revisionism@cs.utexas.edu (note that there's 
a dash in the group name, not a dot).
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15403 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!torn!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The "Fuhrer Order" (was: Re: TO ALL REVISIONISTS:)
Date: 26 Aug 1994 22:29:08 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <33lqbk$ia8@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:   <33kf7j$97l@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu
X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: alt.revisionism

Greg Raven  wrote:

# I will not repost the entire text of Mark Weber's "The Holocaust: Let's
# Hear Both Sides" 

[deleted]

What is the reference for (note 6) and (note 7)?


-Danny Keren.


Article 15464 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!pm005-07.dialip.mich.net!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Mr. Raven, please address your misrepresentation of Pressac
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 1994 16:16:04 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 58
Message-ID: 
References: <33hbmn$pch@access1.digex.net>
   
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm005-07.dialip.mich.net

greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:

> mstein@access1.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) wrote:
> 
> > On the subject of Bo"ck, you wrote:
> > 
> >      "Pressac himself casts doubt on some of the aspects
> >      of this statement, pointing out, for example, that
> >      Boeck could only have witnessed one such gassing (at
> >      most)."
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> >     The only aspect Pressac truly disputes is how high the orderlies
> > climbed, a trivial detail.  Pressac most emphatically does *not* state
> > that Bo"ck could only have witnessed one gassing - as suspected, the "at
> > most" is your own totally fraudulent insertion, not Pressac's words.
> > [...]
> 
> I don't see what you are getting at.

He's pointing out that you cannot be trusted, Mr. Raven, because this
statement of yours was an outright fabrication.

> I believe this all came up because
> Keren claimed that Boeck's statement was evidence of a Nazi plan or policy
> to exterminate the Jews in gas chambers. I pointed out that, according to
                                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Pressac, Boeck did not seem to have been a witness to more than one
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> "gassing." Therefore, even if one gassing had taken place, which I do not
  ^^^^^^^^^^
> admit, and Boeck saw it, this is hardly proof of a plan to exterminate
> millions of people.

Please read the underlined sentence above.  Note that, while Mr. Raven backs
off from his original statement by adding the word "seem," it still asserts
the same thing:  that Pressac says that Boeck only saw one gassing.

Now read Pressac's actual words, below.

> I would ask just one question: 'How many gassings did Bo"ck see?'  
> If he only saw the one described before the court, it is not so 
> surprising that his 'aversion' should remain intact.  If he had 
> been forced by his duties to see them regularly, his attitude might 
> be different.  It is all too easy to become hardened.

Pressac nowhere says that Boeck only saw one.

Pressac only says that it would not be surprising if he only saw one.

That's not the same thing, now is it.

Mr. Raven, this is a clear case of misrepresentation on your part.  Would
you care to modify your statement again, or perhaps retract it entirely?
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 15501 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!trane.uninett.no!eunet.no!nuug!EU.net!uunet!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access1.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please address your misrepresentation of Pressac
Date: 28 Aug 1994 10:14:02 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <33q63a$cq4@access1.digex.net>
References: <33hbmn$pch@access1.digex.net>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: access1.digex.net

In article ,
Jamie McCarthy  wrote:
>Pressac only says that it would not be surprising if he only saw one.

    Even this distorts what Pressac said.  (Jamie, I'm surprised at you!)
Pressac says Bo"ck's *ability to keep his conscience* would not be
surprising if he only saw one.  Pressac then idly speculates that if Bo"ck
had seen gassings regularly, he *might* have become hardened.

    Raven asked what I was getting at.  I'm getting at the question of
whether Raven could read *anything* honestly and competently.  Lunatics,
pathological liars, and the mentally retarded are not reasonable
benchmarks for proof.  What's Raven's best evidence he doesn't fit into
one of these categories?

    If Raven can claim with a straight face that his paraphrase is an
honest reading of Pressac, would he be capable of reading a letter signed
by Hitler, "I order that every Jew be killed" without saying something
like, "But that only refers to one particular transport of Jews!" (without
any proof, of course) or shouting "Forgery!  Forgery!"  (again without
proof)?  Is Raven *ever* capable of admitting he's wrong?

    Raven is trying to play defense lawyer and judge at the same time. 
And his paraphrase of Pressac shows how corrupt his interpretation of text
is.  Mary McCarthy once said of Lillian Hellman: "Lillian Hellman is a bad
writer, a dishonest writer.  Every word she writes is a lie, including
'and' and 'the'."  One can only wonder what Ms. McCarthy might have had to 
say about Greg Raven as a historian....

    (Hey, Jamie - any relation?  :) )

-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15560 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please address your misrepresentation of Pressac
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 1994 17:08:17 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 34
Message-ID: 
References: <33hbmn$pch@access1.digex.net> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article ,
k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:

> Now read Pressac's actual words, below.
> 
> > I would ask just one question: 'How many gassings did Bo"ck see?'  
> > If he only saw the one described before the court, it is not so 
> > surprising that his 'aversion' should remain intact.  If he had 
> > been forced by his duties to see them regularly, his attitude might 
> > be different.  It is all too easy to become hardened.
> 
> Pressac nowhere says that Boeck only saw one.
> 
> Pressac only says that it would not be surprising if he only saw one.
> 
> That's not the same thing, now is it.
> 
> Mr. Raven, this is a clear case of misrepresentation on your part.  Would
> you care to modify your statement again, or perhaps retract it entirely?

Wasn't the Boeck statement originally produced in response to my request
for the best evidence of a Nazi plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in
gas chambers? If so, and because Pressac casts doubts on Boeck's having
witnessed more than one, I think this goes directly to the issue of whether
this is a good piece of evidence to produce. However, if you believe that
this is the BEST EVIDENCE of the above-mentioned Nazi plan or policy,
merely say so and we can discuss it further.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15561 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please explain your contradiction
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 1994 17:11:25 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 53
Message-ID: 
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article ,
k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:

> 
> The following is the text of an article which I submitted on August 2nd,
> and again on August 18th.  It's self-explanatory out of context, but if
> anyone wants to see the original article with the complete quotes from
> Mr. Raven, all it will take is sending me some polite email.  :-)
> 
> This is being emailed to Mr. Raven to ensure that he sees it.
> 
> 
> Mr. Raven, you state that you are "willing to accept [the definition above]
> as a starting point."
> 
> That definition assigns the word "Holocaust" to mean "the murder of six
> million Jews as a central act of state by the Nazis during the Second World
> War, many in gas chambers."
> 
> And you state that you "cannot accept" that "the Nazis had a plan or policy
> to exterminate the Jews, that they loaded Jews into gas chambers to murder
> them, and that they wiped out 6 million Jews as part of this plan/policy."
> 
> By absolutely straightforward syllogistic logic, it seems evident to me
> that you, therefore, "cannot accept" the Holocaust.  That is, you deny it.
> 
> I'm no logician, but I don't think I'm missing anything.   Your position
> has changed, it appears.
> 
> I really hope we can resolve this first, simplest, issue quickly.  If you
> waffle on this one, Mr. Raven, I'm afraid I'll have little hope that any
> of the more serious issues will be tackleable.

I believe I have also stated that revisionists agree that many civilians,
including many Jews, were mistreated by the Nazis, and that many of them
died as a result of this mistreatment. For many of the revisionists I know,
this constitutes part of the Holocaust as well. Revisionists do not deny
there was a Holocaust. We do claim that there was no Nazi plan or policy to
exterminate the Jews in homicidal gas chambers, that there were no gas
chambers, and that the figure of six million Jewish deaths is an
exaggeration. It is not our fault that those promoting the Holocaust focus
on the "gas chambers" and the "six million," etc. Many of awful things
happened during WWII without having to invent things such as the Holocaust
extermination myth. Therefore, we are attempting to revise the definition
of the terme "Holocaust" to make it more accurately reflect what really
happened.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15562 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please quote the text
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 1994 17:16:32 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 36
Message-ID: 
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article ,
k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:

> 
> Since Mr. Raven is now back on the net, I'll remind him of some questions
> which he hasn't answered.
> 
> Greg Raven  wrote [in response to Jamie McCarthy]:
> > By the way, thank you for admitting that there is no direct evidence of the
> > existence of the gas chambers.
> 
> mstein@access.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) wrote:
> >     Quote the text where he does this, Greg.  QUOTE THE TEXT.  Where is
> > it, Greg?  Where?
> 
> greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:
> > If your read Mr. McCarthy's post, you will see exactly what I mean. Didn't
> > I post his original text just above my reply?
> 
> (sigh)  No, Greg, you did not.  You deleted all but the last paragraph of it.

Sorry. I believe if you read the original message, you will see that
McCarthy refers only to testimonies and eyewitness accounts, or somesuch. I
take this to mean that there is no substantive evidence to support his view
of the Holocaust extermination myth. I will repeat that the Holocaust
extermination myth is unique in Western history in that it is the only
event for which we have only "testimony" and "eyewitness" accounts. Now, if
there was some tangible evidence ... but of course, Mr. McCarthy made no
reference to that. Why not?

