Shofar FTP Archive File: people/v/von.ebersdorf.johannes/usenet/2008/v.ebersdorf.200812
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Tue Dec 2 13:29:38 EST 2008
Article: 1964302 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!news-in-02.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-06.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Germany to pursue Holocaust denier's arrest
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID: <7938j4l93cj9qlofap0inc020pd9ub3k0n@4ax.com>
References: <5DdXk.233$yK5.94@edtnps82> <905c16da-4f1c-457f-9e76-ca3835d22fbc@o4g2000pra.googlegroups.com> <4l10j454t98ij87bvj5g32bfqpokd08277@4ax.com> <6pc3bmF7e8eoU1@mid.individual.net> <6pc92sF7d4hcU1@mid.individual.net>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 99
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 11:14:42 -0500
Bytes: 5275
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1964302
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 08:24:36 +0100, "Heinrich"
wrote:
>
>"I'll Always Be Here" schreef in bericht
>news:Xns9B64E37AFC526Theonlyonethatcares@87.106.137.111...
>> "Heinrich" wrote in
>> news:6pc3bmF7e8eoU1@mid.individual.net:
>>
>>>
>>> "I'll Always Be Here" schreef in bericht
>>> news:Xns9B64903DD8FCCTheonlyonethatcares@87.106.137.111...
>>>> Johannes von Ebersdorf wrote in
>>>> news:4l10j454t98ij87bvj5g32bfqpokd08277@4ax.com:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 06:48:27 -0800 (PST), "Chris C. Larson"
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Nov 27, 10:22 am, Johannes von Ebersdorf
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 10:18:06 -0800 (PST), "ChrisC.Larson"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >On Nov 26, 9:07 am, "Kurt Knoll" wrote:
>>>>>>> >> I have never seen a German newspaper since 1945 where the Germans
>>>>>>> >> are allowed to have an open discussion about the holocaust. And
>>>>>>> >> just like under Hitler's time everyone has to be very carefully
>>>>>>> >> what he says about the holocaust in public.
>>>>>>> >> Kurt Knoll.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> "I'll Always Be Here" wrote in
>>>>>>> >> messagenews:Xns9B61BC64BD58ETheonlyonethatcares@87.106.137.111...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> > "Kurt Knoll" wrote
>>>>>>> >> > innews:JA1Xk.177$yK5.8@edtnps82:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> >> You mean the Germans are not allowed to read or see what other
>>>>>>> >> >> countries say about the holocaust I just wonder what will come
>>>>>>> >> >> next.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> > Interesting. How do they manage to avoid it in the newspapers,
>>>>>>> >> > radios, tv's, books, magazines and the internet?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> > They all can't be as stupid or lazy as you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> >> Kurt Knoll.
>>>>>>> >> >> wen du zum saufen augh rst kanns du auch alles lessen.
>>>>>>> >> >> kk
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> >> "Wolfgang Kieckbusch" wrote in message
>>>>>>> >> >> news:edf0fcaa-95dd-4fb2-9235-
>>>>>>> >> > cbc5607c1...@g38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>>> >> >>> On 25 Nov., 15:19, "Kurt Knoll" wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> >>> Es ist der Alkohol, Knoll!
>>>>>>> >> >>> Du richtest Dich zugrunde!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> >>> Wolfgang Kieckbusch
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >Kurt:
>>>>>>> >I see that you are still struggling with the concept of denying
>>>>>>> >facts being confused with "open discussion". We've seen the points
>>>>>>> >(or lack thereof), that you and your asshole denier buddies have
>>>>>>> >made. Do you have any thing else to discuss? If not, go find
>>>>>>> >yourself something better to do.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Actually Kurt is quite correct. German authorities pander to the
>>>>>>> allied version of WW2, and subject anybody who askes uncomfortable
>>>>>>> questions to judicial persecution.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And your proof?
>>>>>
>>>>> LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> Read any German newspaper or magazine, assuming that you are capable.
>>>>> The ministry of justice indicates that there were almost ten thousand
>>>>> prosecutions in 2004 for what could charitably be called "propaganda
>>>>> offences".
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Interesting. Provide the name of the newspapers, the dates and the
>>>> pages.>
>>> he is right !!!
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Not until he proves it.
>since when is it up to you to decide whether it is genuine proof?
Nameless one always wants other people to do their research for them,
and then he will claim that the sources are invalid or that the
authors are biased. I have seen this scenario rather too many times.
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Tue Dec 2 13:29:38 EST 2008
Article: 1964307 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!news-in-02.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-09.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID: <4k38j4dm0mto4uv0tspjpomd5rf094qrlu@4ax.com>
References: <9fb5f9a3-0366-4cc4-8086-59fc56dcbe16@a26g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 72
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 11:24:21 -0500
Bytes: 4930
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1964307
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 17:46:09 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
Holman) wrote:
>In article ,
>ebersdorf@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>> The woman didn't say she was a citizen of the "third" Reich, a state
>> that has never legally existed. It is simply a term used by the
>> uneducated masses. If there ever were to be a third Empire, it would
>> still be future.
>>
>> There has been no new German state since the founding of the second
>> Empire in 1871.
>
>That can be argued, even if you might be technically correct. From a
>practical and legal standpoint, the German *Reich* collapsed in May, 1945,
>with Austria, the German Federal Republic, and the German Democratic
>Republic, replacing it in 1945 (Austria) and 1949, respectively. As we all
>know, the German Federal Republic reunited itself with ("wiedervereinigte
>sich mit") the German Democratic Republic in 1990. If a processes of
>reuniting took place, between the time of the breakup and the reuniting
>there had to have been a separate and distinct political entity.
>
>> All Germans are citizens of the state known in
>> international law as "Deutsches Reich" and the BRD is only its
>> trustee, not a replacement for it.
>
>Hitlerite Germany was indeed known legally simply as "Deutsches Reich" or
>"das deutsche Reich", these being the terms that he used in his speeches
>and which also appeared on postage stamps, currency, passports, etc. But
>that country ceased to exist in May 1945, and its two major successor
>states, the German Federal Republic, and the German Democratic Republic,
>were established as semi-sovereign (in the sense that both were under some
>form of foreign occupation) political entities in 1949.
>
>According to the German Constitution (2 BvF 1/73; BVerfGE 36), the German
>Federal Republic is "identical" with the "deutsches Reich", however
>practical geopolitics as well as history tell a different story.
>Bismarck's "deutsches Reich" included territory that is now in France,
>Denmark, Poland, Russia, and Lithuania. Between 1949 and 1990 the German
>Democratic Republic, a distinct state, never formally recognized by the
>Federal Republic, but widely recognized by other countries, with its
>*defacto* if not *de jure* existence also recognized by the German Federal
>Republic, cut off all historical connections with the *deutsches Reich*
>existed on the territory of and had a population mostly descended from
>that of Bismarck's *Reich*, without being regarded or regarding itself as
>a successor state to it.
>
>The *legality* of the existence of the German Democratic republic can be
>argued, but there is no arguing the historical fact that it did exist
>between 1949 and 1990, and that even the German Federal Republic had to
>deal with the *practical factuality* of its existence.
>
>Regards,
>Eugene Holman
>
>*Deutschland drei geteilt? Niemals!"
As I said, all power in the BRD comes from its trusteeship of the
political entity known as Deutsches Reich. (Incidentally, both the D
and the R are capitalized since it is a single entity, not an
adjective before a noun).
The second empire was NOT extinguished in 1945, since the allied
officials specifically stated of the occupation that "This does not
effect the annexation of Germany".
The fact that parts of the Empire remain under alien occupation does
not mean that it no longer exists. The BRD is NOT identical with DR,
which is why the name DR is not used for it.
