Giwer 28

Mr. Giwer, during the course of discussions in February, 1996,
in which you performed some truly amazing mental gymnastics in
a futile attempt to confuse everyone, you made the following

Perhaps he is in league with the revisionists at Yad Vashem
who reduced the official number from 6 million to a bit over
3 million. (Giwer, The 4-Million)

In subsequent follow-up articles on the same general topic,
that is, the number of Jewish victims to the Holocaust, you
were repeatedly asked to support this claim with
documentation. You have not, and will not, do this, since
the statement you made is an outright lie; however, for the
record, Mr. Giwer, when will you produce documentation,
from Yad Vashem, in support of your assertion?

Question 2 [February 1996]

Also, in February of 1996, you claimed that since the United Nations
did not come into existence until 1945 that reference to the United
Nations could not have occured in 1944:

In August 1944 (fourty FOUR) how could the United Nations have
regarded him as anything when it would not even come into existence
until 15 months later? (Giwer, Re: Jewish Census)

Are you now prepared to retract that question in light of the fact
that you have been presented evidence that term “United Nations” was
used as early as 1942?

Question 3 [February 1996]

On February 7, 1996 you made the following comment in reference to
the atrocities committed by the Khmer Rouge:

I was paying attention at the time and not once did I notice any
Jewish group protesting ouside of the Cambodian Embassy and I was
living in the DC area at the time, Fairfax County, Virginia to be
specific. (Giwer, Re: INTERNET FREE SPEECH WEB SITE ! (this
one’s not a troll))

Could you please specify the location of the Cambodian embassy to the
United States at the time of the Khmer Rouge. After you discover that
you are unable to do this, will you instead explain why you lied?

Question 4 [February 1996]

On February 22, 1996 you made some rather interesting comments on the
production of “HCN” from burning atmospheric nitrogen:

It appears you are unaware the CN is a by product of incomplete
combustion. You see, you take a carbon based fuel and air which
contains more nitrogen than oxygen and also supports combustion but
at a higher temperature and you get a fractional production of CN
as well as CO and a mess of other things. With enough oxygen and
good design you will get all CO2 as the result. And of course if
you have ever paying any attention to the causes of smog you know one
of them nitrogen compounds emitted as gases. Do you think there is
some way to prevent carbon from being included among those compounds?
Of course there is a resident chemist here to confirm or deny this so
lets wait for his commentary.

Yes, Virginia, there is nitrogen in the atomsphere and yes , Virginia,
it does burn. (Giwer, Re: Open Gallon of Paint – paint one door –
throw the rest away)

Since you are a qualified chemist, perhaps you can explain how
burning nitrogen results in reducing it rather than oxidizing it.
Yes, we know that in fuel lean conditions that N2 is oxidized to NO and
NO2 and that these species are an important component of photochemical
smog. Yes, we agree that it is possible under fuel rich conditions that
coal containing nitrogen could produce some uncombusted cyanides.
The part that’s really difficult to understand is how atmospheric N2
enters into the production of cyanides. Please be so kind as to

Question 5

You have asserted that eyewitnesses to gassings have noted that
the victims took “tens of minutes” to die, and you claim that
this assertion contradicts your other assertion that Zyklon B
would have killed them more quickly.

Here is the relevant excerpt from what you wrote:

For a moment there I thought had a way to salvage those stories
that talk about the screaming going on for tens of minutes.

After a few minutes there was silence. After some time had
passed, it may have been ten to fifteen minutes, the gas
chamber was opened.

Note the ten to fifteen minutes. (Giwer, Re: the mechanism of
hydrogen cyanide inhalation poisoning)

Mr. Giwer, does the “ten to fifteen minutes” in the text you
quoted (See URL (page does not exist)
refer to the time that the screaming went on — i.e. before
the silence — or does it refer to something else?

If it refers to something else, do you still stand by your
statement that:

…I am the only one who has read what people keep saying I
should read. (Ibid.)

Question 6 [June 1996]

You have written, of late, the following comments regarding
the number of Holocaust victims:

6,000,000 are a tragedy, the other 6,000,000 a footnote.

and …

To the Holocaust museum folks the other 6 million are
the footnote.

Daniel Mittleman responded to these comments with the

“Below … is the Mission Statement of the Holocaust Museum.
( (page does not exist)
Please note in particular the second paragraph. The reader can
determine for himself whether or not Mr. Giwer’s charge that
‘the other six million are a footnote’ is accurate:

“Mission Statement

The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum is America’s
national institution for the documentation, study, and
interpretation of Holocaust history, and serves as this
country’s memorial to the millions of people murdered during
the Holocaust.