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15563 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!pacbell.com!UB.com!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, isn't Leuchter either a fool or a fraud?
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 1994 17:19:07 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 38
Message-ID: 
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article ,
k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:

> 
> Still raising some old questions that Mr. Raven hasn't answered.
> 
> _Assuming for the sake of argument_ that the gas chambers are totally
> reconstructions, isn't the section of Mr. Leuchter's report that deals
> with the chemical analysis of their walls either (1) a fraudulent
> worthless sham, or (2) evidence of Mr. Leuchter's complete ineptitude
> and ignorance?
> 
> Answer that question satisfactorily, Mr. Raven, and _then_ I'll let you
> change the subject and I'll talk about whether or not or how much of
> the gas chambers are really reconstructions.
> 
> This article is being emailed to Mr. Raven to ensure that he sees it.

You seem to be selectively defining words to suit yourself, and then
demanding that I accept your definitions. A reconstruction need not be
total, it can be partial. When Dr. Piper of the Auschwitz State Museum says
that the so-called gas chamber at Auschwitz I (Stammlager) is a
reconstruction, he means that the building was returned to the state it was
in when it supposedly functioned as a gas chamber, not that the old
building was razed and a completely new one erected.

Furthermore, I can't imagine the squawling that the exterminationists would
put out if Leuchter had not tested the walls of the Auschwitz I "gas
chamber." Most likely, the whining would have been along the lines of, "He
was so certain he would find it WAS used as a gas chamber that he did not
test for HCN residues." As usual, Leuchter was just being thorough.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15564 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, when did you ask if May 4 was the "best"?
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 1994 17:24:20 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 52
Message-ID: 
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article ,
k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:

> 
> This is a repost from August 16th.  It is being emailed to Mr. Raven
> to ensure that he sees it.
> (text deleted)
> As for your claim that we haven't "made up our minds about what we
> ourselves consider to be the best evidence," I draw your attention to
> the following paragraphs, which were posted first over three months
> ago, which have since been reposted three times, which have been
> emailed to Mr. Raven at least once:
> 
> > So, we will indeed give him a document which we feel fairly represents the
> > massive collection of conclusive evidence that the Holocaust happened. And
> > then we will give him another.  And another, and another - because they
> > are all evidence:  statements from Hoess and Himmler and Boeck and Broad
> > and Kremer and Glowakci and others involved in the process, eyewitness
> > accounts from Wiesenthal and Kogon and Wiesel and Buki and the Paisikovics
> > and Mueller and Dragon and Rosenblum and Nyizli and Silberberg and
> > Mandelbaum and the thousands upon tens of thousands of relatively-unknown
> > others, plans for the chambers, plans for the vehicles, orders for the
> > equipment, inventories of the Krematoria, letters to the government,
> > letters from the government, letters between government officials,
> > memorandums, reports, diagrams, charts, speeches, statistics, diaries...
> 
> > We ask Mr. Raven to please apply himself first to document one.  When he
> > has finished attempting to convince his audience that document one does
> > not suit his needs, then he may proceed on to document two, and so on
> > until he reaches the end of the list.  We would hope that Mr. Raven would
> > limit his answers to one document per posted article, to facilitate any
> > further discussion that may take place, and that he would enumerate his
> > points, as we have done here.  As we say - we welcome focus.
> 
> Mr. Raven, document one was presented to you over three months ago.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that you are right. Please repost
that wonderful first document, the one that was so persuasive that you have
neglected to demand a response until now. You know, the one that was so
devastating to the revisionist position that you and others felt compelled
to post many other documents alongside it, just in case. I have not spent
much time in alt.revisionism since first logging in, but I seem to remember
many times asking if each document that I saw presented to me was THE
DOCUMENT. I never saw an answer in the affirmative. Now that you have made
up your mind as to which document to start with, please repost it.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15569 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, why did you distort Wiesel's _Night_?
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 1994 17:28:41 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 103
Message-ID: 
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article ,
k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:
> 
> D.J. Schaeffer has kindly given me permission to repost his August 2nd
> article, which asks Mr. Raven some tough questions about his distortion
> of Elie Wiesel's famous book _Night_.  Everything between this paragraph
> and my signature is taken from that article.  This article is being
> emailed to Mr. Raven to ensure that he sees it.
> 
> greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes:
> >
> >Interesting. The Germans told Auschwitz inmates that the Soviets were
> >coming, and offered them a chance to either leave with the Germans or stay
> >and wait for the Soviets. Few waited. In fact, Elie Wiesel and his father
> >opted for the Germans, as can be read in his book, "Night."
> 
> Greg, shall we read together? Then, we can re-examine your 
> paragraph above.
> 
> _Night_, by Elie Wiesel, Fourth Printing, December 1970 (Paperback)
> pp. 92
> --------------------------------------------------------
>    At four o'clock on the afternoon of the same day, as usual the bell 
> summoned all the heads of the blocks to go and report.
>    They came back shattered. They could only just open their lips enough to
> say the word: evacuation. The camp was to be emptied, and we were to be sent
> futher back. Where to? To somewhere right in the depths of Germany, to other
> camps; there was no shortage of them.
>    "When?"
>    "Tomorrow Evening."
>    "Perhaps the Russians will arrive first."
>    "Perhaps."
>    We knew perfectly well that they would not.
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
>    Well, Greg, it seems that contrary to your assertion, the prisoners
> were hoping the Russians would arrive before they had to be evacuated.
> The text doesn't say "We feared the Russians...", it says "Perhaps...".
> 
>    Now we'll see that the alternative wasn't Germans vs. Russians, as
> our "scholar" implies, but Germans vs. death. 
> 
> _Night_, by Elie Wiesel, Fourth Printing, December 1970 (Paperback)
> pp. 92 (cont. from above)
> --------------------------------------------------------
>    The camp had become a hive. People ran about, shouting at one another.
> In all the blocks, preparation for the journey was going on. I had forgot-
> ten about my bad foot. A doctor came into the room and announced:
>    "Tomorrow, immediately after nightfall, the camp will set out. Block
> after block. Patients will stay in the infirmary. They will not be 
> evacuated."
>    This news made us think. Were the SS going to leave hundreds of
> prisoners to strut about in the hospital blocks, waiting for their 
> liberators? Were they going to let the Jews hear the twelfth stroke 
> sound? Obviously not.
>    "All the invalids will be summarily killed", said the faceless
> one [He was another prisoner - DS]. "And sent to the crematory in 
> a final batch."
>    "The camp is certain to be mined," said another. "The moment the 
> evacuation's over, it'll blow up."
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
>     Uh, Greg? Enough for you? So, why did you, at best, misrepresent
> the context of the passage? Tell us, when did you read _Night_?
> Who told you how to distort that passage? Since when do people 
> prefer their persecutors over their liberators?
> 
>    Here's what you wrote:
> 
> >Interesting. The Germans told Auschwitz inmates that the Soviets were
> >coming, and offered them a chance to either leave with the Germans or stay
> >and wait for the Soviets. Few waited. In fact, Elie Wiesel and his father
> >opted for the Germans, as can be read in his book, "Night."
> 
>    It is true that those left behind by the evacuation were not 
> murdered, and that Elie Wiesel and his father opted for the Germans,
> but you deliberately (what else could be the explanation?) asserted
> out of context. It is clear that the perception was that anyone
> who didn't choose to go would be murdered. You clearly distorted 
> the meaning of this passage in your assertion to try to make your point 
> that the Jewish prisoners preferred to stay with the Germans instead 
> of waiting for the Soviets. 
> 
>    In short, you are either a foolish parrot, or a deliberate liar.

So, you are saying that those who remained behind had the perception that
they were going to be murdered? Yet they stayed behind? And that Wiesel,
who claims to have seen Germans throwing babies into open pits of flame, if
I remember correctly (an event that disturbed him so much he claimed he
could no longer sleep), later thought the Germans were okay? Baffling.

By the way, you left out mentioning that Wiesel had the conversation with
his father in the camp HOSPITAL, where both Wiesel and his father had been
treated. Funny kind of death camp, that Birkenau. Not very efficient of
those Nazis to spend time and money curing people so they would have to
feed them and gas them later.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15570 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!paris.ics.uci.edu!news.claremont.edu!kaiwan.com!DialupNewsWatcher!user
From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please answer some questions about Treblinka
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 1994 17:33:42 -0800
Organization: Institute for Historical Review
Lines: 28
Message-ID: 
References: 
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaiwan.kaiwan.com

In article ,
k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:
 
> Earlier this month, Mr. McVay published a series of testimonies from former
> SS guards at the Treblinka extermination camp, talking about various things
> including some executions they'd witnessed and taken part in.
> Do us a favor, Mr. Raven, please _do_ go through that article (and the
> other seven) line by line.  If your analysis of each line is as amusing
> as your analysis of "quadrangle," I'd enjoy reading it.
> 
> In addition, please explain why you consider aerial photos taken in
> late 1944 to be accurate portrayals of a camp which was abandoned and
> stripped in late 1943.