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Tue Dec 2 13:29:38 EST 2008
Article: 1964311 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!news-in-02.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-09.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID:
References:
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 70
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 11:59:04 -0500
Bytes: 5018
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1964311
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 09:25:45 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
Holman) wrote:
>In article
>, Bent
>Attorney wrote:
>
>
>>
>> I started this thread with the intention of getting a debate going
>> over the morality behind Stolz's lock up. I wanted people to state
>> their opinions as to whether they thought her detention was right,
>> wrong, in a grey area or whatever, and why.
>
>The issue of her being in prison is not as much a moral as it is a legal
>one. Ms. Stolz has behaved in a manner regarded an Germany as contempuous
>to the point of being seditious of the state in addition to having
>violated laws that are taken extremely seriously and rigorously enforced
>in Germany. The state has responded to her contemptuous and seditious
>behavior in the manner deemed apprpriate in its legal code. If you want to
>inject the issue of morality, you have to consider two issues: 1. the
>citizen's moral obligation to stay on the right side of the law, 2. the
>citizen's moral obligation to call attention to unjust laws and work to
>rectify them.
>
>With respect to the first issue there is no questioning the fact that Ms.
>Stolz acted immorally. Not only did she disobey laws, she showed
>unprecedented and repeated contempt for both the government that had
>passed the laws and the legal system that enforces them, even when ordered
>to cease and desist from doing so. As to the laws themselves, they exist
>and are enforced to ensure that Germans do not deny, forget, belittle, or
>try to justify the crimes committed in the name of their nation in most of
>Europe during the National Socialist regime. It boils down to the issue of
>whether it is more moral to ensure that the crimes committed by the Nazis
>are neither denied nor forgotten, or to allow people with such an agenda
>to deny, belittle, or try to justify these crimes.
>
>> Instead I get a lot of
>> legal stuff from someone who doesn't seem to know anything about
>> himself. He just goes on and on about what this state would have
>> done, or what that state did, or how Stolz sinned against the state
>> etc.
>
>The legal stuff is part of the issue. Ms. Stolz denies both the crimes
>committed by the Nazis as well as the legitimacy of the German Federal
>Republic, and, specifically, of its laws forbidding public Holocaust
>denial and its mandate to enforce them.
>
>> Not much opinion coming from Holman. Just statist crap. Holman: You
>> have any original ideas, or do you just spew twice chewed state
>> controlled vegetation?
>
>I have lived and studied in Germany and I am quite familiar with Ms.
>Stolz's mindset. The Neo-Nazi movement, one of the branches of which Ms.
>Stolz represents, denies the legitimacy of the German Federal Republic as
>the successor state to Hitler's Reich and thus considers its laws, legal
>system, judges, and police to be illegitimate organs of a state
>established and maintained by foreign occupants, conveniently neglecting
>the fact that Austria, which is not under foreign occupation, has and
>rigorously enforces similar laws. Any discussion of the morality of Ms.
>Stolz's behavior and of the punishment meted out for it by the German
>legal system has to address the issue of the legitimacy of the present
>German state and government, and of Ms. Stolz's right to deny this
>legitimacy.
>
>Regards,
>Eugene Holman
Violating bad laws may be dangerous and possibly unwise, but it
certainly isn't immoral. As a democracy, the BRD is a farce.
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Tue Dec 2 13:29:38 EST 2008
Article: 1964312 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-08.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID:
References: <2e2dnTEi0eldnKzUnZ2dnUVZ_tzinZ2d@giganews.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 110
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 12:00:59 -0500
Bytes: 6543
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1964312
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:40:54 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
Holman) wrote:
>In article <2e2dnTEi0eldnKzUnZ2dnUVZ_tzinZ2d@giganews.com>, "Ben Cramer"
> wrote:
>
>> "Eugene Holman" wrote in message
>> news:holman-2911080925450001@ke-hupnet143-27.hupnet.helsinki.fi...
>
>
>
>> > The issue of her being in prison is not as much a moral as it is a legal
>> > one. Ms. Stolz has behaved in a manner regarded an Germany as contempuous
>> > to the point of being seditious of the state in addition to having
>> > violated laws that are taken extremely seriously and rigorously enforced
>> > in Germany. The state has responded to her contemptuous and seditious
>> > behavior in the manner deemed apprpriate in its legal code. If you want to
>> > inject the issue of morality, you have to consider two issues: 1. the
>> > citizen's moral obligation to stay on the right side of the law, 2. the
>> > citizen's moral obligation to call attention to unjust laws and work to
>> > rectify them.
>> >
>> > With respect to the first issue there is no questioning the fact that Ms.
>> > Stolz acted immorally.
>>
>> Whoa. Right there.
>>
>> Immorally by whose standards?
>
>By the standards of modern European statecraft according to which secular
>states promulgate laws reflecting the collective will and values of the
>people that they represent, with their citizenry and others legally under
>their jurisdiction being obligated to observe and obey these laws, and
>subject to clearly defined sanctions if they choose not to do so.
>
>> >Not only did she disobey laws, she showed
>> > unprecedented and repeated contempt for both the government that had
>> > passed the laws and the legal system that enforces them,
>>
>> Which is the right of every citizen living in and under a democratic
>> government.
>
>It is indeed their right, but every citizen who chooses to exercise this
>right knows that he/she runs the risk of a specific punishment.
>
>> > even when ordered
>> > to cease and desist from doing so. As to the laws themselves, they exist
>> > and are enforced to ensure that Germans do not deny, forget, belittle, or
>> > try to justify the crimes committed in the name of their nation in most of
>> > Europe during the National Socialist regime.
>>
>> Horseshit. The laws were created by and for the yids to fuel the fires of
>> guilt which then runs the engine of reparations.
>
>Wrong. The Jews were only one of the groups targeted by the Nazis and they
>are only one of the groups that has received reparations. Nazi Germany
>managed to piss off just about everybody in Europe, and its successor
>state has had to pay reparations to the countries that it invaded,
>pillaged, and ethnically cleansed.
Most of the ethnic cleansing went in the other directions. The Poles
and Czechs pretty much hold the world record in that department.
>
>> >It boils down to the issue of
>> > whether it is more moral to ensure that the crimes committed by the Nazis
>> > are neither denied nor forgotten, or to allow people with such an agenda
>> > to deny, belittle, or try to justify these crimes.
>>
>> What crimes?
>
>For starters: attacking Poland on September 1, 1939, attacking, occupying,
>and pillaging Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, much of France,
>Norway, and Denmark during 1940, attacking the USSR on June 22, 1941,
>destroying Warsaw, Lidice, Distomo, Oradour-sur-Glane, and others,
>including the southwestern suburbs of Leningrad. Besieging Leningrad for
>three years resulting in 600,000 civilian deaths there. Destroying
>hundreds of thousands of Jews in public mass shootings during th summer
>and fall of 1941 at places such as Daugavpils, Liepaja, Rumbula,
>S^iauliai, Kiev, Odessa, Kharkov, Serniki, Ustinovka, Starokamensk, Minsk,
>Dnepropetrovsk...
>
>> There's never been a properly constituted court established to
>> examine these alleged "crimes."
>
>These crimes were the objects of numerous past-war trials, lasting well
>into the 2000s, in West Germany, East Germany, Austria, the Netherlands,
>Belgium, Poland, Luxembourg, Hungary, Finland, Denmark, Norway, Israel,
>the USSR, Greece, Italy, the United States, Canada, Australia, and
>elsewhere.
>
>> Yid apologia snipped.
>
>If the Nazis had only committed crimes against the Jews in Germany, things
>would be relatively simple. But they set up shop in more than twenty
>countries, and targeted not ony Jews, but also Gypsies, homosexuals,
>Social democrats, trade unionists, Roman Catholic clergy, political
>activists, people of mixed race, and various and sundry others who did not
>fit into their mold.