The Holocaust was the state-sponsored, systematic persecution
and annihilation of European Jewry by Nazi Germany and its
collaborators between 1933 and 1945. Jews were the primary
victims — six million were murdered; Gypsies, the handicapped,
and Poles were also targeted for destruction or decimation for
racial, ethnic, or national reasons. Millions more, including
homosexuals, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Soviet prisoners of war, and
political dissidents also suffered grievous oppression and
death under Nazi tyranny.” (Mittleman, Both Sides)

Mr. Giwer, please explain why you lied about the United States
Holocaust Memorial Museum’s purpose and viewpoint.

Question 7

On June 15, 1996, you stated that:

“In the process of burning the two bones most likely
to be left are the pelvis and the skull. (Giwer, Dem bones,
dem bones, dem dry bones)

In response to subsequent questioning about the truth of this
statement, you have made some claims about the human skeleton
which, if true, would set the science of human skeletal biology
on its ear, bones and all.

In reply to a poster who asked you how many bones there are in
the human skull and pelvis, you wrote:

“The skull, two in an adult, counting the jaw, discounting
the six small bones in the ear. The pelvis, one. (Giwer;
Re: Dem bones, dem bones, dem dry bones; June 16, 1996)

When questioned about the accuracy of your answer by a poster
who pointed out that the skull consists of several bones,
you replied:

“You are talking about the skull of a child before the
skull is fused. (Giwer; Re: Dem bones, dem bones, dem dry
bones; June 18, 1996)

In response to this, another poster repeatedly asked you what
degree of closure (or fusion, if you prefer) there is in the
lambdoidal, sagittal and coronal sutures of the human cranium,
on average, by age 35. She pointed out that these are the major
sutures of the cranial vault (skull), and cited human skeletal
anatomy texts in which the answer could be found.

Your final statement related to this matter was reiteration of
your original claim:

“The fact remains that the pelvis and the skull are the bones
most likely to survive any form of cremation and the skull is
never mentioned by those so-called eyewitnesses. (Giwer; Re:
Dem bones, dem bones, dem dry bones; June 22, 1996)

As a qualified scientist perhaps you would answer the question
about when and how completely the different bones of the skull
fuse together. We know that in normal burial, the adult skull
remains intact. But we also know that the skull consists of a
number of bones, and that fusion of these different bones into
a single mass remains incomplete well into adulthood. Please
address the question related to closure and then explain why you
think that after cremation, intact skulls should have been
recovered and easily identified among the ashes removed from

Question 8

On July 10, 1996, you included the following assertion in
an article which you published in alt.revisionism:

“McVay is a self aggrandizing fool who permits hired
underlings to speak for him while he refuses to speak
for himself.” (Giwer, Re: Who would be Gannon?)

Please identify these “hired underlings” or admit that you
lied, apologize, and retract the statement.

Question 9

On September 26, 1996, you offered a series of statements in
sundry newsgroups, including:

“He is an American currently in the employ of 1B Systems
of British Columbia (finger nizkor).” (Giwer, McVay, posting…)

Since no company by that name can be shown to exist, because no
company by that name does exist, please explain why you
have lied about its existence. Since you have claimed that
this limited company exists, it should be trivial for you to
show that it does. Go ahead – I’ll wait.

Question 10

“He runs this Nizkor project on the 1B Systems internet access
line.” (Giwer, McVay, posting…)

Since no such company, limited or proprietary, exists, and
no such company can be shown to exist, please explain how a
non-existent company can have an “internet access line.” Go
ahead – I’ll wait.

Question 11

“1B Systems’ primary funding comes through the US DOD.”
(Giwer, McVay, posting…)

Please explain how a non-existent company can obtain
funding through anyone, or any agency. Go ahead – I’ll wait.

Question 12

“CIA connections were traceable until milnet purged several
entries including his whois.” (Giwer, McVay, posting…)

Please provide documentation that establishes or established, any
connection between Kenneth McVay and the CIA or any other American
or Canadian government agency. Go ahead – I’ll wait.

For Work Cited, see (page does not exist)

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Twelve Questions Matt Giwer won’t Answer (Month 120)
Summary: A collection of some of Matt Giwer’s best examples
of the Holocaust denial mindset, with accompanying
questions that he refuses to answer.
X-Giwer: [broken link 1]
X-Lies: [broken link 2]
X-Admitted-Lie: [broken link 3]

Archive/File: people/g/giwer.matt/giwer-10q
Last-Modified: 2006/12/20

“He who makes a claim bears the responsibility
of supporting it.” (Matt Giwer)

Question 1 [February 1996]