As I have stated repeatedly, I do not have time to go through your (and
others) posts line by line. Please tell me which piece of evidence you
consider to be the single best piece of evidence to show that the Nazis had
a plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in homicidal gas chambers. If you
cannot do this, then please do me the favor of ceasing to claim that there
were such monstrous devices, being operated by such a monstrous plan, on
such a monstrous scale, until you can provide such proof.

-- 

Greg Raven (greg.ihr@kaiwan.com)
Institute for Historical Review/PO Box 2739/Newport Beach, CA 92659
The Journal of Historical Review, 6 times/year, $40
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, $10.00 + $1.00 shipping


Article 15571 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!kmcvay
From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay)
Subject: Raven's May 4th. Myopia appears incurable
References: <33hbmn$pch@access1.digex.net>  
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac
Message-ID: <1994Aug30.152732.4080@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 94 15:27:32 GMT

In article  greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes the following in response to a pointed reminder that he
lied about a quote from Pressac:

>> Mr. Raven, this is a clear case of misrepresentation on your part.  Would
>> you care to modify your statement again, or perhaps retract it entirely?

>Wasn't the Boeck statement originally produced in response to my request
>for the best evidence of a Nazi plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in
>gas chambers? If so, and because Pressac casts doubts on Boeck's having
>witnessed more than one, I think this goes directly to the issue of whether
>this is a good piece of evidence to produce. However, if you believe that
>this is the BEST EVIDENCE of the above-mentioned Nazi plan or policy,
>merely say so and we can discuss it further.

May 4th. Myopia is alive and well, and Mr. Raven apparently
continues to believe that if he simply ignores reality long enough,
it will go away.

Thank you, Mr. Raven, for reminding us of your contempt for your
audience.                                   

-- 
   /^\__/^\                 The Old Frog's Almanac 
  / @    @ \     A Salute to That Old Frog Himse'f, Ryugen Fisher
 (          )       Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada
  \  ~~~~  /               


Article 15572 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!kmcvay
From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay)
Subject: May 4th. Myopia: Raven showing continuing signs of infection
References:  
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac
Message-ID: <1994Aug30.153252.4181@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 94 15:32:52 GMT

In article  greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes:

>In article ,
>k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:

>> Mr. Raven, document one was presented to you over three months ago.

>Let's assume for the sake of argument that you are right. Please repost
>that wonderful first document, the one that was so persuasive that you have

The document in question has been reposted here perhaps a dozen or
more times. 

It has been mailed to you many times.

You continue to act as if you have not seen it.

You continue to act as if you have not seen the article which it
accompanied.

Your myopia appears no better now than it was on May 4th., Mr.
Raven. See a doctor before it is too late, and ask that he cure your
selective blindness.

-- 
   /^\__/^\                 The Old Frog's Almanac 
  / @    @ \     A Salute to That Old Frog Himse'f, Ryugen Fisher
 (          )       Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada
  \  ~~~~  /               


Article 15573 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!kmcvay
From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay)
Subject: May 4th. Myopia: Serious and continuing condition?
References:  
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac
Message-ID: <1994Aug30.153752.4253@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 94 15:37:52 GMT

In article  greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes:

>In article ,
>k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:
 
>> Earlier this month, Mr. McVay published a series of testimonies from former
>> SS guards at the Treblinka extermination camp, talking about various things
>> including some executions they'd witnessed and taken part in.
>> Do us a favor, Mr. Raven, please _do_ go through that article (and the
>> other seven) line by line.  If your analysis of each line is as amusing
>> as your analysis of "quadrangle," I'd enjoy reading it.
 
>> In addition, please explain why you consider aerial photos taken in
>> late 1944 to be accurate portrayals of a camp which was abandoned and
>> stripped in late 1943.

>As I have stated repeatedly, I do not have time to go through your (and
>others) posts line by line. Please tell me which piece of evidence you
>consider to be the single best piece of evidence to show that the Nazis had
>a plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in homicidal gas chambers. If you
>cannot do this, then please do me the favor of ceasing to claim that there
>were such monstrous devices, being operated by such a monstrous plan, on
>such a monstrous scale, until you can provide such proof.

Mr. Raven's myopia appears highly selective... he seems to be saying
that he is not only myopic, but that it is selective.. he admits
that he doesn't bother to _read_ the responses sent to him, which
is, it seems, also an open admission that Mr. Raven is not remotely
interested in discussions, but only interested in one-way
misrepresentations, which he feels free to offer from time to time.

Mr. Raven, I submit, is his own best evidence of the moral
degeneracy of "Holocaust revisionism."

One can only hope he keeps it up - he, like Gannon before him,
displays such an open contempt for his audience that every post
strikes a blow from which Holocaust denial finds it more and more
difficult to recover.

-- 
   /^\__/^\                 The Old Frog's Almanac 
  / @    @ \     A Salute to That Old Frog Himse'f, Ryugen Fisher
 (          )       Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada
  \  ~~~~  /               


Article 15580 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!uhog.mit.edu!news.mtholyoke.edu!world!bzs
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please explain your contradiction
In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Mon, 29 Aug 1994 17:11:25 -0800
Message-ID: 
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Organization: The World
References: 
	
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 02:44:46 GMT
Lines: 20


From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
>I believe I have also stated that revisionists agree that many civilians,
>including many Jews, were mistreated by the Nazis, and that many of them
>died as a result of this mistreatment.

Actually, short of what might be hidden behind this use of the word
"many", this isn't how it's been presented here about half the
time. The claim from substantial numbers of revisionists has been that
Jews supposedly exterminated escaped to the Soviet Union and somehow
became completely incommunicado. I remember you defending this idea
yourself here last time it was brought up tho the exact scope was
never pinpointed and I think it never got much beyond that you know of
at least one example (so only a few more million to go?)

-- 
        -Barry Shein

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


Article 15582 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access3.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, isn't Leuchter either a fool or a fraud?
Date: 29 Aug 1994 22:52:59 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <33u6ub$k1n@access3.digex.net>
References:  
NNTP-Posting-Host: access3.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>In article ,
>k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:
>You seem to be selectively defining words to suit yourself, and then
>demanding that I accept your definitions.

    You mean like you do with the word "Holocaust" as "a plan or policy 
to kill millions of Jews in homicidal gas chambers?"

    The plan or policy was to kill millions of Jews.  They started out by
shooting (see the Einsatzgruppen reports, which I seem to recall you
accept as genuine, not forgeries).  They also used gassing vans, and - yes
- gas chambers; there were other less-frequently-used methods as well,
such as shutting up in buildings and then burning the buildings down with
the people in them.  The plan was to kill;  the means were just
incidental.  By defining the end and the means into one indivisible
formulation, you try to give yourself the ability to ignore other means,
or indeed point to them as evidence *refuting* the Holocaust. 

-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15583 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access3.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, when did you ask if May 4 was the "best"?
Date: 29 Aug 1994 22:59:52 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <33u7b8$kjs@access3.digex.net>
References:  
NNTP-Posting-Host: access3.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>Let's assume for the sake of argument that you are right. Please repost
>that wonderful first document, the one that was so persuasive that you have
>neglected to demand a response until now.

    I think Greg needs to find another Internet service provider.  For
some reason it frequently seems to take three or four or five requests to
get Greg Raven to respond to something, after both posting it and sending
him email.  He says that he was only just now asked to respond to it.  If
his provider is losing messages and email to that extent, perhaps it's 
time for him to change.
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15584 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!uhog.mit.edu!news.mtholyoke.edu!world!bzs
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please quote the text
In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Mon, 29 Aug 1994 17:16:32 -0800
Message-ID: 
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Organization: The World
References: 
	
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 03:03:32 GMT
Lines: 76


From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
>I will repeat that the Holocaust
>extermination myth is unique in Western history in that it is the only
>event for which we have only "testimony" and "eyewitness" accounts.

Repeat all you like but that's not true no matter how you read that
sentence; it's neither the only such event nor is it limited to such
evidence.

Ultimately all you have is eyewitness testimony, in some sense. If I
were to let you gaze into a crystal ball that allowed you to see the
events at issue in the end all you would be is another eyewitness
testifying to what you see. At some ontological level all we can
possibly have are the recordings of human perceptions. Your silly
arguments appear to border on that sort of sophistic reasoning.

Unless each and every person who cares is allowed to personally study
every bit of evidence then all one will have is something akin to
eyewitness testimonies.