>
>The Nazis were nasty people and their crimes resulted in the death of
>roughly 40,000,000 Europeans. Denying, deprecating, or trying to justify
>their criminality is offensive to the overwhelming majoriy of Europeans,
>even if the Silvia Stolz's, Ernst Zündels, and David Irvings of the world
>think that the Nazis took a bad rap and were really not so evil after all.
>
>Regards,
>Eugene Holman
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Tue Dec 2 13:29:39 EST 2008
Article: 1964313 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-07.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID: <5668j4l1m1alrp98ggvisi47e52esgfcrp@4ax.com>
References:
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 72
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 12:06:29 -0500
Bytes: 4209
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1964313
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 18:37:53 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
Holman) wrote:
>In article , "Kurt Knoll"
> wrote:
>
>> Lets face it Eugene Germany is a lackey for the state of Israel.
>
>How so? Germany unleashed a continent-wide war and lost it big time.
Nonsense. Both WW1 and WW2 were engineered by the allies, mainly
Britain.
>Initially confident that it would be victorious, Hitler's Reich flagrantly
>violated international conventions concerning the rules of warfare
The allies were no different.
and
>embarked upon an unprecedented campaign of pillage and ethnic cleansing to
>both rid Europe of people it regarded as racially undesirable and destroy
>the cultures and physical existence of peoples it regarded as racial
>inferiors, *Untermenschen*, in order to gain additional territory,
>*Lebensraum* for German colonization.
That is crap. It wasn't Hitler who needed a war. He was getting
everything he needed without war. It was the allies who needed a war.
>
>Nazi Germany did unspeakably horrible things to the parents, grandparents,
>and relatives of most of the citizens of the state of Israel, as well as
>to a few survivors living there, but it did even more horrible things to
>the citizens of Poland (approx 10,000,000 of whom were killed by the
>Nazis)
There is no bloody way that 10 M Poles died in WW2. Try fewer than 5
M, and that includes the 3 M Polish Jews in eastern Poland.
and the Soviet Union (approx, 25,000,000 of whom were killed by the
>Nazis). Both countries lost far more population due to Nazi perfidy than
>the number of Jews (approx. 6,000,000) killed, remembering that there is
>some overlap. Thus, it is not only the Jews or the state of Israel that
>have an interest in keeping the Holocaust on the agenda and ensuring that
>the present generation of Germans is not allowed to forget, deny,
>downplay, or try to justify the Holocaust. All of Germany's neighbors,
>victimized by the Holocaust in one way or another, do what they can to
>make sure that their own younger generation as well as the Germans,
>remember the Holocaust and its implications. This would still be the case
>even if Israel would never have been founded.
>
>> What she
>> did is showing it to the whole words. here case was a show for the holocaust
>> industries.
>
>What Silvia Stolz did was make her clearly psychotic relationship to the
>German state and its recent history evident to the entire world. She also
>demonstrated far better than she could have ever imagined why German and
>Austrian laws criminalizing denial, deprecation, or attempts to justify
>the Holocaust need to be kept in the legal code and robustly enforced.
>
>
>
>Regards,
>Eugene Holman
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Tue Dec 2 13:29:39 EST 2008
Article: 1964315 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news.glorb.com!news2!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID: <6f68j4ljem5rekap5g83088ork6ufqddve@4ax.com>
References: <5YCdnX85dY2qRKzUnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@giganews.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 51
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 12:09:03 -0500
Bytes: 3332
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1964315
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 12:16:16 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
Holman) wrote:
>In article , "Ben Cramer"
> wrote:
>
>> "Eugene Holman" wrote in message
>> news:holman-3011081000410001@ke-hupnet143-27.hupnet.helsinki.fi...
>> > In article <5YCdnX85dY2qRKzUnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@giganews.com>, "Ben Cramer"
>
>
>> >> There was no state of israel, fuckwit.
>> >
>> > The Nazis did unspeakably horrible things between 1938 and 1945 to the
>> > parents, grandparents, and relatives of most of the people who are
>> > citizens of the state of Israel today. Indeed, a substantial part of the
>> > present citizenry of Israel left or are the descendants of people who left
>> > Nazi Germany for Palestine between 1933 and 1938 precisely because the
>> > Nazis were doing unspeakable horrible things to Jews in Germany.
>>
>> So you say. You've never provided any properly tested evidence to support
>> your nonsense.
>
>You can't "properly test" an historical event.
It was an historical event much like the Belgian children whose hands
were hacked off, at least according to British propaganda. There is
virtually nothing that the allies have ever said about anything that
isn't a lie.
>
>Exhibit 1:
>http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/11/09/germany.commemorate.ap/
>
>Exhibit 2: http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/docs/Bruns/index.html
>
>Exhibit 3:
>http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/media_fi.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005143&MediaId=183
>
>Exhibit 4.
>http://64.233.183.132/search?q=cache:j-LhzhL-wIMJ:www.liepajajews.org/LGhetto.pdf+liepaja+massacre&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&client=firefox-a
>
>Exhibit 5. http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Arajs-Kommando
>
>
>> Judicial notice doesnt' cut it, old feller.
>
>I've never appealed to judicial notice.
>
>Regards,
>Eugene Holman
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Tue Dec 2 13:29:39 EST 2008
Article: 1964550 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!news-in-02.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-09.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID:
References: <3b2dnT0qrboB2anUnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@vex.net> <06bd3e42-a014-41fb-b7c1-9a9e8b372503@j11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 52
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:18:26 -0500
Bytes: 3350
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1964550
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 13:12:46 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
Holman) wrote:
>In article , "Ben Cramer"
> wrote:
>
>> "Eugene Holman" wrote in message
>> news:holman-0212080753560001@c518-m3.eng.helsinki.fi...
>> > In article
>> > , Bent
>> > Attorney wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Dec 1, 6:20=A0pm, kmc...@shell.vex.net (Kenneth McVay OBC) wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> > >> She violated German law, which is probably why he thought the German
>> >> > >> response was appropriate.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Hiding behind the law again. How about what you think is right or
>> >> wrong? Or don't you swing that way?
>> >
>> > What a person thinks is right or wrong is of very little value in a
>> > society governed by suprapersonal laws.
>>
>>
>> More b'ollocks from ole yougenie.
>>
>> Split this up amongst ya, yougenie.
>>
>> "de minimis non curat lex"
>
>When a courtroom lawyer bases he defense on the country, the laws, and the
>court being illegtimate we are not dealing with trivia. It is an
>instantiation of unprecedented (= "beispiellos" is the adjective that the
>German prosecutor used to describe Sylvia Stolz's tactics) contempt for
>the state and legal system.
>
>Regards,
>Eugene Holmsn
Like numerous other unfortunates before her, Ms. Stolz found herself
faced with a "power" capable of doing unpleasant things to her. That
part is not in dispute and I suppose that she would have been aware of
that.
That is not the same as saying that the BRD has some sort of
legitimacy. The BRD is the reign of force, against an unwilling
population, engineered by alien elements. The best case scenario is
that this evil system be swept away like the Ancien Regime in
pre-revolutionary France.
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Tue Dec 2 13:29:40 EST 2008
Article: 1964564 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!news-in-02.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-06.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID:
References: <3b2dnT0qrboB2anUnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@vex.net> <06bd3e42-a014-41fb-b7c1-9a9e8b372503@j11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 87
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:20:54 -0500
Bytes: 4919
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1964564
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 06:29:16 -0600, Sara Salzman
wrote:
>In article
>,
> Bent Attorney wrote:
>
>> On Dec 1, 6:20 pm, kmc...@shell.vex.net (Kenneth McVay OBC) wrote:
>> > In article
>> > <06bd3e42-a014-41fb-b7c1-9a9e8b372...@j11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>,
>> > Bent Attorney wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > >On Dec 1, 3:10 pm, kmc...@shell.vex.net (Kenneth McVay OBC) wrote:
>> > >> In article
>> > >> ,
>> > >> Bent Attorney wrote:
>> >
>> > >> >On Dec 1, 2:52 pm, "I'll Always Be Here"
>> > >> >wrote:
>> > >> >> "Kurt Knoll" wrote
>> > >> >> innews:l5WYk.1675$si6.1216@edtnps83:
>> >
>> > >> >> > Like it or not what stolt'z did was in my opinion proper.
>> >
>> > >> >> And what happened to her was appropriate. Thank you.
>> > >> >Interesting. You like to lock up those whose speech offends you. I
>> > >> >was in the supermarket earlier and was soothed by the Christian
>> > >> >Christmas music that was played in the store. Does this music offend
>> > >> >you too?
>> >
>> > >> I can't locate the part where he indicated that he liked to lock up
>> > >> those
>> > >> whose speech offends him. Can you point it out, please?
>> >
>> > >Well look at what he said McVay. 'And what happened to her was
>> > >appropriate. Thank you'.
>> >
>> > What he said was *no9t* that he liked to lock folks up if their speech
>> > offended him.
>> >
>> > You're such a deflector.
>> >
>> > >> >Now to brass tacks. Why exactly do you say that 'what happened to her
>> > >> >was appropriate?' Don't be like Eugene and hide behind legal
>> > >> >statutes. Say what's on your mind if you've the stones.
>> >
>> > >> She violated German law, which is probably why he thought the German
>> > >> response was appropriate.
>> >
>>
>> Hiding behind the law again. How about what you think is right or
>> wrong? Or don't you swing that way?
>
>
>"Hiding behind the law"? Isn't Stolz a LAWYER? Doesn't she have an
>obligation to work within the LAW?
If others believed that earlier, then we would still have slavery and
numerous other unjust institutions. Sometimes laws have to be opposed.
The persecution of Jews, for example, before and during WW2 was
"legal", but I'm pretty sure that you wouldn't call it "good".
>
>When people have a JOB, or a law license, they have obligations. Lawyers
>are, at least in the US, "officers of the Court." They have certain
>obligations. Once of those is to show respect to the Court. When they
>don't, when they show contempt, there are consequences. If they don't
>like it, they shouldn't practice in front of Judges.
>>
>
>Why is that concept so alien to you?
>> > >Idiot as usual McVay. German law bans free political speech you
>> > >fucking slime.
>> >
>> > She violated German law, regardless of what non-German citizens may think,
>> > and she was punished accordingly.
>> >
>> > If you wish to campaign to change those laws, by all means feel free to do
>> > so.
>> >
>> > --
>> > "In the final analysis, one does not refute a closed system, a total
>> > lie that is not refutable to the extent that its conclusions has
>> > preceded any evidence." (Vidal-Naquet, Pierre. Assassins of Memory,
>> > New York: Columbia University Press. p.81)
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Tue Dec 2 13:29:40 EST 2008
Article: 1964565 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!news-in-02.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-08.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID:
References: <3b2dnT0qrboB2anUnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@vex.net> <06bd3e42-a014-41fb-b7c1-9a9e8b372503@j11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 95
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:24:04 -0500
Bytes: 5922
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1964565
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:43:21 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
Holman) wrote:
>In article
><06bd3e42-a014-41fb-b7c1-9a9e8b372503@j11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>, Bent
>Attorney wrote:
>
>> On Dec 1, 3:10=A0pm, kmc...@shell.vex.net (Kenneth McVay OBC) wrote:
>> > In article
>>
>> > >Now to brass tacks. =A0Why exactly do you say that 'what happened to her
>> > >was appropriate?' =A0Don't be like Eugene and hide behind legal
>> > >statutes. =A0Say what's on your mind if you've the stones.
>
>Sylvia Stolz was a practicing courtroom lawyer. Thus, both her
>professional competence and the place where she uses it are functions of
>legal statutes.
>
>Her client was Ernst Zündel, a German citizen accused of violating German
>laws remotely from Canada and the United States.
>
>Instead of entering a plea of "not guilty" and leave it up to the courts
>to produce evidence to the contrary,
You're confusing theoretical American practice with Germany. The
German legal system is based on Roman Law, and you are considered
guilty when you are charged. The obligation is on you to show that the
state's charges are wrong or that the state didn't have the right to
bring the charges in the first place. Ms. Stolz tried the second
approach and found that she herself had run afoul of ridiculous German
legislation.
> she constructed a defense based on
>her claim that the German state, its laws, and its court and legal system
>were all illegitimate and thus had neither a case nor even jurisdiction
>over Ernst Zündel and herself, both, she alleged, citizens of the German
>*Reich* but not of what she regards as its illegitimate successor state,
>the German Federal Republic. Needless to say, the court regarded such a
>defense as contemptuous and seditious. When trying to make its case that
>Zündel and Stolz were citizens of the German Federal Republic, and that
>its laws and legal system do indeed apply to both of them, Stolz
>interrupted the trial several times with filibustering and verbal
>outbursts. When told to cease and disist from such obstructive behavior,
>she refused to do so, claiming once again that the court had no
>jurisdiction over her and could not order her to behave in a specific
>manner. She was thus physically removed from the courtroom, kicking and
>screaming, by the bailiffs, eventually being charged with obstructing
>justice and multiple counts of contempt of court.
>
>I cannopt see how you can seriously claim that her eventual sentence amd
>punishment for obstructing justice and contempt of court are simply a
>matter of hiding behind legal statutes. I do not know of a country on this
>planet where such behavior would not have resulted in severe punishment
>for centempt of court and possibly sedition.
>
>> > She violated German law, which is probably why he thought the German
>> > response was appropriate.
>>
>> Idiot as usual McVay. German law bans free political speech you
>> fucking slime.
>
>German law bans *certain types* of public speech, just as Canadian and
>American law do. None of the three countries permits the kind of behavior
>in the courtroom that Silvia Stolz exhibited. Saying "fuck" or "cunt" on
>American daytime television or radio will get your broadcaster hit with a
>half million dollar fine; in Germany or Austria saying the equivalent is
>perfectly legal. On the other hand, claiming that the Nazi government did
>not kill Jews on German or Austrian radio or television will get you into
>trouble big time, even though it wpuld be perfectly legal in the United
>States.
>
>No country has completely free speech, political or otherwise. All
>countries have laws defining what counts as legal and illegal speech, even
>though the history and culture of the country concerned play a large role
>in determing what is and is not permissible. For easily understood
>reasons, Germany, Austria, and most of Germany and Austria's neighbors
>have and rigorously enforce laws criminalizing the denial, deprecation, or
>attempted justification of the crimes against humanity committed by
>Hitlerite Germany.
>
>Ernst Zündel chose to violate these laws, while Sylvia Stolz chose to
>challenge the legitimacy of the state that promulgated and enforces these
>laws by demonstrating her contempt for it and its legal system and
>procedures. Hence their present status as guests of the German penal
>system.
>
>
>
>Regards,
>Eugene Holman
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Tue Dec 2 13:29:40 EST 2008
Article: 1964566 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID:
References: <3b2dnT0qrboB2anUnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@vex.net> <06bd3e42-a014-41fb-b7c1-9a9e8b372503@j11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 34
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:30:14 -0500
Bytes: 2558
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1964566
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 13:21:56 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
Holman) wrote:
>In article , "Ben Cramer"
> wrote:
>
>> "Eugene Holman" wrote in message
>> news:holman-0212080743210001@c518-m3.eng.helsinki.fi...