Now, you don't seem to fit into this idea you have the numerous
documents such as memos written between Nazi officers during the war
which report the events you doubt occurred. Are they also only
"eyewitnesses"? Is anyone who has viewed such a document only an
eyewitness? And thus all irrelevant?

No, what you, plural, do (and we've seen it here numerous times) is
simply discount anything other than eyewitness as forgeries or
similar.

So that which isn't eyewitness is forgeries, and that which is
eyewitness is simply discredited by definition. How convenient.

The truth of the matter is much more simple: You don't believe any of
this occurred, a priori, so you have built this ridiculous story to
try to defend your bizarre ideas. Like the way flat-earthers insist
that the US space launches were all staged in some hollywood movie
lot. Why? Because the earth is flat, so no one could have orbited it,
period, anything proving otherwise is to be discounted as a fraud or
hearsay.

Why don't you deal with the evidence? And I don't mean simply waving
your hand and saying something is a forgery BECAUSE it doesn't agree
with your beliefs.

Show us where all these supposed forgeries came from, who manufactured
them, who masterminded such a reasonably consistent story.

Oh of course there were some contradictions as no doubt you would
mechanically point out to the previous paragraph; such is the lot of
vast arrays of evidence, but by and large a very consistent picture
comes through. And I don't know of any inconsistencies that you would
otherwise accept as evidence in any case, all I've seen have been
drawn from the very same eyewitness testimony you so roundly object
to, so what's the point?

But if two cars crash and there are ten eyewitnesses, and eight insist
one car was blue and the other red and two that the other was white
few other than yourself would immediately conclude that there
therefore was no car crash. A much simpler and more plausible
explanation is that someone was a little mistaken in some details of
their recollections.

As to being the only such event in history: Prove to the degree you
demand for events surrounding the Holocaust that Black slavery ever
existed in the United States. As just one easy example.

It's ridiculous Greg, you're being simply ridiculous and not fooling
anyone (other than perhaps when you preach to your IHR choir.)

-- 
        -Barry Shein

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


Article 15585 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!galaxy.ucr.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!ai292
From: ai292@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Gordon McFee)
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please answer some questions about Treblinka
Message-ID: 
Sender: news@freenet.carleton.ca (Usenet News Admin)
Reply-To: ai292@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Gordon McFee)
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
References:  
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 03:08:12 GMT
Lines: 59



In a previous article, greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) says:
>
>As I have stated repeatedly, I do not have time to go through your (and
>others) posts line by line. Please tell me which piece of evidence you
>consider to be the single best piece of evidence to show that the Nazis had
>a plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in homicidal gas chambers. If you
>cannot do this, then please do me the favor of ceasing to claim that there
>were such monstrous devices, being operated by such a monstrous plan, on
>such a monstrous scale, until you can provide such proof.
>
Greg, I'm not sure what you mean by the "single" best piece of evidence,
but would you accept, as starters at least, the oral and written
statements of Adolf Hitler and Heinrich Himmler--the ones that have been
accepted as true by virtually everyone on both "sides" or for which audio
or video evidence exist?  By this I mean several of Hitler's speeches in
which he speaks about the extermination (variously Vernichtung or
Ausrottung) of the Jews that will follow if they succeed in starting
another war [sic]; his recorded (by Martin Bormann) tabletalk; his
political and personal testaments; and his consistent approach on these
matters from at least the early 1920's?  As for Heinrich Himmler, I would
refer to his Posen speech, accepted as genuine by Fritz Berg in a public
post to me, in which he refers to the extermination (Ausrottung) of the
Jewish race.

I suggest the totality of this evidence points to a systematic plan to
first expel, and then, at about the time of the invasion of Russia,
physically exterminate (die physicalische Vernichtung) the Jewish race. 
This was transmitted, according to Reinhard Heydrich,
SS-Obergruppenfuehrer and head of the RSHA, and Adolf Eichmann,
SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer and head of Amt IV-b-4, as verbal order from
Hitler, a so-called Fuehrerbefehl, which in Nazi Germany had the force of
law.  Would you agree up to this point?

I believe after my research that there was no premeditated plan to
exterminate the Jews with poison gas.  In saying this, I realize I part
company with many in this newsgroup.  I believe the use of gas grew out of
the practical difficulties in carrying out the above-mentioned
Fuehrerbefehl.  Hitler cared not how the Jews were done away with--he only
wanted them done away with.  The first efforts were those of the
Einsatzgruppen, who executed Jews by shooting.  This did not yield
sufficiently quick results and gas was adopted as a quicker and more
efficient method.  

Thus, I believe the employ of gas was an operational consideration, not a
strategic consideration.  Hence, Hitler would likely not have been
involved in its adoption, although he would likely have approved of it. 
There is no evidence on this that I am aware of.  The major "work" done in
the adoption of gas was lead by SS-Obergruppenfuehrer Globocnik, and
carried out by principally by SS-Sturmbannfuehrer Wirth.  There are too
many documents extant about this aspect of the operation for it to be a
concoction.

I would appreciate your thoughts on this.
--
Gordon McFee ai292

I'll write no line before its time!


Article 15586 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access3.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please answer some questions about Treblinka
Date: 29 Aug 1994 23:26:29 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <33u8t5$mlh@access3.digex.net>
References:  
NNTP-Posting-Host: access3.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>In article ,
>k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:
>> In addition, please explain why you consider aerial photos taken in
>> late 1944 to be accurate portrayals of a camp which was abandoned and
>> stripped in late 1943.
>
>As I have stated repeatedly, I do not have time to go through your (and
>others) posts line by line.

    Tough.  The truth doesn't care about how much time you have to 
examine it.  It will still be the truth.

    You made a claim that 1944 aerial photos support your case about a 
camp that was abandoned and stripped in late 1943.  Please explain how 
this astonishing claim can be true.  Inquiring minds want to know.

>Please tell me which piece of evidence you
>consider to be the single best piece of evidence to show that the Nazis had
>a plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in homicidal gas chambers. If you
>cannot do this, then please do me the favor of ceasing to claim that there
>were such monstrous devices, being operated by such a monstrous plan, on
>such a monstrous scale, until you can provide such proof.

    Translation: Damn, I got caught using an invalid argument again. 
Weasel, weasel, weasel.  Distract, distract, distract.  Evade, evade,
evade. 

    Sorry, Greg.  Remember, we *did* warn you at the very start we were 
wise to *all* the tricks.

    Answer the question of how 1944 aerial photos support your claim 
about a camp planted over in 1943.
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15589 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access3.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please quote the text
Date: 29 Aug 1994 23:47:36 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <33ua4o$nn6@access3.digex.net>
References:  
NNTP-Posting-Host: access3.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
>Sorry. I believe if you read the original message, you will see that
>McCarthy refers only to testimonies and eyewitness accounts, or somesuch.

    QUOTE THE TEXT.

>I [distort] this to mean that there is no substantive evidence to support 
>his view of the Holocaust extermination myth [according to MY definitino 
>of substantive, which means whatever I say it means as convenient].
>I will repeat [my false claim] that the Holocaust
>extermination myth is unique in Western history in that it is the only
>event for which we have only "testimony" and "eyewitness" accounts [but 
>only because every document which disagrees with me either means what 
>*I* say it means, not what it clearly means, or is a forgery even though 
>I have absolutely no proof that it's a forgery].  Now, if
>there was some tangible evidence [I'd still find a way to call it a 
>forgery or meaningless] ...
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15590 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!uhog.mit.edu!news.kei.com!world!bzs
From: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please answer some questions about Treblinka
In-Reply-To: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com's message of Mon, 29 Aug 1994 17:33:42 -0800
Message-ID: 
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Sender: bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein)
Organization: The World
References: 
	
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 03:59:20 GMT
Lines: 22


From: greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven)
>As I have stated repeatedly, I do not have time to go through your (and
>others) posts line by line. Please tell me which piece of evidence you
>consider to be the single best piece of evidence to show that the Nazis had
>a plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in homicidal gas chambers.

If you spent one tenth the effort dealing with the salient evidence
rather than expending your energy evading the subject like this you
might have more time to stop making an idiot out of yourself.

Why do you think you're being clever? You're not. This is bush crap,
Raven.

Deal with the memos written between Nazi officers; beyond waving your
hand "forgeries all forgeries".

-- 
        -Barry Shein

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


Article 15591 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, isn't Leuchter either a fool or a fraud?
Date: 30 Aug 1994 08:04:24 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <33up68$j3u@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:  
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu
X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: alt.revisionism

But there are cyanide traces in the gas chamber of Auschwitz I, right?
So what the hell is your point?

Phew.


-Danny Keren.



Article 15593 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please answer some questions about Treblinka
Date: 30 Aug 1994 08:54:12 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <33us3k$l5r@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:  
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu
X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: alt.revisionism

Greg "Hitler was a great man" Raven, wrote:

# As I have stated repeatedly, I do not have time to go through your (and
# others) posts line by line. 

Ah, that's a good one. He can't answer the questions posed to him, so
he says he doesn't have time. Ah, what a clown this Raven guy is. And
this guy gets money to deny the Holocaust. It's his bloody job, for
God's sake. And this is the best he can do: "I didn't have time to
read your posts".

Raven, you accused me of posting non-existent sources. I've asked you
many times to say what I quoted was "non-existent". Since you don't
respond anymore, I take it that you learned how to look for books
in the library, and that you retract your slander and apologize?

# Please tell me which piece of evidence you
# consider to be the single best piece of evidence to show that the Nazis had
# a plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in homicidal gas chambers.

Such evidence is posted here daily. It was explained to you at length
that it is impossible to choose "the best piece of evidence" because
there is no criterion which makes such a choice possible. It seems you
are just not intelligent enough to understand this very simple matter.


-Danny Keren.


Article 15594 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please answer some questions about Treblinka
Date: 30 Aug 1994 09:01:42 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <33ushm$led@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:  
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu
X-ORIGINAL-NEWSGROUPS: alt.revisionism

Raven, Jamie McCarthy and I asked you a question. How can you rely 
on an aerial photo of Treblinka taken at Sept. 1944, when the camp was
destroyed in the end of 1943? What exactly did you conclude from that 
photo?

Hey, I know! The photo was taken from one of the UFOs Raven's
colleague, "revisionist" Ernst Zundel, keeps talking about. The UFO
taking the photo was a light-year away from Earth, and thus the photo,
although taken at 1944, really shows what happened in Treblinka at 1943!
Is this what you claim, Raven?

And please, no "I don't have enough time" excuses. Hell, McCarthy and 
me are working people. We have full time jobs, yet we find time to
read articles directed to us and respond to them. Denying the
Holocaust is your bloody job, isn't it? How come you don't find the
time?


-Danny Keren.


Article 15595 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!dzk
From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please answer some questions about Treblinka
Date: 30 Aug 1994 09:15:14 GMT
Organization: Brown University
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <33utb2$loe@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>
References:   
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab6b.cs.brown.edu

Well Gordon, I think your point may be valid. It's possible that
the SS began using gas simply because it was searching for better
and faster ways to kill many people quickly.

However, Hitler writes in "Mein Kampf" something about wishing that
Jews were exposed to poison gas (does someone have the exact quote)?
So, maybe he did influence the decision to switch from mass shooting
to gas. Another factor was that gas proved useful in killing the
mentally retarded and insane in the "T4" operation. It's obviously
no coincidence that many of the staff of "T4" were later trasferred
to the "Operation Reinhard" camps; even Stangl, commandant of
Treblinka, began his "career" in the T4 operation.


-Danny Keren.




Article 15604 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.duke.edu!convex!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz
From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please answer some questions
Date: 30 Aug 1994 13:28:14 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <33vc5e$18l@agate.berkeley.edu>
References:  
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:

>As I have stated repeatedly, I do not have time to go through your (and
>others) posts line by line. Please tell me which piece of evidence you
>consider to be the single best piece of evidence to show that the Nazis had
>a plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in homicidal gas chambers. If you
>cannot do this, then please do me the favor of ceasing to claim that there
>were such monstrous devices, being operated by such a monstrous plan, on
>such a monstrous scale, until you can provide such proof.

As I (and others) have stated repeatedly, we do not have time to go through
your (and others) posts line by line.  Please tell me which piece of 
evidence you consider to be the single best piece for evidence to show 
that World War II occurred.  If you cannot do this, then please do me the
favor of ceasing to claim that there was such a large-scale war, involving
so many soldiers from so many countries, until you can provide such proof.
-- 
				Richard Schultz

"It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean.  Do you have to salt your
truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?"


Article 15605 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!hobbes.physics.uiowa.edu!cobra.uni.edu!sunfish!choover
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please answer some questions about Treblinka
Message-ID: 
From: choover@usd.edu (Christopher J Hoover )
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 13:13:40 GMT
Sender: news@sunfish.usd.edu
References:  
Organization: University of South Dakota
Nntp-Posting-Host: sunbird
Lines: 23

greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes:

>As I have stated repeatedly, I do not have time to go through your (and
>others) posts line by line. Please tell me which piece of evidence you
>consider to be the single best piece of evidence to show that the Nazis had
>a plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in homicidal gas chambers. If you
>cannot do this, then please do me the favor of ceasing to claim that there
>were such monstrous devices, being operated by such a monstrous plan, on
>such a monstrous scale, until you can provide such proof.

This is a false methodology, and you know it.  Historical research doesn't
work that way.  Never has, never will.  Please tell me which piece of
evidence you consider to be the single best piece of evidence to show that
you would recognize well-researched history if it bit you on the kiester. 
If you cannot do this, then please do me the favor of ceasing to claim
that "single best piece of evidence" is a legitimate methodology for
evaluating historical events, until you can provide such proof. 


Chris
--
Christopher J. Hoover    choover@usd.edu       University of South Dakota
Disclaimer:  standard    It's *always* September, *somewhere* on the Net.


Article 15606 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!pm005-01.dialip.mich.net!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, when did you ask if May 4 was the "best"?
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 09:56:31 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 142
Message-ID: 
References: 
   
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm005-01.dialip.mich.net

greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:

> k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:
> 
> > [deletia]
> > Mr. Raven, document one was presented to you over three months ago.
> 
> Let's assume for the sake of argument that you are right.

Good choice -- I _am_ right.

And I'm not only right about that document being presented.  I'm right
about you lying when you said you'd asked if that document was the
"best evidence."

My assertion is that you deliberately lied when you said you'd asked
whether or not the May 4th article was the "best evidence"; I claim that
you have never asked that question of that article.  You're not
confirming my assertion, but you're not denying it either.  So the
charge still stands.  Unless you have no intention of clearing your
name, I suggest that you prove that you were not a liar.  You can do
that simply enough by reposting the article in which you raised the
question. I repeat my offer to help you out by emailing you every single
article you've ever posted.

Or, if you want us all to continue to "assume for the sake of argument"
that you are a deliberate liar, just don't follow up on the issue, and
I'll be happy to make that assumption with your blessing.

> Please repost that wonderful first document, the one that was
> so persuasive that you have neglected to demand a response until now.

By "first document" I believe you're referring to the first document
presented in the long article on May 4th.

The May 4th document "demands a response," Mr. Raven.  It demands
politely, but it does indeed demand.  To quote from that article:  "We
ask Mr. Raven to please apply himself first to document one.  When he
has finished attempting to convince his audience that document one does
not suit his needs, then he may proceed on to document two, and so on
until he reaches the end of the list."

Thus it would seem that you are lying when you say "[we] have neglected
to demand a response until now."

I might suggest that you cease lying.  You lose credibility.

In fact, Mr. Raven, as you well know, the original May 4th article,
complete with the polite demand quoted above, complete with the first
document, has been posted on alt.revisionism five or six times.  It's
been emailed to you at least once, and, Mr. Raven, I have confirmation
email from you verifying that you received it.

Let me repeat that, Mr. Raven:  I have email from you verifying the receipt
of that article.

If you like, Mr. Raven, I will repost the original May 4th article.

But I don't think it will do any good, and I don't want to waste bandwidth.

> You know, the one that was so
> devastating to the revisionist position that you and others felt compelled
> to post many other documents alongside it, just in case.

The other documents were not posted "alongside," they were posted in
order. When Mr. Raven finishes with #1, he is invited to proceed further
to #2. In other words, we did meet his insane demand that millions of
murders, committed over five years in six or eight separate countries in
war-torn Europe, be "proved" with a single piece of evidence.  In fact,
we think we've found no fewer than ten separate pieces of evidence, each
of which does a pretty good job of standing on its own and individually
"proving the Holocaust."

Not that such an insane standard of proof is required.

Mr. Raven again clearly demonstrates that he does not understand the
concept of the convergence of evidence, which is simply the way that any
piece of science or history is proved.  Mr. Bradley Smith, another
Holocaust-denier, has said that he thinks it's a fine concept.  Any
scientist or historian will tell you that it's a fine concept.  But Mr.
Raven insists on dealing with only one document at a time.

But then, Mr. Raven is neither a scientist nor a historian, so it may be
a bit much to expect him to play by their rules.

> I have not spent
> much time in alt.revisionism since first logging in, but I seem to remember
> many times asking if each document that I saw presented to me was THE
> DOCUMENT.

I remember that too.

(Here, again, we see Mr. Raven's insistence on narrowing discussion to
one document.)

> I never saw an answer in the affirmative.

That's because you never asked about the one that _was_ "THE DOCUMENT."
Curious how you could manage to avoid asking, even though it was posted
half-a-dozen times and emailed to you at least once.  My guess would be:
that's because you _knew_ that Document #1 in the May 4th article was
"THE DOCUMENT," because we spelled it out explicitly, so why would you
bother asking?