>
>
>> >
>> > Her client was Ernst Zündel, a German citizen accused of violating German
>> > laws remotely from Canada and the United States.
>>
>> de minimis non curat lex
>
>Years of systematic violation of German laws from two countries and
>despite an official complaint to the Canadians from the German government
>is not a trivial matter.
If there was to be a trial, it should have been held in Canada and not
in an authoritarian joke of a democracy like the BRD.
The Canadian government caved in to demands by Jewish groups to have
Zündel deported to Germany, a country where Jesus would have been
deemed to have received a fair trial at the hands of Pontius Pilate.
>
>Non de minimis, sed de maximis egregiisque, curat lex.
>
>
>
>Regards,
>Eugene Holman
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Tue Dec 2 13:29:41 EST 2008
Article: 1964567 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nx01.iad.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!news.glorb.com!news2!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-02.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID: <95eaj413nt166kccr1rcsgnfsmmhf1332k@4ax.com>
References:
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 88
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:31:39 -0500
Bytes: 5007
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1964567
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 06:24:48 -0600, Sara Salzman
wrote:
>In article ,
> "Kurt Knoll" wrote:
>
>> You need you head examined what is stated is what I did hear from the
>> English. The inbreed arrogance of the law society still shows it today.
>> Kurt Knoll.
>
>Sure. Stolz' arrogance was evident in her blatant disrespect towards the
>Court.
Perhaps the court was deserving of contempt?
>>
>> "Kenneth McVay OBC" wrote in message
>> news:mK6dnSXcb8kv7KnUnZ2dnUVZ_tLinZ2d@vex.net...
>> > In article ,
>> > Kurt Knoll wrote:
>> >>There is one thing most of the people do not understand. The British legal
>> >>system is a remnant form the medieval ages and today's German system is
>> >>not
>> >>very much different. The British legal system was administered by the
>> >>royals, Common people were not allowed to talk to the judge directly and
>> >>had
>> >>to take a lawyer who was also a member of the royal clan to converse
>> >>between
>> >>the royals and him self. I find it very much insulting when ordinary
>> >>people
>> >>have to bend over to please this parasites ass.
>> >
>> > No lawyer is required - consider the case of David "See you, sue you"
>> > Irving as an example.
>> >
>> > Please stop knolling.
>> >
>> > 116 Statements Demonstrating Leading Revisionist Scholar Kurt Knoll's
>> > strict adherence to the high intellectual standards of Holocaust denial:
>> >
>> > (See http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/k/knoll-kurt/ for the first 105)
>> > (Honest, Folks, I'm not making them up!)
>> >
>> > 106. "We all know in whose poked the judge is who made this decision."
>> > ,, October 31, 2008
>> >
>> > 107. "There you go mirelle and the Jews fuck anyone the can
>> > some others twice." <%HBPk.5939$%%2.2445@edtnps82>,
>> > Nov. 3, 2008
>> >
>> > 108. "Go back to you comic book and finish reading it . But I know you
>> > are all fucket up and the Syphilis bothering your brain."
>> > <1MaQk.417$A73.19@edtnps82>, Nov. 5, 2008
>> >
>> > 109. "In CASE of world war lI the germans reap what they are
>> > dolt to blivr no questions ask." ,
>> > Nov. 6, 2008
>> >
>> > 110. "You must be kidding I do save all your replies and my postings
>> > no wunder why all of us do not rust you."
>> > <%hMQk.902$xJ3.739@edtnps83>, Nov. 6, 2008
>> >
>> > 111. "There is no need to reply to dihonedt partites like you."
>> > , Nov. 8, 2008
>> >
>> > 112. "If tree were still some of the camp guards alive today."
>> > , Nov. 9, 2008
>> >
>> > 113. "As long as your gang victimize other there will be people
>> > here and ask more guest." <6gXSk.116$jr4.61@edtnps82>,
>> > Nov. 13, 2008
>> >
>> > 114. "Cutting basting and altering someone reply is Kenneth McVay
>> > domain. What we are looking at her is a person who has
>> > absolutely no charter." , Nov.
>> > 15, 2008
>> >
>> > 115. "And who was the bushing force behind it."
>> > <3xoVk.2022$jr4.1436@edtnps82>, Nov. 20, 2008
>> >
>> > 116. "Just watching you is enough to hate two faced cook suckers like
>> > you." , Nov. 22, 2008
>> >
>> > --
>> > "Irving's conclusions were completely untenable. I thought his
>> > scholarship was sloppy and unreliable and did not meet even the
>> > most basic requirements of honest and competent historical
>> > research." (Richard Evans, Lying About Hitler, p.70)
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Tue Dec 2 13:29:41 EST 2008
Article: 1964569 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID:
References: <6c9ca288-7834-4cad-9f22-f670294c0080@o2g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 60
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:36:37 -0500
Bytes: 3740
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1964569
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:07:47 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
Holman) wrote:
>In article
><6c9ca288-7834-4cad-9f22-f670294c0080@o2g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, Bent
>Attorney wrote:
>
>> On Dec 1, 5:42=A0pm, "I'll Always Be Here"
>> wrote:
>
>
>> >
>> > Not true. I have no desire to lock you up. But I can see that you support
>> > the right of someone to stand up in a crowded theater and shout "Fire",
>> > right?
>> >
>>
>> Do you actually expect me to read anything further that was written by
>> you when you come up with such a stupid statement?
>
>It's not a stupid statement at all.
>
>You criticize Germany for criminalizing certain types of public speech
>while accepting that Canada, the United States, and many other countries
>also criminalize certain types of public speech. The "Oh, but that's
>different" argument doesn't work. Why can I say *Fotze* 'cunt' or *bumsen*
>'fuck' on German daytime television or radio and not get into trouble, but
>if I say the same words in English on American daytime broadcasting the
>FCC will slap the broadcaster with a half million dollar fine? Which is
>more dangerous to society, Anglo-Saxon monosyllables for basic biological
>structures and activities or public denial, deprecation, or attempted
>justiciation of crimes that wrecked a continent and claimed the lives of
>tens of millions of innocent people? Bent Attorney, thy name is not
>logical consistency.
In Canada, unlike Germany, you will not be imprisoned for political
opinions if the opinions fall short of advocating violent overthrow of
the government. You will certainly not be imprisoned for having views
on a historical event that differ from the views of the powers that
be. Modern Germany is a cruel farce masquerading as a democracy.
>
>
>Winston Churchill: Madame Wiltshire, would you go to bed with me if I paid
>you a hundred thousand pounds?
>
>Madame Wiltshire (blushing): I certainly would, Mr. Churchill.
>
>Winston Churchill: Would you go to bed with me if I paid you one pound?
>
>Madame Wiltshire (indignant): I most certainly would not. What kind of a
>woman do you think I am?
>
>Winston Churchill: I think we have already established that, madame. Now
>we are haggling over the price.
>
>
>
>Regards,
>Eugene Holman
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Fri Dec 12 15:37:33 EST 2008
Article: 1965760 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID:
References: <3b2dnT0qrboB2anUnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@vex.net> <06bd3e42-a014-41fb-b7c1-9a9e8b372503@j11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 95
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 07:21:38 -0500
Bytes: 4728
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1965760
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 19:27:58 -0500, "Patrick Keenan"
wrote:
>"Johannes von Ebersdorf" wrote in message
>news:h3daj4tcl28ug5srmci6a5tc1orc8jkfj8@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 13:12:46 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
>> Holman) wrote:
>>
>>>In article , "Ben Cramer"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Eugene Holman" wrote in message
>>>> news:holman-0212080753560001@c518-m3.eng.helsinki.fi...
>>>> > In article
>>>> > ,
>>>> > Bent
>>>> > Attorney wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On Dec 1, 6:20=A0pm, kmc...@shell.vex.net (Kenneth McVay OBC) wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > >> She violated German law, which is probably why he thought the
>>>> >> > >> German
>>>> >> > >> response was appropriate.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Hiding behind the law again. How about what you think is right or
>>>> >> wrong? Or don't you swing that way?
>>>> >
>>>> > What a person thinks is right or wrong is of very little value in a
>>>> > society governed by suprapersonal laws.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> More b'ollocks from ole yougenie.
>>>>
>>>> Split this up amongst ya, yougenie.
>>>>
>>>> "de minimis non curat lex"
>>>
>>>When a courtroom lawyer bases he defense on the country, the laws, and the
>>>court being illegtimate we are not dealing with trivia. It is an
>>>instantiation of unprecedented (= "beispiellos" is the adjective that the
>>>German prosecutor used to describe Sylvia Stolz's tactics) contempt for
>>>the state and legal system.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Eugene Holmsn
>>
>> Like numerous other unfortunates before her, Ms. Stolz found herself
>> faced with a "power" capable of doing unpleasant things to her. That
>> part is not in dispute and I suppose that she would have been aware of
>> that.
>
>While you are supposing, do you suppose that you can find anywhere where
>lawyers called to the bar do not swear to respect and uphold the laws and
>government of the nation and jurisdiction they seek to practice in?
>
>Do you suppose they are unconscious when they swear to this?
>
>> That is not the same as saying that the BRD has some sort of
>> legitimacy.
>
>No, it isn't, but it clearly does. You could ask its population - oh,
>wait, that already happens.
>
>> The BRD is the reign of force, against an unwilling
>> population,
>
>Its population doesn't seem to be that unwilling to me. They seem to be
>thriving and glad to have the freedoms that the Nazis and Communists denied
>them.
>
>But perhaps you are looking at another planet or dimension.
>
>> engineered by alien elements.
>
>It appears to be solidly supported by its population, who vote for it every
>few years.
>
>I don't see movements to do away with it by anyone other than a very few
>loons.
>
>> The best case scenario is
>> that this evil system be swept away like the Ancien Regime in
>> pre-revolutionary France.
>
>And what, a system based on slavery and theft like National Socialism be put
>in its place? Perhaps a revival of Stalinism?
No, I had in mind a genuine democracy, rather than an allied farce.
>
>-pk
>
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Fri Dec 12 15:37:33 EST 2008
Article: 1965761 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-07.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID:
References: <89ec37ec-986b-40d3-97ff-afe190bed9f4@j39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 61
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 07:33:33 -0500
Bytes: 3710
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1965761
On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 10:18:26 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
Holman) wrote:
>In article , "Ben Cramer"
> wrote:
>
>> "Eugene Holman" wrote in message
>> news:holman-0312081933090001@ke-hupnet143-27.hupnet.helsinki.fi...
>
>
>
>> > Specifics, PLEASE!
>> >
>> > Give even a single examples of "publicity-seeking buffoonery" associated
>> > with the Holocaust.
>>
>> Bloody hell, yougenie. One can hardly turn on the television these days
>> without some shit head waffling about the "Holocaust(tm)" in some manner.
>
>The Holocaust stands as a benchmark for human evil, so it is widely used
>as a resource or point of comparison. othing publicity seeking or
>buffoonish in that.
>
>> Some buffoon even managed to make mention of it, with emotive film tracks,
>> during a documentary on the food shortate in Korea, ferchrissake.
>
>As was his right. Despite your use of the (tm), the Holocaust is in the
>public domain and used as an easily undrstood benchmark for cruelty and
>horror.
Jewish groups oppose that use, since their claim is that the
holocaust™ is unique and incomparable to any other event. Their claim
is nonsense. There have been lots of similar excesses before and after
the holocaust™, so the holocaust™ is only "special" because Jews were
persecuted rather than ordinary humans.
>
>> >> Why should Zundel be locked away?
>> >
>> > Because he went out of his way to show his contempt for and serially
>> > violate valid German laws, even when his violations resulted in an
>> > exchange between the German and the Canadian government.
>>
>> He wasn't in Germany, dickhead. He was in Canada.
>
>He is a German citizen and was violating German laws remotely from Canada
>and the United States. As far as I understand it, you, as an Australian
>citizen, can get busted for having sex with children, thus violating
>*Australian* law, while on holiday in Bangkok. Australian law has
>provisions stipulating that they apply to Australian citizens, wherever
>they may be.
>
>Germany has similar laws concerning its citizens, as the recent episode
>with Dr. Toben demonstrated.
>
>> Crap snipped.
>
>That is an index of your grasp of the issues.
>
>Regards,
>Eugene Holman
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Fri Dec 12 15:37:33 EST 2008
Article: 1965762 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-06.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID:
References: <89ec37ec-986b-40d3-97ff-afe190bed9f4@j39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 106
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 07:36:59 -0500
Bytes: 6318
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1965762
On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:24:07 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
Holman) wrote:
>In article , "Ben Cramer"
> wrote:
>
>> "Eugene Holman" wrote in message
>> news:holman-0412081018260001@ke-hupnet143-27.hupnet.helsinki.fi...
>
>
>
>> > The Holocaust stands as a benchmark for human evil, so it is widely used
>> > as a resource or point of comparison. othing publicity seeking or
>> > buffoonish in that.
>>
>> You silly tosser. Of course it's publicity seeking. It's also marketing,
>> promotion and profiteering from a grossly exaggerated, unable to be
>> questioned, protected by legislation, yid creation.
>
>It is also a series of historical events, such as the 9/11 attacks or the
>assassination of John F. Kennedy, and is freely avalable for anyone to
>write, sing, or make films about. Questions are certainly asked about the
>Holocaust, and only in the countries that unleashed it (Germany, Austria)
>or were most severely victimized by it (France, Poland, Belgium,
>Lithuania, the czech Republic; Switzerland, Israel, and a few others) is
>there legislation prohibiting certain kinds of public discussion about it,
>this legislation being regarded as necessary by the governments of the
>countries concerned to scotch any efforts to deny, downplay, or justify
>what happened.
>
>> >> Some buffoon even managed to make mention of it, with emotive film
>> >> tracks,
>> >> during a documentary on the food shortate in Korea, ferchrissake.
>
>Some people think that Kim Yong-Il is allowing a Holocaust to be committed
>on his own population. Of course the Holocaust, the best known and
>documented genocide in human history, is used as a benchmark.
>
>> > As was his right. Despite your use of the (tm), the Holocaust is in the
>> > public domain and used as an easily undrstood benchmark for cruelty and
>> > horror.
>>
>> The Holocaust(tm) is a construct of Ilya Ehrenberg and the stinky yids.
>
>No, oh historically illiterate one. The Holocaust is a construct of Nazi
>racial ideology, German nationalism gone berserk, a thug-infected German
>government that could not be voted out of office, and a Wehrmacht with
>supporting police structures that thought that they had the right to be
>the owners of Europe.
You copied that out of an allied propaganda tract, didn't you? Germans
were and are rather less racist and nationalistic than Americans,
either then or now. The claim about "owning" Europe is silly allied
propaganda without any substance.
>
>> >> >> Why should Zundel be locked away?
>> >> >
>> >> > Because he went out of his way to show his contempt for and serially
>> >> > violate valid German laws, even when his violations resulted in an
>> >> > exchange between the German and the Canadian government.
>> >>
>> >> He wasn't in Germany, dickhead. He was in Canada.
>> >
>> > He is a German citizen and was violating German laws remotely from Canada
>> > and the United States.
>>
>> What foolishness is this?