Of course, then, what should we make of your asking "is this it?" about
everything else?  Nearly every other document posted, there must have
been fifty or more in the last four months, you asked "is this the one?"
and implied that you'd refuse to talk about it unless it were.

Those repetitive questions, to which you already knew the answer, were
a smokescreen, an attempt to stall.

Isn't that so, Mr. Raven?

> Now that you have made
> up your mind as to which document to start with, please repost it.

Our minds were made up on May 4th -- as you knew, because you received
a piece of our minds in email.  And you confirmed receipt of that email.

Your continual attempt to pretend you haven't ever read that article, and
to pretend that it is _we_ who are changing our minds and waffling, Mr.
Raven, is a transparent fraud.  We made up our minds within two weeks of
your first asking the question.  You have been clumsily dancing around
our response for the last three and a half months, Mr. Raven.

Don't you think it's time you start addressing the documents you asked for?

Do you really want us to repost the May 4th article _again_?  If we do so,
will you really address the questions that we raise, this time?  Or will
you simply continue to ignore the article?

Because if it's going to be a waste of bandwidth, Mr. Raven, I'm not
going to repost that article one more time.

So assure me that this time, really, you _will_ address the issues we
raised, over three months ago -- then I'll repost it.

This article emailed to Mr. Raven to ensure that he sees it.
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 15607 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!pm005-01.dialip.mich.net!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please answer some questions about Treblinka
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 10:03:21 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 44
Message-ID: 
References: 
   
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm005-01.dialip.mich.net

greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:

> k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:
>  
> > Earlier this month, Mr. McVay published a series of testimonies from former
> > SS guards at the Treblinka extermination camp....
> > Do us a favor, Mr. Raven, please _do_ go through that article (and the
> > other seven) line by line.  If your analysis of each line is as amusing
> > as your analysis of "quadrangle," I'd enjoy reading it.
> 
> As I have stated repeatedly, I do not have time to go through your (and
> others) posts line by line.

What do you get paid for, then, Mr. Raven?

Can you address _anything_ said in the testimony of the SS guards, except
for this one quibble about "quadrangular"?

You held the "quadrangular" thing out as an _example_ of why you felt the
testimonies were invalid.  I think it's clear that it's a bad example.
Perhaps you could provide us with one or two more examples?

If not, then we must consider the possibility that maybe you are just
grasping at straws, trying to invalidate the testimony of six SS guards
based on what one of them said about the shape of the camp that may or
may not be absolutely correct.  In other words, that you're looking for
reasons not to believe, that you're totally unobjective.

> Please tell me which piece of evidence you
> consider to be the single best piece of evidence to show that the Nazis had
> a plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in homicidal gas chambers.

It's all in the May 4th article, which you have already read (several times,
I'm betting).

Oh, and--you forgot to reply to the following paragraph of mine, Mr. Raven.
Or do you not have time to answer this one question?

   In addition, please explain why you consider aerial photos taken in
   late 1944 to be accurate portrayals of a camp which was abandoned and
   stripped in late 1943.
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 15609 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!udel!thorin.cis.udel.edu!carroll
From: carroll@thorin.cis.udel.edu (Mark C. Chu-Carroll)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please address your misrepresentation of Pressac
Date: 30 Aug 1994 14:59:02 GMT
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <33vhfn$sqt@louie.udel.edu>
References: <33hbmn$pch@access1.digex.net>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: thorin.cis.udel.edu

In article  greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes:
>Wasn't the Boeck statement originally produced in response to my request
]for the best evidence of a Nazi plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in
]gas chambers? If so, and because Pressac casts doubts on Boeck's having
]witnessed more than one, I think this goes directly to the issue of whether
]this is a good piece of evidence to produce. However, if you believe that
]this is the BEST EVIDENCE of the above-mentioned Nazi plan or policy,
]merely say so and we can discuss it further.

In other words, "I can't possibly deny having been caught in a
deliberate lie, so I'll try to weasel out by trying to sidetrack the
discussion into an argument about my invalid discussion methods."

Tell us Greg. Why is it that you have never managed to respond to any
of the dozens of articles that explain why your "single best evidence"
request is ridiculous? You have PLENTY of time to respond to every
other thread, but you've never managed to find the time to write a
response defending your methods...

	


-- 
|| Mark Craig Chu-Carroll:  ||"We the people are getting tired of your lies
|| CIS Grad, Univ of Delaware   || We the people now believe that it's time
|| PGP key available by finger  || We're demanding our rights to the answers
|| carroll@cis.udel.edu         || We elect a precedent to state of mind"-Fish


Article 15613 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!pm005-07.dialip.mich.net!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please address your misrepresentation of Pressac
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 12:24:05 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 65
Message-ID: 
References: <33hbmn$pch@access1.digex.net>
   
   
   <33vhfn$sqt@louie.udel.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm005-07.dialip.mich.net

carroll@thorin.cis.udel.edu (Mark C. Chu-Carroll) wrote:

> greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) writes:
>
> ]Wasn't the Boeck statement originally produced in response to my request
> ]for the best evidence of a Nazi plan or policy to exterminate the Jews in
> ]gas chambers? If so, and because Pressac casts doubts on Boeck's having
> ]witnessed more than one, I think this goes directly to the issue of whether
> ]this is a good piece of evidence to produce.
> 
> In other words, "I can't possibly deny having been caught in a
> deliberate lie, so I'll try to weasel out by trying to sidetrack the
> discussion into an argument about my invalid discussion methods."

What Mark said.

And:  Pressac does _not_ "cast doubts" on Boeck's having witnessed more
than one gassing.  He says it would not be surprising if Boeck had only
witnessed one, given Boeck's attitude toward the gassing process.  But if
Boeck had witnessed more than one, would that be surprising?  Well, not
really.

Pressac doesn't, in fact, say anything about what Pressac's reaction would
be if Boeck _had_ witnessed more than one.

Pressac doesn't say it would be surprising.

Pressac certainly doesn't "cast doubts."

Thus, Mr. Raven is misrepresenting Pressac's commentary even now -- even
after he's backed down from his first assertion, which was that Pressac had
said that Boeck could have witnessed only one gassing, "at most"!  That
statement is not only false, it directly implies that Pressac doubts that
Boeck saw even one gassing, which is a complete fabrication.

Mr. Raven, of the reasoning in the above paragraphs, what don't you
understand?

> ]However, if you believe that
> ]this is the BEST EVIDENCE of the above-mentioned Nazi plan or policy,
> ]merely say so and we can discuss it further.

I don't care whether or not we discuss _Boeck_ any further, Mr. Raven.

At this point, I'm more interested in _your misrepresentation_ of
Pressac's comments on Boeck's testimony.  The question of your
misrepresenting and lying about Pressac's work does not depend on whether
or not I or anyone else believes Boeck to be the BEST EVIDENCE.

I imagine you don't want to discuss it further, but then of course
that's your choice.

> Tell us Greg. Why is it that you have never managed to respond to any
> of the dozens of articles that explain why your "single best evidence"
> request is ridiculous? You have PLENTY of time to respond to every
> other thread, but you've never managed to find the time to write a
> response defending your methods...

What Mark said.

This article emailed to Mr. Raven to ensure that he sees both my and
Mark's comments.
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 15614 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!pm005-07.dialip.mich.net!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please quote the text
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 12:40:07 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 46
Message-ID: 
References: 
   
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm005-07.dialip.mich.net

Mr. Raven continues to insist that he can put words in my mouth.

I reject this, and demand that he actually read what I write.

greg.ihr@kaiwan.com (Greg Raven) wrote:

> Sorry. I believe if you read the original message, you will see that
> McCarthy refers only to testimonies and eyewitness accounts, or somesuch. I
> take this to mean that there is no substantive evidence to support his view
> of the Holocaust extermination myth.

You're changing the subject again, Mr. Raven.

Greg, in article , regarding
whether or not the gas chambers are reconstructions, I wrote,  "We can deal
with the truth or falsity of this statement later."  You later said that
I had "admitted" that they were reconstructions, and thus that no direct
evidence of the tools used to kill the people still exists.

I want you to quote the text where I "admitted" this, Mr. Raven, as per
the Subject line of this thread.

If you like, I'll email you all articles I've written since you first came
up with this thing about the gas chambers being reconstructions.  I'll be
happy to.  Just ask.

> I will repeat that the Holocaust
> extermination myth is unique in Western history in that it is the only
> event for which we have only "testimony" and "eyewitness" accounts. Now, if
> there was some tangible evidence ... but of course, Mr. McCarthy made no
> reference to that. Why not?

One thing at a time.

As soon as you either (1) quote the text where I made this admission, or
(2) confess that you misrepresented what I said, that you put words in my
mouth;  then we can go on to talk about how much tangible evidence of the
mass gassings still exists at Auschwitz.  And I'll be happy to do so.

But do one of those two things first.  _Then_ I'll agree to change the
subject.

Emailed to Mr. Raven, as usual.
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 15618 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!access.digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please address your misrepresentation of Pressac
Date: 30 Aug 1994 12:52:10 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <33vo3q$jj6@access2.digex.net>
References: <33hbmn$pch@access1.digex.net>  
NNTP-Posting-Host: access2.digex.net

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:
> Pressac casts doubts on Boeck's having
>witnessed more than one [gassing]

    This is (to say the least) a very creative reading of Pressac's text, 
which has been posted here several times.

    Say, Greg, want to get some high school English teachers together and 
place a little wager on what they'd say about your interpretation of 
Pressac's text?
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15620 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!torn!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!pm005-04.dialip.mich.net!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Mr. Raven, do you want evidence in order, or in isolation?
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 14:02:30 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 64
Message-ID: 
References: 
   
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm005-04.dialip.mich.net

Mr. Raven, I'm confused.

When it was pointed out that no serious historian would demand evidence
as you have -- one piece at a time, each piece to be considered in
isolation -- you replied, on July 31:

> I have not said that anyone would use a single data point to prove a
> hypothesis. I merely want to make the discussion somewhat manageable.
> If we can discuss one piece of evidence at a time, that would seem to
> be a much more manageable method than that currently being employed
> here....

So it would seem that you want to look at evidence one piece at a time
simply to improve the quality of discussion.

Then, recently, regarding the subject of the ten documents that have
been provided to you, you made an interesting side-remark.  Keep in
mind that the preface to those ten documents clearly explains that
they should be discussed one at a time.  We ask you, Mr. Raven, to
address first #1, then when you're through to proceed on to #2, and
so on.  We figured that would fit in best with your plans.

Your recent side-remark was:

> Please repost
> that wonderful first document.... You know, the one that was so
> devastating to the revisionist position that you and others felt
> compelled to post many other documents alongside it, just in case.

That snide comment leads me to believe that you feel we would have
done better to left off the other nine documents.

Yet we've always made it very clear that the ten documents do not
depend on each other, that we feel each can stand on its own as per
your silly demand.

The tone of the above-quoted remark makes it clear, to me, that it
isn't enough for us to simplify discussion by handing you one document
at a time, ten of them lined up in a row.  It appears that what you
want is one single perfect document, perhaps a sworn statement:  "I am
going to kill all the Jews with poison gas, signed, A. Hitler."  One
document that obviates the need for all others.  One document that, by
itself, if there were no other evidence in the whole world, would
prove conclusively that the Holocaust happened.

Please clarify your position, Mr. Raven.

If that is truly what you want, one document and no others, one piece
of paper that proves the reality of eleven million murders committed
by thousands of people scattered over five years and two million
square kilometers, say so.

Or, if you want to look at any number of documents, with each document
in strict isolation from the others, for each document ignoring all
corroborative evidence, ignoring the convergence of evidence, ignoring
context to determine meanings and intentions, say so.

Or, if you want to do what a real historian does -- examining all
the evidence together, considering things in context -- say so.

Because right now, I'm confused.
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 15622 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz
From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, do you want evidence in order, or in isolation?
Date: 30 Aug 1994 18:15:47 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <33vt0j$7a7@agate.berkeley.edu>
References:   
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu

In article ,
Jamie McCarthy  wrote:

>It appears that what you
>want is one single perfect document, perhaps a sworn statement:  "I am
>going to kill all the Jews with poison gas, signed, A. Hitler."  One
>document that obviates the need for all others.  One document that, by
>itself, if there were no other evidence in the whole world, would
>prove conclusively that the Holocaust happened.

Did we ever get an explanation from the "all of the documnts are 
forged" crowd of why, it the IZC was forging all of these thousands
of documents, they didn't take the time to forge the "Hitler order"
described above?  After all, if some non-IZC bozo could try to forge
Hitler's *diaries* and nearly get away with it, forging his signature
on one piece of paper could hardly be much trouble for those crazy
dudes as IZC headquarters.

-- 
				Richard Schultz

"It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean.  Do you have to salt your
truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?"


Article 15623 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!kmcvay
From: kmcvay@oneb.almanac.bc.ca (Ken Mcvay)
Subject: Mr. Raven wants no evidence at all, and fabricates what he needs
Summary: Mr. Raven does not want evidence at all, in or out of order.
         Evidence is something Mr. Raven cannot deal with - he's paid
         to fabricate it when he can, and ignore it when he cannot.
References:   
Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac
Message-ID: <1994Aug31.170737.4484@oneb.almanac.bc.ca>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 17:07:37 GMT

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

>Please clarify your position, Mr. Raven.

Mr. Raven's position seems to be this: The convergence of evidence
relating to the collective events known as the Holocaust is both
uncomfortable and overwhelming. Therefore I must insist that we
ignore it completely within our discussions, within which I insist
on redefining the Holocaust within far more narrow terms. These
terms will make meaningful discussion impossible, which is, after
all, what I get paid to do.

In that vein, I must say that I will not read any such evidence,
will lie about such evidence, and deny that I am doing so if you
call me a liar.

>Because right now, I'm confused.

Don't be - Mr. Raven is pretty transparent, even for a paid denier.
I can hardly wait for Faurisson and Zu"ndel to climb on board - such
can only continue to expose the underlying racism and utter
stupidity of the denial industry, and those profiting from it. It is
quite amazing to see how incapable these guys are of defending their
own assertions, and one can only hope that Faurisson, Zu"ndel, and
Mark Weber will continue the demonstration.

Of course, they may find less discomfort returning to the talk show
circuit, where they can browbeat the audience with their lies
without fear of immediate refutation, and perhaps make some more
money while they are at it. A sorry lot.

Raven's position seems to be shared by Faurisson, as evidenced both
by his ignorance regarding Zyklon-B, and his reaction to hearing the
truth: "This discussion is over."

Speaking of "this discussion is over," one needs to note that
Friedrich Berg seems to have oozed off, dragging his tail between
his legs... perhaps he should develop Raven's May 4th. Myopia and
return to the net. He would, of course, ignore all the evidence that
his thesis is bullshit, and start all over again, "proving" that
diesel exhaust is harmless, and therefore the Holocaust did not
happen. He will, for instance, insist that his "challenge" to myself
and others was never answered, because we are "afraid" of him and
his paper. This will lead to a reprinting of the responses to his
nonsense, which he will _also_ ignore, saying, like Mr. Raven, that
(1) he hasn't seen them, or, when we point out that they've been
mailed to him, and acknowledged, that (2) he doesn't have time to
read them.

In the meantime, we have Milton Kleim, who, in the established
denier tradition, has begun misrepresenting yet another text in
support of his wierd politics. One can only hope that, sooner or
later, these idiots will find a spokesman who can actually walk and
chew gum at the same time.. unlikely as that may seem.

In the meantime, don't be confused. Raven's a liar, pure and simple,
and he isn't about to admit it. By his own words he is condemned.

-- 
   /^\__/^\                 The Old Frog's Almanac 
  / @    @ \     A Salute to That Old Frog Himse'f, Ryugen Fisher
 (          )       Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada
  \  ~~~~  /               


Article 15625 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!news.duke.edu!solaris.cc.vt.edu!uunet!news1.digex.net!access.digex.net!not-for-mail
From: mstein@access.digex.net (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Forgeries
Date: 30 Aug 1994 15:10:45 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <34007l$qe5@access2.digex.net>
References:    <33vt0j$7a7@agate.berkeley.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: access2.digex.net

In article <33vt0j$7a7@agate.berkeley.edu>,
Richard Schultz  wrote:
>Did we ever get an explanation from the "all of the documnts are 
>forged" crowd of why, it the IZC was forging all of these thousands
>of documents, they didn't take the time to forge the "Hitler order"
>described above?  After all, if some non-IZC bozo could try to forge
>Hitler's *diaries* and nearly get away with it, forging his signature
>on one piece of paper could hardly be much trouble for those crazy
>dudes as IZC headquarters.

     At dinner last night, Faurisson expressed the opinion that 99% of the
documents are genuine.  Unfortunately we did not have the chance to get
into which ones he thought were forgeries and why. 

- Mike
-- 
Mike Stein			The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420			Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA  22210		position of my employer.


Article 15666 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!panix!ddsw1!golux.pr.mcs.net!user
From: golux@mcs.com (The only Golux in the World, and not a mere Device)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: My best evidence that Greg Raven is dishonest
Followup-To: alt.revisionism
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 1994 00:57:51 -0600
Organization: MCSNet Services
Lines: 58
Message-ID: 
References: <33hbmn$pch@access1.digex.net> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: golux.pr.mcs.net

In article , greg.ihr@kaiwan.com
(Greg Raven) wrote:

> In article <33hbmn$pch@access1.digex.net>, mstein@access1.digex.net
> (Michael P. Stein) wrote:
> 
> > On the subject of Bo"ck, you wrote:
> > 
> >      "Pressac himself casts doubt on some of the aspects
> >      of this statement, pointing out, for example, that
> >      Boeck could only have witnessed one such gassing (at
> >      most)."
> > 
> >      Here is the full text of Pressac's comments on Bo"ck's testimony, found 
> > on page 181 of the English language edition:
[deleted for brevity]
> >     The only aspect Pressac truly disputes is how high the orderlies
> > climbed, a trivial detail.  Pressac most emphatically does *not* state
> > that Bo"ck could only have witnessed one gassing - as suspected, the "at
> > most" is your own totally fraudulent insertion, not Pressac's words.  What
> > Pressac wonders about (but does *not* flatly deny) is if Bo"ck could have
> > maintained his moral character if he had been forced to witness such
> > activities on a *regular* basis. 
[...]
> I don't see what you are getting at. I believe this all came up because
> Keren claimed that Boeck's statement was evidence of a Nazi plan or policy
> to exterminate the Jews in gas chambers. I pointed out that, according to
> Pressac, Boeck did not seem to have been a witness to more than one
> "gassing." Therefore, even if one gassing had taken place, which I do not
> admit, and Boeck saw it, this is hardly proof of a plan to exterminate
> millions of people.

No, you "pointed out" that according to Pressac, Bo"ck could *only* have
seen one gassing "(at most)," when in fact, Pressac said no such thing.

> However, if this is important to you, all you need to do is tell me that
> you consider the Boeck statement to be the BEST evidence that the Nazis had
> a plan or policy to exterminate millions of Jews in homicidal gas chambers.
> Then we can talk about it all you want.

You've entirely missed the point, Greg.  This particular thread is not
devoted to your single-minded insistence on "the one or two pieces of best
evidence"; it is, rather, devoted to your misrepresentation of Pressac. 
There are two possibilities: you misrepresented Pressac knowingly, or you
did it by mistake.  If the former, then your integrity and intellectual
honesty are called intop serious question.  If the latter, then your
reading comprehension and intellectual rigor are called into serious
question.  Whichever of these is the case, it is only right that they
should be addressed before we permit you to dictate the boundaries of any
discussions in this newsgroup, don't you think?

So which is it?

-- 
D. J. Schaeffer |       The Todal looks like a blob of glup.
golux@mcs.com   |     It makes a sound like rabbits screaming,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^        and smells of old, unopened rooms.
                            -- Thurber, _The 13 Clocks_


Article 15676 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!schultz
From: schultz@garnet.berkeley.edu (Richard Schultz)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Can *any* of these guys read?
Date: 31 Aug 1994 12:22:59 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <341sn3$3ck@agate.berkeley.edu>
References:  
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu

In article ,
Greg Raven  wrote:

>So, you are saying that those who remained behind had the perception that
>they were going to be murdered? Yet they stayed behind? And that Wiesel,
>who claims to have seen Germans throwing babies into open pits of flame, if
>I remember correctly (an event that disturbed him so much he claimed he
>could no longer sleep), later thought the Germans were okay? Baffling.

No, what Wiesel said -- and what the quote above bears out -- is that
there was a great deal of uncertainty, confusion, and argument about 
what to do.  It was clear from the quotes posted previously that the
*general* impression was that the Russians would not arrive in time.
The question then became:  should the prisoners try to stay behind and
risk being killed by the Nazis, or should they go along with the evacuation
with its unknown risk?  Tragically, Wiesel and his father chose the
second option.  I say tragically, because Wiesel's father died in
Buchenwald after the death march, and Wiesel points out specifically that
those who stayed behind ended up simply being liberated by the Russians
rather than killed.  Primo Levi, who was one of those who stayed behind,
reports the same thing in his memoirs.

>By the way, you left out mentioning that Wiesel had the conversation with
>his father in the camp HOSPITAL, where both Wiesel and his father had been
>treated. Funny kind of death camp, that Birkenau. Not very efficient of
>those Nazis to spend time and money curing people so they would have to
>feed them and gas them later.

*You* seem to have left out mentioning that Wiesel points out that no one
wanted to go to the hospital because the selections there were much more
frequent than those in the camp itself.  And since you mention the Nazis
"feeding" the prisoners, perhaps you would care to report (and document)
the number of calories in the daily rations for the workers at Auschwitz,
and compare that number to the substistence level for people doing heavy
labor.

-- 
				Richard Schultz

"It is terrible to die of thirst in the ocean.  Do you have to salt your
truth so heavily that it does not even quench thirst any more?"


Article 15678 of alt.revisionism:
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!torn!nott!cunews!freenet.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!ai292
From: ai292@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Gordon McFee)
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please answer some questions about Treblinka
Message-ID: 
Sender: news@freenet.carleton.ca (Usenet News Admin)
Reply-To: ai292@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Gordon McFee)
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
References: <33utb2$loe@cat.cis.Brown.EDU>  Well Gordon, I think your point may be valid. It's possible that
>the SS began using gas simply because it was searching for better
>and faster ways to kill many people quickly.

That's my best guess, based on my analysis.  It in no way diminishes the
immorality of the holocaust, not does it in any way exculpate the "higher
ups", who both willed it and approved of it.

>
>However, Hitler writes in "Mein Kampf" something about wishing that
>Jews were exposed to poison gas (does someone have the exact quote)?
>So, maybe he did influence the decision to switch from mass shooting
>to gas. Another factor was that gas proved useful in killing the
>mentally retarded and insane in the "T4" operation. It's obviously
>no coincidence that many of the staff of "T4" were later trasferred
>to the "Operation Reinhard" camps; even Stangl, commandant of
>Treblinka, began his "career" in the T4 operation.

I'll have to search for the quote, but I remember it.  I'm not sure it was
in Mein Kampf--it seems to me it was in an interview or something--but his
message was that if more Jews had been exposed to poison gas in WWI,
everyone would have been better off.  Come to think of it, I think the
quote is in "Hitler, the psycopathic God" by Waite.

I'm sure Hitler would have, and indeed did, approve of the use of gas,
mainly because of its increased efficiency and the fact that it was not as
hard on the poor SS to gas someone as to have to shoot him (this applied
particularly to women and children).  And there is no doubt that the T-4
exercise served both as an inspiration and a model.
>

--
Gordon McFee ai292

I'll write no line before its time!


Article 15695 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!news.itd.umich.edu!pm005-00.dialip.mich.net!user
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Correction (was Re: Mr. Raven, why did you distort Wiesel's _Night_?)
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 1994 12:03:26 -0400
Organization: University of Michigan
Lines: 19
Message-ID: 
References: 
   
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm005-00.dialip.mich.net

In article ,
k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie McCarthy) wrote:
> 
> D.J. Schaeffer has kindly given me permission to repost his August 2nd
> article, which asks Mr. Raven some tough questions about his distortion
> of Elie Wiesel's famous book _Night_.

A quick correction.

It wasn't D.J. Schaeffer who gave me permission nor wrote the excellent
analysis of Raven and _Night_ that I quoted in that article.  It was
Dan Spiegel (dspiegel@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu).

Sorry about that, Dan;  feel free to whip me with that wet noodle now.
I'll try not to do that again.  And thanks for bringing it to my
attention, D.J.
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy   Internet: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu   AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 I speak for no one but myself.


Article 15705 of alt.revisionism:
Path: oneb!hakatac!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!torn!spool.mu.edu!agate!dog.ee.lbl.gov!overload.lbl.gov!ames!tulane!darwin.sura.net!news1.census.gov!info.census.gov!not-for-mail
From: lnyman@info.census.gov (Lisa Nyman)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Mr. Raven, please answer some questions about Treblinka
Date: 31 Aug 1994 16:23:34 -0400
Organization: US Census Bureau
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <342os6$bd3@info.census.gov>
References:   <33ushm$led@cat.cis.brown.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: info.census.gov

In article <33ushm$led@cat.cis.brown.edu>,
Danny Keren  wrote:
>
>Hey, I know! The photo was taken from one of the UFOs Raven's
>colleague, "revisionist" Ernst Zundel, keeps talking about. The UFO
>taking the photo was a light-year away from Earth, and thus the photo,
>although taken at 1944, really shows what happened in Treblinka at 1943!
>Is this what you claim, Raven?
>

Geez, Danny, that that book had a question mark in the title!  That
makes all the difference.


-- 
Lisa Wolfisch Nyman  301-763-6005 |   I don't do TIGER!   |
-----------------------------------------------------|-----------------------|
SF-19902.95-xy7/23(g) Standard Disclaimer on file    | Now accepting appli-  |
in the Central Office. I speak for me, Not U.S.      |cations for .sig quote.|

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