>
>It is known as extraterritoriality; the legal ability of a government to
>exercise authority and extend its laws to its citizens and residents when
>they are abroad as well as, in certain cases, to non-citizens who violate
>its laws remotely. Germany does not allow the sale of certain types of
>Nazi memorablia or, to give a completely different kind of example, of
>articles made from tiger skins, on its territory. Anyone, whether a German
>citizen or not, making these types of articles available for sale on
>German territory is violating German law and liable to be aprehended.
>Consequent to treaties signed by the EU countries, a person like Frederick
>Toben, a German citizen resident in Australia who violated German laws on
>public denial of the Holocaust by making a website containing such
>material available in Germany, does not have to be physically present in
>Germany for the German authorities to have a claim on him.
>
>> > As far as I understand it, you, as an Australian
>> > citizen, can get busted for having sex with children, thus violating
>> > *Australian* law, while on holiday in Bangkok. Australian law has
>> > provisions stipulating that they apply to Australian citizens, wherever
>> > they may be.
>>
>> Hahahahahahahahaha. Ridiculous analogy.
>
>How so? Being a citizen of Austrailia legally obligates you not to engage
>in pedophilia, whether at home or abroad. Thus you can be prosecuted in
>Australia and under Australian law for pedophilia committed when on
>holiday in some other country.
>
>> JacobsOn et al have already accused me of engaging in this disgustion
>> perversion.
>
>I am certainly not accusing you of this. I am just using it as an example
>of extraterritoriality hat should be familiar to you.
>
>
>
>Regards,
>Eugene Holman
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Fri Dec 12 15:37:35 EST 2008
Article: 1965764 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-09.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID:
References: <3b2dnT0qrboB2anUnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@vex.net> <06bd3e42-a014-41fb-b7c1-9a9e8b372503@j11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 110
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 07:39:25 -0500
Bytes: 5701
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1965764
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 23:30:23 -0500, "Patrick Keenan"
wrote:
>
>"Johannes von Ebersdorf" wrote in message
>news:rrdaj4pcfe794114thnpgpm45cs9o7mc6t@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 13:21:56 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
>> Holman) wrote:
>>
>>>In article , "Ben Cramer"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Eugene Holman" wrote in message
>>>> news:holman-0212080743210001@c518-m3.eng.helsinki.fi...
>>>
>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > Her client was Ernst Zündel, a German citizen accused of violating
>>>> > German
>>>> > laws remotely from Canada and the United States.
>>>>
>>>> de minimis non curat lex
>>>
>>>Years of systematic violation of German laws from two countries and
>>>despite an official complaint to the Canadians from the German government
>>>is not a trivial matter.
>>
>> If there was to be a trial, it should have been held in Canada and not
>> in an authoritarian joke of a democracy like the BRD.
>>
>> The Canadian government caved in to demands by Jewish groups to have
>> Zündel deported to Germany,
>
>No, they did not. Germany wasn't even trying to extradite Zundel.
>
>His problem was that lots of people know first-hand just what his effect on
>society is - I personally remember the gangs of his followers and the street
>beatings - and don't want him in Canada. It's not just, as you mistakenly
>seem to think, that Jews find him undesirable.
That is nonsense. I live in the GTA and the only violence was by
Zünder's opponents, not by his "gang" of supporters.
>
>And he wasn't deported, either. You have that wrong, too. To be
>deported, you have to have entered the country. He hadn't.
>
>He was *not allowed entry* to Canada, though he *could* have just walked
>across the border to the nearest cab rank after the US punted him for
>breaking their laws.
>
>He stupidly chose - and it's hard to express just how stupid this choice
>was - to apply for refugee status, despite the fact that he was applying for
>this status in the very place he had fled.
>
>Most, if not all, of those who attempt to apply for refugee status in this
>way are jailed. It's no secret, and hasn't been for years. This also
>happens in the US, and they are not as polite about it as Canadians.
>
>Zundel chose jail over freedom, for reasons of his own.
>
>Perhaps he just likes the prison experience, since he also chose to stay
>there for as long as possible.
>
>Zundel was refused entry because he has many violent friends and associates,
>some of whom were jailed for attempting the armed overthrow of countries,
>and some had clear ties to governments actively involved in terrroist acts
>that resulted in many murders. And he refused to talk about them, though
>they posed a threat to the country he was attempting to enter or gain
>citizenship in.
>
>This is not the kind of person any country wants to accept. His "beliefs",
>or perhaps more accurately his sales pitches for pro-Nazi material (since
>it's likely he does believe the Holocaust took place exactly as history
>describes), don't come remotely close to the weight of those associations.
>
>Canada took him to Germany after his refugee application was denied, only
>because he's a German citizen.
>
>He could not be sent back to his port of entry, the US, since he'd bricked
>that door up by breaking US law. And he'd surrendered his own choice of
>country by insisting on going through the refugee process. This was
>entirely his own choice.
>
>
>> a country where Jesus would have been
>> deemed to have received a fair trial at the hands of Pontius Pilate.
>
>Oh please, stop being such a sissy about this.
>
>It's not like he went to Iran and suggested that Iranians should not follow
>their leaders "like monkeys", which merits a death sentence.
>
>Either he believes what he says and will proudly stand up for it, or he
>doesn't believe it and is looking for a way out.
>
>Do you think he believes his own crap or not?
>
>-pk
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>Non de minimis, sed de maximis egregiisque, curat lex.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Eugene Holman
>
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Fri Dec 12 15:37:35 EST 2008
Article: 1965772 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-08.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID:
References: <3b2dnT0qrboB2anUnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@vex.net> <06bd3e42-a014-41fb-b7c1-9a9e8b372503@j11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 100
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 08:46:24 -0500
Bytes: 5652
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1965772
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 17:36:24 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
Holman) wrote:
>In article ,
>ebersdorf@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:43:21 +0200, holman@mappi.helsinki.fi (Eugene
>> Holman) wrote:
>>
>
>
>> >Her client was Ernst Zündel, a German citizen accused of violating German
>> >laws remotely from Canada and the United States.
>> >
>> >Instead of entering a plea of "not guilty" and leave it up to the courts
>> >to produce evidence to the contrary,
>>
>> You're confusing theoretical American practice with Germany.
>
>Thanks for pointing this out. Actually, I was trying to simplify things
>for our readership. German law, like Finnish law, is based on the Roman
>tradition of codicils (§) and attributes, with the underlying philosophy
>being "everything is forbidden that is not specifically permitted". When
>you are charged with violating a law, the case against you is that you
>have committed a forbidden act that has the attributes enumerated in
>codicil number so-and-so. Your defense ("not guilty") is based upon
>showing that the act has the attributes of some less serious codicil or,
>in the ideal case, that the entire charge was based on faulty or
>inadmissible evidence. This is quite different from the English common law
>that most American law (Louisiana being a codil law maintaining exception)
>is based on where precedents and the specific individuals and situations
>involved in the case determine how it will be dealt with, and the
>dominating philosophy is "everything is allowed that is not specifically
>forbidden".
>
>I wonder how many people participating in this discussion are aware of
>these differences?
>
>> The
>> German legal system is based on Roman Law, and you are considered
>> guilty when you are charged. The obligation is on you to show that the
>> state's charges are wrong or that the state didn't have the right to
>> bring the charges in the first place. Ms. Stolz tried the second
>> approach and found that she herself had run afoul of ridiculous German
>> legislation.
>
>Anyone entering a courtroom and challenging the legitimacy of the court,
>its laws, and the state that it represents runs a high risk of suffering
>the fate meted out to Ms. Stolz.
>
>Why do you characterize the German legislation on this point as
>"ridiculous"? Any state would have reacted similarly to such a challenge
>to its legitimacy and authority.
>
>On another point, how do you think Germany's neighbors react if Germany
>were to repeal its laws on Holocaust denial, deprecation, and
>justification, and allow its citizenry feel good by denying that the
>atrocities committed by Germany during WW II were no worse than any
>atrocity committed by the allies?
The allies committed far more atrocities and at a significantly
greater scale than the Nazis ever did.
> Do you really think that countries such
>as Poland,
Poland gave us the largest ethnic cleansing in human history with the
elimination of the 14 million people resident in eastern Germany
between 1945 and 1950, an action resulting in the deaths of at least
four million of the fourteen million. At the usual ten-to-one exchange
rate, there are not enough Poles in existence to pay the bill. It may
be irrational, but when I encounter a Pole it is an intense internal
struggle to resist the urge to spit in his face.
> the Netherlands,
The Netherlands did not suffer that significantly under the German
occupation. Most of the damage and loss of life there were caused by
the so-called allied "liberators".
> and Russia, invaded, plundered, and ethnically
>cleansed by Nazi Germany would accept something like this without a strong
>reaction?
Most of the Russian casualties were the result of Stalin's choice of
campaign methods, not of German military action. Russia was no
"innocent victim" in any case, since Soviet forces were poised to
invade Germany by July of 1941. The German invasion was a pre-emption
to prevent that plan from going forward.
Germans owe no apologies to Russians for anything either before,
during, or after WW2.
>
>
>
>Regards,
>Eugene Holman
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Fri Dec 12 15:37:36 EST 2008
Article: 1965773 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-09.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID:
References: <3b2dnT0qrboB2anUnZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@vex.net> <06bd3e42-a014-41fb-b7c1-9a9e8b372503@j11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com> <2qmdnaaf1q7pTajUnZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@supernews.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 137
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 08:53:37 -0500
Bytes: 7923
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.revisionism:1965773
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 19:19:01 -0500, "Patrick Keenan"
wrote:
>"Eugene Holman" wrote in message
>news:holman-0212080743210001@c518-m3.eng.helsinki.fi...
>> In article
>> <06bd3e42-a014-41fb-b7c1-9a9e8b372503@j11g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>, Bent
>> Attorney wrote:
>>
>>> On Dec 1, 3:10=A0pm, kmc...@shell.vex.net (Kenneth McVay OBC) wrote:
>>> > In article
>>> > >
>>>
>>> > >Now to brass tacks. =A0Why exactly do you say that 'what happened to
>>> > >her
>>> > >was appropriate?' =A0Don't be like Eugene and hide behind legal
>>> > >statutes. =A0Say what's on your mind if you've the stones.
>>
>> Sylvia Stolz was a practicing courtroom lawyer. Thus, both her
>> professional competence and the place where she uses it are functions of
>> legal statutes.
>
>I think that there is a comparison that can be made with other lawyers, and
>people in other professions.
>
>Professional practictioners who are in a position of authority, such as
>doctors, lawyers, police officers, teachers and politicians, are often held
>to a higher standard than non-professionals and must adhere to codes of
>conduct that extend well outside their practice, but which certainly cover
>Ms. Stoltz's courtroom behaviour.
>
>Disciplines are called that for a reason. Professionals have extra
>restrictions on their behaviour, and transgressions produce disciplinary
>actions.
>
>If you examine the codes of conduct for various professions, you'll even
>find references to activities intruding into private lives. This is what
>the "moral turptitude" clauses are about.
>
>But really, I think that this "argument" about free speech is just a
>diversion by people who don't want to accept the consequences of their
>expressed beliefs.
>
>If they really believed the value of this stuff, they would be marching into
>jails, heads held high, not trying to weasel out of the consequences.
>
>Another example of that here is our "Mr. Cramer" being afraid that his words
>might be presented to a public that doesn't inhabit this particular corner.
>If he really believed them, he'd be glad for any opportunity to get his
>ideas across.
>
>As if he actually had any ideas.
>
>-pk
>
>
>
>>
>> Her client was Ernst Zündel, a German citizen accused of violating German
>> laws remotely from Canada and the United States.
>>
>> Instead of entering a plea of "not guilty" and leave it up to the courts
>> to produce evidence to the contrary, she constructed a defense based on
>> her claim that the German state, its laws, and its court and legal system
>> were all illegitimate and thus had neither a case nor even jurisdiction
>> over Ernst Zündel and herself, both, she alleged, citizens of the German
>> *Reich* but not of what she regards as its illegitimate successor state,
>> the German Federal Republic. Needless to say, the court regarded such a
>> defense as contemptuous and seditious. When trying to make its case that
>> Zündel and Stolz were citizens of the German Federal Republic, and that
>> its laws and legal system do indeed apply to both of them, Stolz
>> interrupted the trial several times with filibustering and verbal
>> outbursts. When told to cease and disist from such obstructive behavior,
>> she refused to do so, claiming once again that the court had no
>> jurisdiction over her and could not order her to behave in a specific
>> manner. She was thus physically removed from the courtroom, kicking and
>> screaming, by the bailiffs, eventually being charged with obstructing
>> justice and multiple counts of contempt of court.
>>
>> I cannopt see how you can seriously claim that her eventual sentence amd
>> punishment for obstructing justice and contempt of court are simply a
>> matter of hiding behind legal statutes. I do not know of a country on this
>> planet where such behavior would not have resulted in severe punishment
>> for centempt of court and possibly sedition.
>>
>>> > She violated German law, which is probably why he thought the German
>>> > response was appropriate.
>>>
>>> Idiot as usual McVay. German law bans free political speech you
>>> fucking slime.
>>
>> German law bans *certain types* of public speech, just as Canadian and
>> American law do. None of the three countries permits the kind of behavior
>> in the courtroom that Silvia Stolz exhibited. Saying "fuck" or "cunt" on
>> American daytime television or radio will get your broadcaster hit with a
>> half million dollar fine; in Germany or Austria saying the equivalent is
>> perfectly legal. On the other hand, claiming that the Nazi government did
>> not kill Jews on German or Austrian radio or television will get you into
>> trouble big time, even though it wpuld be perfectly legal in the United
>> States.
>>
>> No country has completely free speech, political or otherwise. All
>> countries have laws defining what counts as legal and illegal speech, even
>> though the history and culture of the country concerned play a large role
>> in determing what is and is not permissible. For easily understood
>> reasons, Germany, Austria, and most of Germany and Austria's neighbors
>> have and rigorously enforce laws criminalizing the denial, deprecation, or
>> attempted justification of the crimes against humanity committed by
>> Hitlerite Germany.
>>
>> Ernst Zündel chose to violate these laws, while Sylvia Stolz chose to
>> challenge the legitimacy of the state that promulgated and enforces these
>> laws by demonstrating her contempt for it and its legal system and
>> procedures. Hence their present status as guests of the German penal
>> system.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Eugene Holman
>
Mr. Keenan, if the legal arguments of Ms. Stolz made on behalf of her
client were invalid, then the correct action for the court would have
been simply to reject the arguments, not to imprison the lawyer for
her arguments.
This action is clearly an attempt by the BRD to intimidate the legal
profession so that future defendants in the position of Mr. Zündel
will find it impossible to get a lawyer, since the lawyers would be
afraid to take the case for fear of the possible repercussions to them
personally.
Political justice is not justice at all. Sadly, there really isn't
that much difference between today's BRD legal system and the courts
of Justice Freisler during the NS period.
From ebersdorf@gmail.com Fri Dec 12 15:37:37 EST 2008
Article: 1965774 of alt.revisionism
Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!core-easynews!easynews.com!easynews!en-nntp-07.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Johannes von Ebersdorf
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Sylvia Stolz was locked up for what reason?
Reply-To: ebersdorf@gmail.com
Message-ID:
References: