From [email protected] Thu May 23 07:33:23 PDT 1996
Article: 38744 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘I Witnessed a Gassing’
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 00:00:41 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl3-23.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Wed May 22 7:00:28 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>SS-Hauptsturmfuehrer Johann Schwarzhuber testifies about gassing
>in the Ravensbrueck concentration camp
>[Quoted in “Nazi Mass Murder: A Documentary History of the
>Use of Poison Gas”, edited by E. Kogon, H. Langbein, and
>A. Rueckerl, Yale University Press, 1993, p. 187]
>—————————————————————–
>At the end of February 1945 I was called with Dr. Trommer to the
>office of the camp commandant, Sturmbannfuehrer Suhren. Suhren
>informed us that he had received an order from Reichsfuehrer Himmler
>to liquidate all the women who were sick or unable to walk. Before
>giving us this information, he asked us how many sick women there
>were in the camp. I explained to the commandant that I had been glad to
>leave Auschwitz and would not like to repeat that experience. He then
>told me that Sturmbannfuehrer Sauer, deputy to the camp commandant, had
>been put in charge of the execution.
> .
> .
> .
>I witnessed a gassing. A hundred and fifty women, all at once, were
>pushed into the gas chamber. Hauptscharfuehrer Moll ordered the women
>to undress and told them that a delousing was going to take place. They
>were then pushed into the chamber, and the door was bolted. A male
>prisoner, wearing a gas mask, climbed up onto the roof and, through
>an opening which he closed again immediately afterward, threw a can of
>gas into the room. I heard groans and moans. After two or three minutes,
>there was silence in the chamber.
This is one of the shortest times on record. Are you sure this
really happened?
And where is the crossexamination? Where is the evidence he was
even there to see what he claims? Who was he testifying against?
What was the verdict?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Thu May 23 07:51:33 PDT 1996
Article: 23741 of alt.skinheads
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.webdirect.ca!news.challenge.com!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!oleane!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,can.politics
Subject: Re: Les Griswold: Leader
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 07:46:27 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <4ngvmo$pu[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 2:48:32 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:20323 alt.discrimination:47082 alt.revisionism:37723 alt.skinheads:23741 can.politics:45900
[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes…
>>[email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>>>(Matt Giwer) wrote:
>>
>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >Please learn to use your editor, Mr. Giwer. 163 IQ should make it easy
>>>for you.
>>>>
>>>> When the messenger to me has used his, I do. When they do not, I
>>>> do not. I note that you have only posted to me.
>>>>
>>>> What point do you think you are demonstrating by this?
>>>>
>>>I am demonstrating that you are a rude, insensitive, childish clod. And
>>>demonstrating it quite well, I think.
>>>
>>>I edited my post to *you*, Mr. Giwer. You however, quoted the entire post
>>>back. Therefore your “When the messenger to me has used his, I do. When
>>>they do not, I do not” is yet another one of your lies.
>>
>>>Go away, little man. You’re way out of your league here.
>>
>> And none of your fellow holohuggers will disagree with you and
>>thus encourage you.
> That is because she is not wrong here. there is quite a bit of
> disagreement among the people you call holohuggers – you just don’t see
> it or pretend not to see it. I, for example, made it clear to Gord
> Mcfee that he ought to sue you or shut up about it already.
What does an idiot claim that the court will take judicial notice
of a violation of internet etiquette have to do with substantive
matters of holocaust claims?
Mike Stein
> has slapped me on the wrist several times for errors I have made. I
> corrected marty kelley not long ago for an incorrect response he made.
> (to you I believe). I am confident there are dozens of other examples
> out there.
To follow the rule that has been applied to me, quote them or the
do not exist.
> As Sara has said, “go away little man.”
It is only what she dreams her cunt were like.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Thu May 23 07:51:34 PDT 1996
Article: 24414 of alt.skinheads
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.flame,aus.flame,alt.skinheads,misc.immigration.usa,alt.politics.immigration,aus.flame.usa,alt.usa-sucks
Subject: Re: Web Site for Yank Defectors!
Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 05:19:40 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Tue May 21 10:19:22 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.flame:12114 alt.skinheads:24414 misc.immigration.usa:11854
[email protected] (Ken Livingston) wrote:
>[email protected] (Gregg) wrote:
>> On 13 May 1996 09:16:04 GMT, David Gibson posted:
>>
>> >Gregg ([email protected]) wrote:
>> >: On Sun, 12 May 1996 23:03:12 GMT, Ken Livingston posted:
>>
>> >: >You’re missing the point. All it takes is ONE crazy asshole with an
>> >: >automatic weapon. How many more crazy assholes with automatic
>> >: >weapons do you need before we attempt to put a stop to it?
>> >
>> >: I’m afraid we’ll always have the crazy assholes. And they’ll always
>> >: find a way to obtain or create a suitable weapon. How will your new
>> >: laws guarantee safety? How will the removal of the means of defense
>> >: from the hands of the law-abiding increase public safety?
>> >
>> > No, _some_ crazy assholes will manage to get a weapon. The idea
>> >is make the proportion of crazy assholes who can get a weapon as small as
>> >possible.
>>
>> … leaving the law-abiding majority defenseless against that smaller,
>> but always significant, number of assholes.
>Please don’t misunderstand. I am not advocating a ban on all guns, but I would
>like to see more restrictions placed on automatic weapons. I realize that no
>matter how tough the laws are, these laws cannot eliminate the possibility of
>another incident similar to that of Port Arthur. We can only hope that such
>laws will serve as a deterrent. And in the process, perhaps we attempt to
>restore a portion of the lost sense of security that society has suffered.
>JMHO.
In fact what you are playing with is no more than than the loss
of the pretension of a totally safe world. If the people
involved had been armed, it would never have happened. The bad
guy would have been very dead very fast.
What you may some day learn is that laws only disarm the law
abiding people. No law can protect you from the scoff law.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:19:54 PDT 1996
Article: 38757 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 00:36:46 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 81
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <319[email protected]> <4n5[email protected]> <31976[email protected]> <4n83[email protected]> <319[email protected]> <[email protected]> <83223924[email protected]> <31a141d8.149[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl3-23.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Wed May 22 7:36:34 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Lissa Valerian
>Hey Matt!
>LTNS!
>Anyway… Just for the record, why don’t you lay out your views on the
>Holocaust. Did the holocaust happen? Did 6,000,000+ human beings
>die at the hands of the Nazi germans in an attempt to remove that
>particular culture? Or is this a made up fantasy tale… and if it is
>such, why?
I have posted that many times.
=====
What was the holocaust?
First there is the fact of World War II. 32 million
civilians vanished without a trace.
Second there is the fact of the holocaust that some 12
million of
these untraceable people are presumed to have died because of
deliberate actions by the Nazi SS either in camps or killed by
groups roaming the countryside shooting people. This is the part
called the holocaust. Unfortunately there is no clear way to
determine how many untraceable were in the murdered category.
Third, there are the stories about the holocaust. These are
where the problems lie. These stories, though oft-repeated are
not subject to critical review as critical review that does not
come to the predetermined correct conclusion is defamed as
anti-semitic and neonazi. This of course begs the question of
when they were ever critically reviewed to determine the
“correct” conclusion from them.
=====
BTW: Are the other 6 million just a footnote to you? Or do you
feel they are sufficiently covered by your “+” sign?
And before you get to the “why would they make up stories”
question you can read the rest of the answer.
=====
The question becomes, why would people lie about what
happened to them? There are many likely answers to that
question.
o Motivation
Plain and simple revenge against the
people who had imprisoned them for years and
treated them in an absolutely shameful
manner.
o Mistakes
In any prison, rumor is the fastest
moving and most erronious thing there is. The
repetition of common camp rumors as the truth
is certainly to have been expected.
o Physical condition
Although there is question as to the
physical conditions in the camps, were they in
fact as bad as commonly recounted then these
people were on the point of starvation and
that common induces psychosis particularly if
it has been long term.
=====
Is this sufficient answer to your question or are you going to
keep at it until you can self-righteously declare “neo-nazi”?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:19:55 PDT 1996
Article: 38767 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.dgsys.com!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘I Can’t Take This, I Said To Him’
Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 23:50:22 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl3-23.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Wed May 22 6:50:09 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
> From the interrogation of Adolf Eichmann
>[Quoted in ‘The Good Old Days’ – E. Klee, W. Dressen, V. Riess, The
>Free Press, NY, 1988., p. 221-222]
>————————————————————————
Would it have been too hard for you to identify the person
answering the questions and give the circumstances under which he
was answering questions?
>A. I just know the following, that I only saw the following: a room,
> if I still recall correctly, perhaps five times as big as this one,
> or it may have been four times as big. There were Jews inside it,
> they had to get undressed and then a van, completely sealed, drew
> up to the ramp in front of the entrance. The naked Jews then had to
> get inside. Then the lorry was closed and it drove off.
>Q. How many people did the van hold?
>A. I can’t say exactly. I couldn’t bring myself to look closely, even
> once. I didn’t look inside the entire time. I couldn’t, no, I
> couldn’t take any more. The screaming and, and, I was too upset
> and so on. I also said that to ueller when I submitted my report.
> He did not get much from my report. I then followed the van – I
> must have been with some of the people from there who knew the
> way. Then I saw the most horrifying thing I have ever seen in my
> entire life.
> The van drove up to a long trench, the door was opened and bodies
> thrown out. They still seemed alive, their limbs were so supple.
> They were thrown in, I can still remember a civilian pulling out
> teeth with some pliers and then I just got the hell out of there.
> I got into the car, went off and did not say anything else… I’d had
> more than I could take. I only know that a doctor there in a white
> coat said to me that I should look through a peep-hole at them in
> the lorry. I refused to do that. I could not, I could not say anything,
> I had to get away.
> I went to Berlin, reported to Gruppenfuehrer Mueller. I told him
> exactly what I’ve just said, there wasn’t any more I could tell him…
> terrible…I’m telling you… the inferno, can’t, that is, I can’t
> take this, I said to him.
>
From who? For all anyone can tell, you made this up completely.
But while you are looking it up, post the cross-examination also.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:19:56 PDT 1996
Article: 38789 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.his.com!news.frontiernet.net!news.texas.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: How Anne Frank Died (was Re: A little Q&A on the holocaust)
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 01:08:15 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 84
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl3-23.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Wed May 22 8:08:04 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>(Ehrlich606) wrote:
>> In article
>> Marty Kelley
>>
>> >
>> >The _Critical Edition_ of the diary makes no mention of Anne and her
>> >sister being ill when they were evacuated from Auschwitz as the Germans
>> >attemprted to close down the camp in advance of the approaching Soviet
>> >Army.
>>
>> OK, so you are saying that they were sent to Bergen Belsen because A-B was
>> trying to shut down in the face of the advancing Soviet Army.
>No. I beleive the way Mr. Kelly’s statement reads is that _Critical
>Edition_ does NOT indicate that a typhus-stricken Anne Frank was
>”evacuated” from Auschwitz by the Nazis to Bergen-Belsen to escape the
>advancing Soviet Army.
>I believe your inference otherwise is rather misleading. And considering
>that your objections below, which are premised on your incorrect
>interpretation of what Mr. Kelly wrote above and use this misleading
>premise, they too are misleading. You are mixing two distinct periods of
>operations at Auschwitz together: One where prisoners were routinely
>transported to other camps, and the hasty (one might even say
>panic-stricken) abandonedment of Auschwitz by the Nazis in the face of the
>advancing Soviet Army.
Excuse me but was not the date some three months in advance of
the Russians reaching the camp? It is quite difficult to
maintain panic under such conditions. In fact it is quite
unclear why they would have been evacuated in the first place
unless Belsen was “understaffed” with workers.
>> >While the records of transports from Auschwitz do not list names
>> >of individual prisoners evacuated, it seems likely that Anne and Margot
>> >were among a transfer to Bergen-Belsen on October 28 1944 (_Critical
>> >Edition_ p. 52). The fact that both died sometime in late February or
>> >early March 1945 suggests that they did not
>> >contract typhus until *after* their arrival at Bergen-Belsen, which
>> >experienced a massive typhus epidemic near the *end* of the winter of
>> >1944-45 (_Critical Edition_ p. 54-55).
>>
>> This does not follow. The Soviets didn’t get to A-B until the end of
>> January, 1945, that is, three months later. Therefore the contention that
>> they were sent to Bergen Belsen to get away from the Red Army closing in
>> does not follow.
>From 1940 to 1945 some 212,000 prisoners were transferred out of
>Auschwitz. (_Anatomy_, p.71) This was a matter of routine, done to
>distribute forced labor resources. Anne Frank, was part of this pattern,
>being sent to Bergen-Belsen by transport at the end of October, 1944.
So first you agree she was moved to Poland and then almost
immediately back to Germany and that she was not part of the
panic routine.
(It
>is also worth note that at this time the extermination operationa at
>Auschwitz were also winding down, being halted entirely by Himmler shortly
>afterwards.) The turning tide of the war against the Nazis probably gave
>impetus to this. Only later, in January 1945, when the Russian Army was
>closing in, were the remaining prisoners at Auschwitz hastily “evacuated”
>to the west in “death marches.”
Ignoring the unreasonableness of the evacuation in the first
place, we are doubly concerned with forced marches. Not so much
the marches but the “panic stricken” aspect of it in the face of
the Russians, where the guards and such were themselves moving at
the speed of the starving marchers. While one grants they even
they could move faster than an advancing army, it is unclear that
while knowing the losses that would occur from such a march that
so many personnel, (say one for each ten inmates to cover night
guard duty) would have been devoted to such a useless task.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:19:57 PDT 1996
Article: 38818 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.his.com!news.frontiernet.net!news.texas.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!news.sojourn.com!news.gmi.edu!msunews!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 05:12:26 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <83223924[email protected]> <31a141d8.149[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl3-23.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 12:12:16 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Kimberley Ahlf
>> >If the Jews are really such an insidious monolith, an ‘International
>> >Zionist Conspiracy,’ why should we be so ashamed of their extermination?
>> >You seem willing to subject yourself to a lot of ridicule in attempting to
>> >discredit an extermination program which, as an extension of your positions,
>> >would seem quite virtuous.
>>
>> >Which is it: Should we be ashamed for killing too many Jews or ashamed
>> >for letting too many of them live?
>>
>> What in the hell are you talking about? You appear to be doing
>> nothing more than setting up your own strawman so that you can
>> shoot it down. You further appear to know nothing of what you
>> are talking about and it certainly has no relation to anything I
>> have said.
>>
>> Do you have a point in doing this?
>Sorry, Matt, I just wanted to know what your agenda was in questioning the
>extensive record of the Nazi exterminationist program of WWII and why you
>don’t call into question all aspects of the historical record regarding
>WWII. I apologize for making too many assumptions about your motives. As
>to my ignorance, I do not purport to be anything but ignorant of your
>position and as such I would like to know what you hope to accomplish in
>your debate.
> Did the ‘holocaust’ not occur?
> Was the ‘holocaust’ a byproduct of Nazi industrial policy?
You can simply read what I have posted as recently as a day ago
and three times prior to that in the last week if you want to
know.
Excuse me if I consider continued requests for reiterations of
what I have posted so many times and so recently as pretend
harrassment.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:19:57 PDT 1996
Article: 38842 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Where Did the Ashes Go?
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 17:49:13 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 12:49:04 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (frank forman) wrote:
>I know a gas chamber skeptic who wants to know how all the ashes of the
>some millions of bodies gassed at Auschwitz were disposed of. Would
>someone please go into the arguments back and forth here WITHOUT a single
>ad hominem?
There are two rivers conveniently introduced for Auschwitz but
there are other stories not involving rivers. Those places have
not been found.
After Auschwitz, ask after Treblinka where all the stories
indicate they were buried and nothing resembling the amount
supposedly produced has been found.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:19:58 PDT 1996
Article: 38843 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 17:53:42 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <4o1[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl3-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 12:53:34 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Mike Curtis) wrote:
>[email protected] (Ehrlich606) wrote:
>This forum is to discuss the Holocaust and it’s denial. The Gypsies
>and the Jewish people were not at war with the Germans. The retarded
>were not fielding armies against the Germans. The mentally ill were
>not fielding armies against the Germans. We can name all the targeted
>group in this manner.
This conference is for the discussion of the revision of the
orthodox holocaust stories. Discussion of the orthodox holocaust
is off topic.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:19:59 PDT 1996
Article: 38845 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Picture File: SS-Obersturmfuehrer Hoessler Poses in Belsen
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 18:07:56 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl3-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 1:07:48 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Nele Abels) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wrote:
>>>”False evidence”?
>>
>>>Geez, you mean the women in the lorry and the people in the
>>>mass grave *aren’t really dead*?
>[…]
>>>I’m saying that the man in the photo is SS officer Franz Hoessler,
>>>standing in front of a lorry full of corpses of people murdered
>>>by the Nazis in Belsen. Do you claim otherwise? Let’s see dem
>>>163 IQ in action. Who do you think the man in the photo is?
>>
>> Prove everything you are claiming according to the Gentile Rule
>>of evidence. I you have not personally verified his very
>>existence you are promoting the existence of a person never
>>existed.
>I hereby claim that the person called “Matt Giwer” does not exist. Is there
>anybody able to prove the contrary providing arguments withstanding
>the demands of the “Giwer”-hoax?
Appears to be the case unless someone complies with the Gentile
Rule.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:00 PDT 1996
Article: 38851 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 18:44:00 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <319[email protected]> <4n5[email protected]> <31976[email protected]> <4n83[email protected]> <319[email protected]> <[email protected]> <83223924[email protected]> <31a141d8.149[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl3-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 1:43:53 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Hilary Ostrov) wrote:
>In <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt
>Giwer) wrote:
>[snip]
>> You are not
>>raising any issue of interest here.
>Can anyone remember the last time the Giwer-troll presented any
>information or raised any issue of interest here (or, more to the
>point, if he ever did)?
If there was nothing of interest, why were you responding?
>pot.kettle.black
Rather silly, actually.
>All of which only goes to show once again that the Giwer-troll, as
>others have noted …
>is a troller whose only interest is in causing fights. While he can
>sound superficially plausible, he has lied about what has been said in
>exchanges (while accusing others of lying), refused to document
>claims, pretended not to see posts which contain documented refutation
>of his claims (even when they have been emailed to him), engaged in
>actual libel, and generally conducted himself with such complete lack
>of intellectual and factual integrity that there seems to be no point
>in taking the time to read and respond.
In other words you prefer to recite the mantra rather than
address the issues raised which you have suddenly declared are
not of interest.
And this is the kind of exchange you are promoting?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:00 PDT 1996
Article: 38852 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Giwer Does It Again (Re: Picture File: SS-Women in Belsen Camp)
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 18:41:12 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl3-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 1:41:05 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>Matt Giwer
># [email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>## Ok, Giwer. I’ll give you a hint: there was a rather senior SS-man
>## in Auschwitz-Birkenau who had a criminal record, and even spent
>## time in a German jail before the war. Let’s see if you know
>## who he was.
># Only one person. That is quite a change from the original
># implication.
>I didn’t say “only one person”. You apparently can’t read
>plain English. I was referring to a rather well-known person.
>Do you know who he was?
>Don’t you have a *little* problem dealing with a topic you
>know absolutely and completely nothing about? For God’s sake,
>a few ago you claimed Belsen was in Poland.
And I was asking for support for the claim that there were many
criminals working in the ranks of the SS. Now all you want to do
provide one senior person to respond to the original claim. Why
not simply admit you have nothing to support the original claim?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:01 PDT 1996
Article: 38871 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Testimonial Fiction
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 20:29:36 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 88
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <31a31339.3[email protected]> <4nvnk3$[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 3:29:30 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (tom moran) wrote:
>[email protected] (Ehrlich606) wrote:
>>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (tom
>>moran) writes:
>>>
>>>[email protected] (Ken McVay OBC) wrote:
>>
>>>> EXCERPT
>>>> From Interrogration of Defendant
>>>>
>>>>February 21, 1945. Lieutenant EPPEL’, Investigator of the Fourth
>>>>Department of the “SMERSH” Directorate of Counterintelligence of the
>>>>Second Belorussian Front interrogated as defendant –
>>>>
>>>> LELEKO, Pavel Vladimirovich, born in 1922, native of the village
>>>> of Chaplinka, Chaplinka District, Nikolayev Region, Ukrainian,
>>>> citizen of the USSR.
>>>
>>> This report like all the rest lacks a certain detail that one
>>>might expect from a real hearing. It is more like some tale with a few
>>>questions inserted. A question is asked and then Leleko goes off with
>>>a extended comment and the interogator never poses any thing for
>>>clarification. Even UFO story writers cover their stuff more
>>>carefully.
>>
>>If this is all we had, then I would agree that there are some obscurities
>>in this text. OTOH, a better witness to refute would be Suchomel, whose
>>interview with Lanzmann covers most of the essentials cited here. Since
>>you don’t even MENTION Suchomel, then I submit that your deconstruction of
>>this text is basically dishonest. This ruins your credibility on this
>>topic.
>>
>>There is a tendency to Either/Or the testimony. Either it is always all
>>true, or else it is always all false. I can understand the motivations,
>>and they need not be evil. But surely even you would not deny, Tom Moran,
>>that many Jews were put to death just because they were Jews. As far as I
>>am concerned, that is the point here.
>>
> “Suchomel”? I am not aware of the person/witness. Maybe you
>should post some of his testimony.
> The credibility of a witness is very important in the U.S. court
>system. If witness testimony conflicts with other witness testimony
>how is one to know who is telling the facts. I haven’t read all
>witness testimony, have you?
> You say the “point” is that many Jews died. I agree – many Jews
>did probably die – and so did many others. How many Jews died and by
>what means is the point. We’re talking “Holocaust”, “Hitlers war
>against the Jews”, “The Destruction of European Jewry”, “Anatomy of
>the Auschwitz Death camp”, and all the other books and museums and
>thousands of referrences in our medias.
> How many of these other ethnic groups and nationalities that died
>have driven to capitalize on any history from the WW II? How many of
>them are against historical review, how many of them have used it as
>an excuse to justify suppresion and terrorism?
> This particular witness here is lying. It is testimonial fiction.
>I would say it is the contrivance of a number of people.
> Aren’t you the person who just posted something the other day,
>where I responded that before I responded to the post I would have to
>know if the response was serious or not? Did you ever come back and
>address that?
> Now that this dealing with your attempted end run and evasion,
>maybe you would like to deal with what is here, step by step. You be
>the one to say how reasonable the testimony is. Step by step, just
>like I did.
Every so often on talk.origins someone will come on as though
they are just asking honest questions. After a few exchanges
they start making long posts that could have come straight from
Gish and probably did.
It appears we have one of those here.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:02 PDT 1996
Article: 38875 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘The Bodies Were Dragged Out Of the Gas Chambers’
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 20:59:13 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 1:59:06 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Chuck Ferree
>Matt Giwer wrote:
>Chuck Ferree wrote:
>It’s difficult for me to grasp all the fancy numbers, Giwer uses. Us
>fighter pilots, both the single engine guys and the multi-engine guys
>(P-38s and P-61s…idiot!) had to cope with lots of numbers, but they
>all meant something: airspeed, RPMs, oil pressure gauges, oil temp.
>gauges, altimeters, number of bombs, (lights) red & green, amount of
>fuel left, (meaning could we get back or not) number of rounds of ammo
>left…(which meant could we shoot back or not) fuel mixture control
>settings, various compasses, oxygen flow, inches of Mercury pulled in
>throttle settings (diving, climbing, inverted, chasing an enemy plane,
>being chased by an enemy plane, trying to figure out if we could hold
>our urine for another hour or two, (that took some real calculating),
>checking our pulse…150 beats per minute in a dog fight used up a
>great deal of oxygen…so we knew a little about numbers, Like I said,
>these numbers all had significate meaning. Did then, does now.
>But this turkey’s tossing out numbers, which don’t mean a thing to
>anybody. So what’s his point? Nuthin’ as usual.
>chuck
Obviously nothing you are capable of comprehending.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:03 PDT 1996
Article: 38876 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘I Can’t Take This, I Said To Him’
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 21:04:38 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 2:04:32 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>Matt Giwer
># [email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>## From the interrogation of Adolf Eichmann
># Would it have been too hard for you to identify the person
># answering the questions?
>I’ll give you another chance. Hint: see line starting with “##” above.
># From who? For all anyone can tell, you made this up completely.
> ^^^^^^^^^
>I’ll give you another chance. Hint: see line starting with “##” above.
>Let’s see dem 163 IQ points in action. Go for it!
You do realize that if in fact you claim the person speaking was
in fact Eichmann that this testimony exhonerates him? The person
speaking is not in charge. He had to follow a truck to find out
what was happening.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:04 PDT 1996
Article: 38877 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Giwer’s eagle eye strikes again!
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 21:38:41 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 4:38:35 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Alec Grynspan
>Daniel Keren wrote:
>>
>> Matt Giwer
>>
>> # Fine with me, it WAS Eichmann. And Eichmann only learned about
>> # the gassing vans on a visit to some camp or other.
>>
>> Because he was shocked to see the gassing being carried out,
>> to see the corpses, you conclude he had no part in organizing
>> the mass murder?
>Well, there is the little matter of Eichmann bragging about it when he
>was tried…
>And, for the deniers, no he wasn’t tortured. He said that his biggest
>regret was that it was only 6 million. Yes, he said that gas was used.
>Hmmmm! Now we should get all sorts of interesting refutations of *THAT*.
The question is not what Eichmann said, but who said the words
posted. Or do you agree Eichmann was of such low rank that he
reported to a mere Gruppenfuehrer? Or are the holohuggers going
to reorder the entire rank system to make this person Eichmann?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:04 PDT 1996
Article: 38880 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Giwer’s Amazing Intellectual Prowess
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 21:49:19 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 2:49:13 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Hilary Ostrov) wrote:
>In <4[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt
>Giwer) wrote:
>>[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>>> From the interrogation of Adolf Eichmann
>>>[Quoted in ‘The Good Old Days’ – E. Klee, W. Dressen, V. Riess, The
>>>Free Press, NY, 1988., p. 221-222]
>>>————————————————————————
>> Would it have been too hard for you to identify the person
>>answering the questions and give the circumstances under which he
>>was answering questions?
>If the Giwer-troll had any interest whatsoever in confirming the
>identity of the witness or in any other details regarding the quote,
>he would visit a library (if he knows how to find one) and read the
>book.
>But it is obviously too hard for him to resist an opportunity to
>demonstrate his ignorance for the umpteenth time.
Don’t worry about it. Keren swears it was Eichmann.
I see you, too, believe that Eichmann was of such a low rank the
he reported to a mere Gruppenfuehrer.
>[quote deleted]
>> From who? For all anyone can tell, you made this up completely.
>Oh, well, perhaps the Giwer-troll has yet to grasp the basic concept
>of citing sources. Big Hint Giwer-troll: In the unlikely event that
>_you_ were to cite a source for any of your bandwidth wasting
>exercises, readers who thought there was even the remotest possibility
>that you had not “made it up completely” would be able to verify its
>authenticity by comparing your text with the source cited.
Bandwidth wasting? I just went passed five long FAQs on
holocaust orthodoxy in a conference for discussing changing the
orthodox view. Not only were they long, and available from
Nizkor, they were off topic.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:05 PDT 1996
Article: 38884 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Seeking the first time
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 22:01:24 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 73
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 5:01:19 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (tom moran) wrote:
>
> The Holocaust story has been modified extensively over the years
>with many places, methods and numbers being deleted from the story
>accounts.
> The current popular figure for the number of Jews said to have
>been exterminated is 6,000,000. Six million.
> Does anyone know, when was the first time this 6,000,000 figure
>was announced?
> The earliest date that it was published?
_The American Hebrew_, October 31, 1919, page 582:
THE CRUCIFIXION OF JEWS MUST STOP!
By MARTIN H. GLYNN
(Former Governor of the State of N.Y.)
“From across the sea SIX MILLION men and women call to us
for help, and
eight hundred thousand little children cry for bread.
[…] “These children, these men and women are our
FELLOW-MEMBERS OF
THE HUMAN FAMILY, with the same claim on life as we, the same
susceptibility
to the winter’s cold, the same PROPENSITY TO DEATH before the
fangs of
hunger. Within them reside the illimitable possibilities for the
advancement of the human race as naturally would reside in SIX
MILLION human
beings. WE MAY NOT BE THEIR KEEPERS BUT WE OUGHT TO BE THEIR
HELPERS.”
[…] “IN THE FACE OF DEATH, IN THE THROES OF STARVATION
there is no
place for mental distinctions of creed, no place for physical
differences of
race. In this catastrophy, when SIX MILLION HUMAN BEINGS are
being WHIRLED
TOWARD THE GRAVE by a CRUEL AND RELENTLESS FATE, only the most
idealistic
promptings of human nature should sway the heart and move the
hand.
“SIX MILLION MEN AND WOMEN ARE DYING from lack of the
necessaries of
life; eight hundred thousand children cry for bread. And THIS
FATE is upon
them through NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN, through no transgression of
the laws of
God or man; but through the awful tyranny of war and a BIGOTED
LUST FOR
JEWISH BLOOD.
“In this THREATENED HOLOCAUST OF HUMAN LIFE, forgotten are
the niceties
of philosophical distinction, forgotten are the differences of
historical
interpretation; and the determination to help the helpless, to
shelter the
homeless, to clothe the naked and to feed the hungry becomes a
religion at
whose altar men of every race can worship and women of every
creed can
kneel…”
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:06 PDT 1996
Article: 38889 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 22:38:48 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 5:38:42 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
> Your petty name calling is noted.
>Not noted is that the petty name calling is a response to Mr. Giwer’s
>petty name calling. If Mr. Giwer is offended by name calling, why
>did he start it in the first place?
Despite holocaust league fiction, I was first called antisemitic
and neo-nazi.
> Yet you folks will post the long time required to get insects
> when that suits your argument.
>The long time required to kill insects with Zyklon is not due to any
>long time required for the Zyklon to produce HCN gas. It is solely
>due to the higher resistance of insects to HCN poisoning. Therefore,
>there is no reason to separate the arguments and no effort has been
>made to separate them. But Mr. Giwer has made every effort to imply
>that these two facts are not mentioned in the same breath because he
>has no real argument. In fact, all of his arguments require him to
>put words into the mouths of the opposition, because he can never
>refute what we have really said.
But as you know even in a sealed house the air changes about once
an hour. As you also know it was used to fumigate barracks. As
the cyanide is coming out of the barracks so quickly are you
suggesting someone was going back inside to replace it? Or
perhaps they poured more in through a hole in the roof?
Or perhaps you can dig up some documentation that the barracks
were tented as is done today to keep the poison inside.
Of course you will not understand what I wrote.
> It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
> the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>For Mr. Giwer, it has never been a matter of how many survived, but
>how much attention he could get from insulting the memory of the dead.
Find a conference not devoted towards revising the orthodox view.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:06 PDT 1996
Article: 38891 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!news.cac.psu.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Giwer Does It Again (Re: Picture File: SS-Women in Belsen Camp)
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 22:50:23 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 5:50:17 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
> You do realize you are destroying the entire image of the SS…
>We are only interested in the truth, not in “images!” We leave the
>image-making to idol worshippers like Mr. Giwer.
You are the folks with Yahweh the Idol not me.
I do find it interesting that you claim to be interested in the
truth. Can you give me the date, or at least the year, when the
truth of the Holocaust was reduced to its final form?
> …as a fanatical organization dedicated to Der Feuhrer.
> You are now creating an image where anything that happened
> was simply due to undisciplined street thugs.
>Only Mr. Giwer can see a contradiction between these two images. The
>rest of the world accepts that the SS was made up of “undisciplined
>street thugs” who were fashioned into “a fanatical organization
>dedicated to Hitler.”
I have noted the epithet for years. I also note that is not
compatible with a disciplined military organization. These folks
actually went to these hellhole camps without discipline? Or was
the threat of a firing squad the only thing keeping them in line?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:07 PDT 1996
Article: 38898 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.bonehead.matt-giwer
Subject: Re: My Complaint About Matt Giwer
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 23:50:07 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nqu9j$2b[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 6:50:01 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:38898 alt.bonehead.matt-giwer:10
[email protected] (william c anderson) wrote:
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) wrote:
>: [email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>: >For Mr. Giwer, it has never been a matter of how many survived, but
>: >how much attention he could get from insulting the memory of the dead.
>:
>: Find a holocaust conference. The subject of this one is
>: revisionism.
>This latest tactic by the Giwer Troll–pretending that, since the topic
>of this newsgroup is revisionism, arguing against revisionism is not
>allowed–is neither original nor terribly interesting. It looks to me
>as if our trollish buddy is running out of steam…
Then at least you will admit that all of the orthodox holocaust
quotations and sources are off topic and only the actual
addressing of the revisions is on topic. Endlessly reposting the
originals of what has been discredited is not “arguing against
revisionism.”
To in fact argue against revisionism, one would have to address
what has been revised and show that the revision was incorrectly
made. It could also consist of showing that what has been
discredited should not have been discredited.
There are a lot of things that would fit the category you have
described. The mindless posting and reposting of orthodoxy is
not that. That is like trying to convert an atheist by posting
>from the bible. It is in no way arguing against the revisions.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:07 PDT 1996
Article: 38899 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: revise those damn museums
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 23:59:03 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nrlod$h78@dfw-ixnews3.ix.netcom.com> <4nsjgj$[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 6:58:55 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
> Who cares about the rest?
>Certainly not Mr. Giwer! He doesn’t care about the Jewish victims or
>any of the other victims of the Nazis, but that does not prevent him
>from unfairly criticizing those who do care for not caring enough to
>suit his unreasonable demands.
I really do not care if anyone cares or not. Nothing is going to
bring any of them back to life. I am simply pointing out the
attitude of the holohuggers, that only Jews matter.
There is a thing popularly closed closure when it comes to a
death in the family. One has to get over it. If people carried
on 50 years later about the death of family members the way the
holohuggers carry on about the holocaust they would be pitied and
good friends would urge counseling.
> They are hardly worth mentioning.
>And Mr. Giwer only mentions them in order to use them as club to beat
>Jews with — the same Jews who are responsible for publicizing the
>fate of these “others” to the uncaring world, especially the callous
>Mr. Giwer himself!
As you remember, when I first used the tagline about the other
six million being a footnote, I had to explain who the other six
million were.
> After all, Jews were less than half, so they should be the only
> ones remembered.
>Mr. Giwer said it, but he is trying to blame the rest of us for it!
Blame for what? Who is this “us” you are talking about? Do you
have a friend with you while you are typing?
> It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
> the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>For Mr. Giwer, it has never been a matter of how many survived, but
>how much attention he could get from insulting the memory of the dead.
Find a more appropriate conference.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:08 PDT 1996
Article: 38902 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Ultimate Extermination System
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 00:19:18 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 75
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <317e33e1.3331[email protected]> <4mkdg3$i[email protected]> <4mlhh7$k[email protected]> <4mn58a$b[email protected]> <4mpa3s$7[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 7:19:13 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Miloslav Bilik) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wrote:
>>[email protected] (Miloslav Bilik) wrote:
>>>Coke is produced since 1815, and on a large scale before the second
>>>war. Even in the 40’s, only CO could cause any trouble. The problem is
>>>about the HCN rates on the walls of the ‘vergassungkeller’, one floor
>>>beneath the furnacies. You should give a look on the composition of
>>>the coal oven gasses to know the rate of the HCN in the average coal
>>>heating conditions (1000°C-1400°C). The HCN rate is ridiculous low.
>>>Nothing to ‘stick’ on the walls.
>I have to add that coke was used in the furnaces, no coal.
You have lost me completely here. The subject was crematoria not
furnaces.
>> But since it is an acid, it has nothing to do with quantity.
>>Whatever would react would “stick” as you so quaintly put it.
>With a strong acid, certainly. Prussic acid is weaker than CO2.
CO2 is not an acid.
The
>furnaces produced too a lot of CO2, then you have to suppose on the
>top that the furnaces were not airtight to release some HCN to the
>beneath floor (and there isn’t any HCN produced with coke).
What are you talking about? The Krema ovens were at ground
level. That is what all this talk about raising the bodies back
out of the LK is all about.
>> And the quaint phrasing indicates you have not the least idea
>>what you are talking about but repeating what others have said.
>’Quaint’, good. ‘Stick’ came from anothers revisionists posts, that’s
>why I quoted this word.
If you knew better you should not have done it.
>My question remains without reply: you told that incinerators produced
>more HCN than the gassings. Do you have any sources, or only **one**
>reference case of intoxication with a domestic coke’s heating with HCN
>instead of CO ?
I said only that they probably did. I am not a “scholar.” I do
not need other people to tell me about basic science.
Coke is simply coal with most of the non-carbon organics burned
out of it. There were plenty of organics available in the ovens
for a similar reaction to take place.
What do you mean intoxication? I have never heard of coke being
used for home heating in the US. It has always been coal and the
complete switch to gas, oil or electric was completed about 30-35
years ago in the US. There may be some places in West Virginia
that still use it but it is unlikely.
I would also be quite surprised to find it used as it produces a
much hotter fire than coal and thus would have been harder on the
furnaces.
So where are you going with all of this?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:09 PDT 1996
Article: 38917 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Cyanide Traces at Auschwitz Today
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 00:55:30 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <316a7397.68[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <4no[email protected]> <4np[email protected]> <[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 5:55:25 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whined at Mr. Stein:
> And you continue to lie about what happened as expected.
>I wrote:
> No one has ever caught Mr. Stein in a lie, whereas Mr. Giwer has
> been caught lying several times! It is no oversight that
> Mr. Giwer has provided not a single, solitary shred of evidence
> to back up his accusation. On the other hand, evidence of
> Mr. Giwer’s duplicity abound.
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) comes back:
> If you don’t like it, go to a holocaust NG. This is for
> discussion of revisionism.
>So, far from denying that he lies and deceives, Mr. Giwer merely
>confirms that lies and deceit are a necessary part of Holocaust
>”revisionism!” He is merely angry with me for pointing this out, and
>quite naturally would like to have me leave before I embarass him
>even further. With his unnaturally high IQ he believes that a
>discussion of Holocaust “revisionism” ought to be one-sided, so that
>the inherent lies are not pointed out to potential recruits.
As I have elsewhere explained, it should not be onesided. It is
simply that if you wish to be hear, you should expect what is
posted here rather than inventing some claim about honoring the
memory of the dead which precludes any possible discussion of
what is in need of revision.
And as otherwhere noted, mindless repetition of orthodoxy is not
discussion of revisionism any more than quoting the bible is
converting an atheist.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:10 PDT 1996
Article: 38923 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-feed.iguide.com!news.uoregon.edu!news.sol.net!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 02:47:44 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 156
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <319[email protected]> <4n5[email protected]> <31976[email protected]> <4n83[email protected]> <319[email protected]> <[email protected]> <832239248[email protected]> <319c8913.18604[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 9:47:42 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
> What you folks have been ignoring is that I posted the AVERAGE
> correct answer weeks before this exchange started.
>What an “average” correct answer is, only Mr. Giwer knows! Perhaps
>he means that the answer is correct half the time and incorrect the
>other half!
You have never heard of the “average” 2.4 children per family?
It appears you are not sufficiently acculturated to participate
in this discussion.
> We start with the 11 million (including 5 million from Russia)
> from the Wannsee Protocol. We note Germany had at most control
> over about half of Russia. That gives us that they had access
> to approximately 8.5 million Jews.
>This is the result of Mr. Giwer’s strictly logical, “don’t bother
>with facts!” approach to history! Mr. Giwer’s thesis depends on
>there being an equal distribution of Russian Jews over the entire
>land mass of Russia, which is certainly not the case!
As I noted later the MORE there were in the controlled territory
the LOWER the effectiveness ratio. Put all 5 million in the
controlled territory. Then the efficiency rater was 47%. Then
the average person lost .88 relatives. If you put them all by
some miracle outside of Germany occupied Russia then then you
have an 86% or an average 6.1 relatives lost.
We are still no where never everyone losing their entire family.
What you consider facts is merely dubious to impossible personal
testimony. Any and all claims can be independently checked by
math and science. It matters not what anyone has said if it can
not pass those kinds of tests.
> Next we note that the official Jewish number is 5.2 million or
> thereabouts giving them a 61% efficiency rate.
> That leaves use with each Jew losing on average 1.2 unique
> relatives without doing the 100 out of 200 rountine I
> demonstrated above. Access to any larger number of Russian Jews
> results in a lower average.
>A statistician would say that if Mr. Giwer stood with
>one foot embedded in a cake of ice and the other foot embedded in a
>heap of burning coals, on “average” Mr. Giwer is comfortable!
But you are completely ignorant of statistics so how would you
know? Why would you bother to pretend to knowledge you do not
have? Is it so important to you to defend your view of the
holocaust that you will deliberately attempt to mislead people
with your false pretensions?
I realize that it is the standard practice of the holohuggers to
pretend to understand what they do not understand and then make
false claims about what is said, but why do you PERSONALLY do it?
> My original exercise in determining the average number of unique
> relatives was originally buried under a pile of “I lost my whole
> family and so did my brothers” messages. I have it always found
> it curious that world is populated with Jews who lost their
> entire families and no other type.
>I have always found it curious that someone who claims to be as
>intelligent as Mr. Giwer claims he is, continually bases his opinions
>on vague impressions and hunches instead of facts.
You must be completely innumerate to consider rather elementary
math to be an impression or a hunch. Yet you pretend otherwise.
There are, in
>fact, many Jews who did not lose any family to the Nazis. On the
>other hand, there are families that were lost entirely, leaving no
>members behind to testify to their suffering. As extended families
>were more the rule at that time in Eastern Europe and Russia, it is
>not hard to see how the Nazis would end up rounding up entire families.
I am simply commenting upon the common presentation of the
holocaust. Everyone who speaks lost some huge number of family.
The thought was also brought up by the prevalence of holocaust
survivors which appears to be some sort of badge of honor and to
include people who left Germany in the 1930s. That is what lead
to my Agent 86 comment, “missed it by THAT much.”
> It certainly puts a different perspective on things when instead
> of talking about “entire families” one simply says 61%.
>Indeed! — an entirely false perspective!
It is right there in the numbers. Even the worst case numbers
don’t make it sound much different at 6.1 relatives per person.
But then, you can not comprehend numbers.
> Of course there would be extremes of people who really are the
> only survivors of their family but they would be balanced by
> equal numbers who lost no family members but those folks do not
> appear to exist.
>Only because Mr. Giwer has taken no trouble to find any! Moreover,
>there is a flaw in Mr. Giwer’s logic. He said there needs to be
>”equal numbers who lost no family members” whereas his own analysis
>indicates that there need only be 39% who lost no family members, and
>they would balance those families that lost every member — not the
>families that lost all but one member. So, even in the realm of
>abstract logic, Mr. Giwer is a dismal failure.
You may present YOUR analysis when you master the basics. I will
look forward to reading it. Until then, please at least admit
you have no ability to judge math.
> And on average of course it would be 61% of the family. But
> then it should be properly stated that “our family lost 60%.”
>And Mr. Giwer should properly agree that it is very comfortable to
>stand with one foot in ice and the other in fire!
Again you have no comprehension of math.
>This also reminds me of a joke from the old Andy Griffith show. Andy
>tries to explain to Opie that out of every so many people, on
>average, 2.5 of them live in poverty.
>Opie asks Andy who the “half of a person” is. Andy explains that it
>is only a ratio. Opie replies, with great feeling, “Poor Horatio!”
>This Horatio must be the Jew who lost exactly 61% of his family in
>the Holocaust — no more, no less!
And considering where you learned your math, that is quite
understandable.
> It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
> the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>For Mr. Giwer, it has never been a matter of how many survived, but
>how much attention he could get from insulting the memory of the dead.
Quit reading it then.
It appears you have adopted me as your personal crusade for about
a week now. Is this something you are using to fill your free
time or is there a purpose to it?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:11 PDT 1996
Article: 38925 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Diesel exhaust that looks like steam
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 01:47:27 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 131
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nlrc2$agn@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 8:47:24 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
> As I said, science does not prove anything. Even less the
> applied science of engineering.
>Of course not! The only thing that proves anything is Mr. Giwer’s
>unsupported word — at least in Mr. Giwer’s warped universe, it is!
> I have already explained to him what he has posted means, oil
> vapors. Now if he is not honest enough to admit what that means
> when mixed with air, there is nothing I can do to help him.
>A confirmed liar, Mr. Giwer has no business calling anyone else
>dishonest. Anyone who has driven behind a car, truck, or bus that
>was blowing white smoke from its exhaust knows that smoke is produced
>by oil mixing with the gasoline and burning in the engine. By the
>time it reaches the tailpipe the oil has been completely burned.
Your knowledge of automotive engineering is also quite lacking.
Perhaps you should find a real mechanic and ask. Of course some
of it does burn but the majority does not. Or can you imagine
such an engine working if the gasoline were not vaporize? That
is what fuel injecters and carburetors are for you realize.
If you were to indicate any knowledge of the subject you would
realize the white smoke is really oil vapor quite unburned. It
has been vaporized the the heat of combustion of the gasoline.
As the fuel air mixture is set for that amount of gasoline there
is not enough air to burn much oil, in fact only trace amounts as
the vaporized gasoline is so much more volatile than engine oil.
And just how would “driving behind” such a vehicle qualify one to
know the composition of the white exhaust in the first place?
The common phrase “burning oil” is in the same category as
“running of fumes.” Should you ever be close to one idling, put
a rag over the exhaust for a few money and take away an oily rag.
I am certain there is at least one other person here who can
confirm that but if that person is a holohugger, they will remain
silent so you may continue your rant.
Or perhaps you have never in your life seen an oil well fire?
Perhaps you missed all the films of Kuwait just after the war.
Perhaps you have never seen a picture of a fire of a tar roofed
building? Or perhaps you saw white smoke rather than black. Did
you ever see a burning tire? Synthetic rubber is made of oil.
Have you ever seen white smoke?
Yet you say that by the time it reaches the tailpipe it has been
completely burned. Perhaps you have never seen the exhaust from
a big truck or bus?
Or are you saying that at Treblinka burned oil looked white
rather than black? Thus creating a special reality for the
incredible, vanishing camp?
Perhaps you are simply incapable of thinking through what you are
saying? Perhaps you don’t know how to subject your own
inventions to critical analysis?
>If Mr. Giwer is truly as intelligent as he claims, then he could not
>possibly have made the mistake of believing that gasoline is burned
>in the engine, but the oil vapors that were mixed in with the
>gasoline somehow escape being burned in the cylinder, only to pose an
>explosion hazard after being exhausted from the engine.
Where does the extra air come from to burn it? The mixture is
set for a fix amount of fuel and air. So how does the oil burn
unless the mixture is wrong?
Rather get back to the original claim, that WHITE is produced in
very rich mixtures where it clearly can NOT all burn because of
the mixture.
>In other words, this is either a deliberate lie, or else Mr. Giwer is
>not as intelligent as he claims — which means his claim to
>intelligence is a lie.
In other words you made up everything you wrote, have no idea
what you are talking about but will count your ignorance of the
subject matter as a lie by me. Sorry, Shatzie, that is where all
of the claims that I am lying have come from. It hardly matters
if you add one more.
The only “lies” that have been subtracted from that list are that
I “lied” when I said that bones burn, that I “lied” when I said
the cremation process PROBABLY produced more HCN than would have
been used in any gassing. Of course you now know I was not lying
then but that everyone making the claim those were lies of my
were merely mislead by an unethical chemist who still has the
balls for frequent this conference.
So certainly, add you ignorance as evidence that I have “lied”
one more time. The holohuggers will never contradict you. They
are too gullible.
>Either way, he continued his lies with:
> If he is not honest enough to admit that oil vapor is going to
> settle inside the building and saturate it, I can not change his
> mind.
> Any reasonable person reading what I have written is going to
> reject his idea that the “eyewitnesses” were actually witnessing
> oil vapor that they misidentified as steam.
>Wrong! Any reasonable person reading Mr. Giwer’s diatribe would be
>forced to conclude that Mr. Giwer is a shameless liar.
But you are not a reasonable or knowledgeable person on this
subject how could you tell?
> It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
> the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>For Mr. Giwer, it has never been a matter of how many survived, but
>how much attention he could get from insulting the memory of the dead.
Find yourself another conference, Shatzie.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:12 PDT 1996
Article: 38927 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Nizkor: Proof is for Goyim
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 00:31:44 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 5:31:40 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Michael P. Stein) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer
>>[email protected] (Mike Curtis) wrote:
>>
>>>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> Another imaginary Nazi made up the holohuggers.
>>
>>>Prove that the work already done is false. Get to it Giwer, show the
>>>folks in this newsgroup that you aren’t a total waste of energy. Show
>>>them that you really aren’t a meddler. I dare challenge you to do
>>>this.
>>
>> Prove there was any work done in the first place. This is the
>>Gentile Rule in action.
> No, the Gentile Rule is only invoked when reasonable attempts to
>verify a claim fail. Matt Giwer said that Al Gentile was a Righteous
>Gentile.
The Gentile Rule was originally invoked with a demand for
evidence that he 1) existed, 2) did what he said and then only
later for 3) that he was NAMED a righteous gentile. 3) only came
after I repeated what was related to me by Alec Grynspan who has
confirmed that is what HE TOLD ME.
Attempts were made to verify that claim by checking sources
>which, if the claim were true, should have been able to confirm it. The
>attempts to verify failed. Thus the whole claim becomes suspect. At that
>point is is perfectly reasonable to go back to the original claimant (Matt
>Giwer) and request more information.
Lets me see if I have the rules straight here. If one part of
what I say fails to be verified then the entire claim becomes
suspect. But if an eyewitness to the holocaust recites something
that is not physically possible then his entire story remains
true and the laws of nature are bent to accomodate his speaking
the truth.
Do I have it correct? or would you like to modify it in some
manner? Or do such rules only apply to me?
> Also, since Matt Giwer is a known liar, his unverified statements are
>treated with more skepticism.
Now that most, but not all, have stopped invoking the Gentile
Rule for the above three items, it would appear your claim of my
lying is becoming weaker every moment.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:12 PDT 1996
Article: 38931 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!news.dacom.co.kr!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,edm.general,ab.general,can.general,tor.general,van.general,calgary.general
Subject: Re: William Grosvenor believes in crap!
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 03:49:58 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 8:49:56 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:38931 ab.general:9648 can.general:78398 van.general:8708
[email protected] (Ken Lewis) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says…
>>Good point. However, the idea that Canada is somehow less violent and more
>>holy
>Perhaps no more holy but definitly less violent thanks to very restrictive
>handgun legislation. Compare statistics between the U.S. and Canada on crimes
>committed with guns and you will see a vast difference. As a U.S. citizen, I
>feel much safer here in Canada than someplace where any fool can carry a gun
>around (and often does).
Another person who believes that if the average Canadian were
permitted a handgun the first thing they would do with it is rob
a convenience store and then procede to murder his neighbors.
It is strange to discover Canadians must be kept from handguns
because of their inherently criminal nature.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:13 PDT 1996
Article: 38933 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘The Bodies Were Dragged Out Of the Gas Chambers’
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 04:13:21 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 105
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 11:13:19 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Richard J. Green) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer
>>[email protected] (Richard J. Green) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>>Matt Giwer
>>
>>>>>I could see that the lips and tips of the noses were a bluish
>>>>>color. Some of them had their closed, other’s eyes rolled. The
>>>>>bodies were dragged out of the gas chambers and inspected by a
>>>>>dentist, who removed finger rings and gold teeth…
>>
>>>> Don’t you think it curious that he sees the color characteristic
>>>>of cyanide rather than of CO poisoning?
>>
>>>Is Mr. Giwer arguing that cyanosis is not a symptom of CO poisoning?
>>>OSHA seems to disagree, but perhaps they’re lying:
>>
>>>OSHA Chemicals>> Carbon Monoxide
>>>
>>> NM Carbon Monoxide
>>> SYN CO; Diesel Exhaust Component
>>> IMIS 0560
>>> CAS 630-08-0
>>> NIOSH RTECS FG3500000
>>> DOT 1016 18
>>> DESC Colorless, odorless gas.
>>> MW: 28 BP: -313 F VP: >1 atm MP: -326
>>> F
>>> INCOM Strong oxidizers
>>> OSHA 50 ppm, 55 mg/m3
>>> TLV 25 ppm, 29 mg/m3 TWA
>>> REL 35 ppm 8 hr TWA; 200 ppm Ceiling
>>> SYMP T Headaches; tachypnea; nausea; weakness, dizziness, confusion,
>>> halucinations; cyanosis; depressed, ST segment of electrocardiogram;
>>> angina; syncope
>>> HLTH Asphyxiation, Chemical anoxia (HE17)
>>> ORG CVS, lungs, blood, CNS
>>> SLC1 MEDIA: Direct Reading Passive Monitor (Draeger Datalogger, 0-999ppm)
>>> MAX T: 480 minutes
>>> ANL 1: Direct Reading
>>> . REF: 2 (OSHA ID-209) SAE: 0.07 CLASS: Fully Validated
>>> MEDIA: Five Layer Aluminized Gas Sampling Bag (5 Liter)
>>> MAX V: 5.0 Liters MAX F: 0.05 L/Min (TWA)
>>> ANL 1: Gas Chromatography; GC/DID
>>> REF: 2 (OSHA ID-210) SAE: 0.04 CLASS: Fully Validated
>>> SAM2 DET. TUBE Available from OSHA Cincinnati Lab: Carbon
>>> . Monoxide 4-1La
>>> DET. TUBE (low): Kitagawa, 106S, 10-250 ppm
>>> . Sensidyne, 1La, 8-1000 ppm
>>> . Kitagawa, 100, 5-1000 ppm
>>> . Kitagawa, 106SA, 5-1000 ppm
>>> DET. TUBE (high):Draeger, CH20601, 10-3000 ppm
>>> . MSA, 487334, 10-3000 ppm
>>> . Sensidyne, 1L, 5-2000 ppm
>>> . Kitagawa, 106SH, 0.1-0.2%
>>> MIRAN 1A ∧ 1B: MIN. Det. Con. 2.1 ppm at 4.7 um
>>> MIRAN 103: Range 100 ppm at 4.61 um
>>> WIPE No
>>> DIV I
>>> BRANCH SE
>>>.
>>
>> Argue with this guy and Keren who swears by him. Pinkish. Do
>>you have a problem with this eyewitness? Just say so. One of
>>them is lying.
>Does Mr. Giwer have evidence that victims of CO poisoning can never look
>pinkish? Does he think it’s a binary operation? Either all CO victims
>are cyanotic or else all CO victims are pinkish? One wishes Mr. Giwer
>would be more explicit in what claim he is making. Does he claim that
>CO victims are never cyanotic? Does he claim that CO victims are never
>pinkish? Of course, he will not give a straight answer because:
Trying to decieve people again?
>Mr. Giwer is, as far as I can determine, a troller whose only
>interest is in causing fights. While he can sound superficially
>plausible, he has lied about what has been said in exchanges (while
>accusing others of lying), refused to document claims, pretended not to
>see posts which contain documented refutation of his claims (even when
>they have been emailed to him), engaged in actual libel, and generally
>conducted himself with such complete lack of intellectual and factual
>integrity that there seems to be no point in taking the time to read and
>respond. For detailed and documented evidence of this, please refer to
>URL http://www.almanac.bc.ca/cgi-bin/ftp.pl?people/g/giwer.matt
Of course, the best a decieving grad student chemist can do is
recite a mantra after a deliberate attempt to deceive one more
time.
It is come to be expected of you.
Come back when you can do better.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:14 PDT 1996
Article: 38935 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Testimonial Fiction
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 03:59:45 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <31a31339.3[email protected]> <4nvnk3$l[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 8:59:41 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Marty Kelley
>On Thu, 23 May 1996, tom moran wrote:
>> [email protected] (Ehrlich606) wrote:
>> >But surely even you would not deny, Tom Moran,
>> >that many Jews were put to death just because they were Jews. As far as I
>> >am concerned, that is the point here.
>> >
>[snip]
>>
>> You say the “point” is that many Jews died. I agree – many Jews
>> did probably die – and so did many others. How many Jews died and by
>> what means is the point.
>Unless I’m very much mistaken, Mr. Moran has just avoided the essence of
>Mr./Ms. Ehrlich’s comment: note how Moran simply says “many Jews died,”
>but avoids acknowledged that the Nazis killed them “just because they
>were Jews.”
EVERYONE save for the identified criminals was killed just
because of who they were. Jews were NOT unique in this regard.
>That seems a rather telling omission.
You are making quite an extraordinary claim not supported by any
evidence.
>So, let me put the
>question to you more directly, Mr. Moran: do you acknowledge that the
>Nazis deliberately killed Jews because they were Jews? (We’ll get into
>numbers, means, and the Nazi genocide against other “untermenschen
>later). A simple question, Mr. Moran. It will be interesting to see how
>you answer it.
Do you deny they killed gays because they were gay? Gypsies
because they were gypsies? Slavs because they were Slavs?
Upon what extraordinary grounds do you imply uniqueness?
But sorry, there was nothing unique about Jews in this matter.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:15 PDT 1996
Article: 38939 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 02:04:15 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <319[email protected]> <4n5[email protected]> <31976[email protected]> <4n83[email protected]> <319[email protected]> <[email protected]> <832239248[email protected]> <319c8913.18604[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 7:04:11 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) wrote:
> Therefore in a village of 200 with 100 survivors each person
> lost 100 relatives for a grand total of 10,000 people lost.
>I responded:
> That is the way the self-proclaimed “genius,” Mr. Giwer does
> math! His mistake is to attribute his own math inadequacy to
> those who studied the Holocaust.
I was merely demonstrating the way the talk goes when the purpose
is to create an image rather than convey facts. The image of the
holocaust is much more important than the facts. It is the way
myths are born and grow.
You may remember months ago I was exploring the analogy between
the Christian martyrs and the holocaust. You may also remember I
said it was a matter of time before Jews were singing hymns on
their way to the chambers. Damned if it wasn’t a month later
that someone posted that there was a song they commonly sang
headed for the showers.
It was probably an invention but you see the way legends grow.
Eventually all of the common aspects are filled in.
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
> What you folks have been ignoring is that I posted the AVERAGE
> correct answer weeks before this exchange started…
>For those not conversant with Mr. Giwer’s intellectually dishonest
>tactics, let me point out that Mr. Giwer is attempting to change the
>subject and dodge the clear implications of his erroneous math. That
>is because his ego is too big to admit it when he is wrong.
It is your lack of knowledge and ability with basic arithmetic
that is at issue here. The AVERAGE per person of relatives lost
is about 1.6 and there is no way to change that. Innumeracy must
be a terrible burden for you to bear.
You have no idea of math so you have no idea of whether or not it
is erronious. You are making an unfounded assertion out of your
own ignorance.
> It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
> the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>For Mr. Giwer, it has never been a matter of how many survived, but
>how much attention he could get from insulting the memory of the dead.
Find an NG where you won’t have to read it. It is strange that
you insist upon both reading and continuing to object to what you
read.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:16 PDT 1996
Article: 38945 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!loki.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 05:33:34 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 295
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 10:33:36 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Kimberley Ahlf
>On Thu, 23 May 1996, Matt Giwer wrote:
>> Kimberley Ahlf
>>
>> >Matt,
>>
>> >Your abrasiveness is mystifying. I have professed to be nothing more than
>> >ignorant of the facts surrounding the holocaust, a confession you have
>> >chosen to treat as pretension. I will admit that I have not been unbiased
>> >in my view of your positions, however, no true scholar who approaches his
>> >scholarship seriously would approach any audience, especially a critical
>> >audience, with the obvious hostility and siege behavior you have shown me
>> >and everyone else with whom you communicate.
>>
>> Then I was correct. You are in fact biased.
>Yes I have bias, all people do, but my mind is open to reason.
>>
>> And I have never pretended to participate in the discussion of
>> revising the orthodox view of the holocaust in the manner of a
>> research scholar.
>From: Webster’s New World Dictionary
> 3rd College Edition, Simon & Schuster,Inc
> 1988
>pg. 1141
>RESEARCH= careful, systematic, patient study and investigation in some
>field of knowledge, undertaken to discover or establish facts or
>principles (etc…)
>pg. 1201
>SCHOLARSHIP= 2 a) the systematized knowledge of a learned person,
>exhibiting accuracy, critical ability, and thoroughness (etc…)
>Having rejected the principle of “research” and in your
>approach (see above), are you saying that you do not ascribe to careful,
>systematic, patient study and investigation in forming your positions?
>In claiming that you do not pretend to participate in the discussion in
>the manner of a scholar, are you saying that you do not ‘exhibit
>accuracy, critical ability, and thoroughness’ in your positions?
Now look up scientific research. “Scholars” spend too much time
taking the word of others who have taken the word of additional
others.
And then compare that to what is posted here, where EVERYTHING is
true and can not be questioned. Does that comport with “critical
ability” when the nonsense is so obvious?
And when you use the first definition consider the mad rush
against the impossible effort to obtain a grounding in every
science and to keep up with a few specialties as opposed to the
luxury of a “scholar” to spend years piecing together one story
>from all the conflicting stories.
Add to that the luxury of being able to claim ignorance of
science so as to ignore physical law as a criteria and they are
in fat city when it comes to the holocaust.
>> I am approaching it primarily with a scientific attitude as it is
>> something that has been sorely lacking from this discussion for
>> as long as it has been going on. As such I have little interest
>> in eyewitness testimony because I know what strange things, like
>> UFO abductions, I can find such testimony regarding.
>Having rejected the principle of ‘testimony,’ are you stating that nothing
>is to be believed unless seen for oneself? Testimony must be questioned,
>yes, but rejected even without examination?!!
When the testimony is not congruent with scientific and
mathematically testable or known reality then of course it is to
be rejected.
Consider the recent pinkish vice bluish. One eyewitness finally
got the bluish color of the lips correct for cyanide but he
applied it to the camp where the claim is that is was CO which
would have resulted in pinkish. Now why would you believe this
person when he describes the something that can not happen?
And why would you claim it has not been examined? The wrong
color is examination enough. The claim is clear nonsense. The
person did not witness what he claims to have witnessed else he
would have seen something else.
It is to hard for you to make the connection between these
points?
>> And when there are such aggregious examples, such as the
>> incredible disappearing extermination camp of Treblinka, I see no
>> reason not to apply science to the discussion.
>Based on your rejection of testimony, you must have been present when
>Treblinka disappeared.
I was not there when it magically appeared either. So what is
your point? Have you not read the story? It was there for two
years and then vanished with hardly a trace even though thousands
of tons of bone ash are buried in a five acre area, over a pound
an acre and no signs of it.
>> Further I find no value in the “quote the expert” game as that is
>> a logical fallacy known as appeal to authority. Thus these
>> endless quotations from books, who are at times quoting from
>> other books, have nothing to do with evidence but only an
>> exercise in “Thus spake Aristotle,” a fallacy, having no
>> evidentiary merit.
>An extension of your rejection of testimony, I understand. Are you
>prepared to stand by this position when you youself are quoted in support
>of your positions? If you want me, and others like me, to accept this
>idea then we in fact must reject everything that YOU say, also.
Of course no one should quote me in support of THEIR positions.
I expect YOU and everyone else to learn the primary scientific
sources of what you say else you are no better. If you are
incapable of that then you have no business participating in
that part of the discussion.
Were you to do so you would be like so many here who denounce
math and science without the slightest math or science background
and thus delude others into thinking there is some merit to the
denunciation? You will find that rampant on Nizkor if you take a
look.
What ever it might be in fact, it is all treated like a
propaganda effort.
>> >The only conclusion that a reasonable person can make from the discourse
>> >is that you are not a sincere scholar of the Nazi period but rather an
>> >intellectual toy who endeavors merely to incite and berate rather than
>> >enlighten and debate. You have done nothing to dispel the stated opinions
>> >of others as to your low intellectual honesty.
>>
>> Scholarship is for people who can not handled analytic thought.
>Is it truly possible to practice meaningful analysis without exhibiting
>accuracy, critical ability, and thoroughness (I refer you to the
>definition of ‘Scholarship’ above.)?
It is not possible to do so but what passes for “scholarship”
here and in regard to the holocaust does not exhibit such
qualities. What you are either confusing or do not understand is
the term “critical ability.” “Scholars” consider that to mean
comparing conflicting sources. Scientists consider it to be
formulating a source-independent test to determine which, if
either, is correct.
I look for the independent means of verification of the source,
thus the lip color test. It does not matter what a person has
claimed. I can test the person’s statement independent of his
credentials or lack thereof.
>> But there you go with an aspersion upon my “intellectual
>> honesty.” Were you reading all of those claims that I was lying
>> when I said that bones burned? Have you missed they “knew all
>> along” that it was that it was the trick statement about calcium
>> that I identified immediately? Whose intellectual honesty are
>> you talking about?
>I am sorry, I did not read the above postings but I will accept your
>assertion that others may have behaved dishonestly toward you.
And well you might as they are the primary basis for the claim
that I have “lied” that other bought into the deception and
claimed I lied when they bleieved the deceptions.
>> Are you judging for yourself? (And if you are, name something.)
>> Or are you merely believing what you are reading others say?
>>
>Yes, I am judging for myself, and no, I am definitely NOT believing what I
>am reading.
Very good. You have stated you have no basis for questioning my
honesty in these matters. Please keep that in mind no matter
what anyone tells you or anything you read.
>> A more basic question, will you form your own independent
>> position and speak it REGARDLESS of what anyone else may say
>> about you for doing so? Will you stand on your own two feet and
>> make up your own mind without going along with the crowd?
>Yes, I will form my own independent position and even speak it. However,
>I am affraid that I must decline to adopt your method of analysis which
>rejects accuracy, critical ability, and thoroughness.
You must accept that when things are reported that do not and can
not happen that the person reporting it has not witnessed what he
has claimed. If you reject that, then there is no hope for you.
>> >You have an obvious purpose as an amusement for others, a function at
>> >which you excel, but for those of us who would like to learn more about
>> >the history of the Nazi period you have no value.
>>
>> What you will learn from me, if you have an open mind, is what is
>> possible within physical law. And after learning that, if you
>> have the courage to at least admit the claims that violate those
>> laws are questionable and not to be accepted you will have come a
>> long way.
>Having rejected ‘research’ and ‘scholarship’, on what “physical laws” do
>you base your positions? Physics, Alchemy, Astrology? Those all seem
>to be areas of scholarship, based on research and testimonial evidence.
>Even Biblical scholarship is out…
If you truly believe that alchemy and astrology are aread of
scholarship then you have a long way to go just to get out of the
mud. On the other hand if you were being sarcastic about those
two there is hope for you. If you are putting physics in the
same category then there is little hope for you.
>Earlier you based some assertions on chemical reactions, HCN, CO and so
>forth. Do you base your assertions on scholarship or experiments you have
>conducted?
I base it on information so well known for so long that no one
needs to question it. Blue lips from cyanide poisoning is so old
Arthur Conan Doyle used it. (Now watch someone claim that is the
source of my knowledge of the subject. It has happened before.
It will happen again. The last time it was a passing reference
to “if you can’t read the books rent Gone with the Wind and
immediately the claim was my source was a movie.)
Pathologist reports as far back as anyone wants to look, give the
difference in color between CO and HCN poisoning as they both
deal with binding to hemoglobin (iron) in the blood. The reporst
are either neutral or without exception, never reversed.
And of course I will be AGAIN accused of claiming expert
knowledge by those who have no idea of science and do not realize
just how fundamental this sort of information is. It is
difficult to imagine anyone can claim to be either educated or
acculturated without knowing basic information such as this. But
you will see it.
>> Given the climate illustrated in this conference were you to
>> actually state what you have a problem with and fail to be
>> convinced you know the kind of attack you will be subject to.
>> Can you deal with that? Or do you imagine that you will agree
>> with all of the inconsistent beliefs regarding the holocaust?
>> will you retreat to, “it just was”?
>No, I do not have a problem with seeing my ideas analyzed and refuted, but
>it must be done in a way exhibiting accuracy, critical ability, and
>thoroughness. Otherwise I will lose all respect for the criticisms and
>the critic.
And you must always consider physical reality, the way things
happen now and not grant exceptions to that reality for a brief
period in human history.
>> It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
>> the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>Matt, I think your rejection of the principles of scholarship, research,
>testimony and indirect evidence do not bode well for the force of your
>arguments. It appears that you advocate intellectual anarchy, whereby
>individuals must devlop their ideas and understandings completely
>independent of all other bases of knowledge.
It is IMPOSSIBLE to develop any correct idea that is in conflict
with science or math without first changing the science or math.
Any “basis” of knowledge in conflict with science or math is
total and complete garbage and not knowledge at all.
>If you truly believe THAT, then you are undercutting not only the
>positions of the so-called “holohuggers,” but also all science, technology and
>theology, as well as YOUR OWN positions.
You appear to be pretending to a knowledge of science and math
when you have none. As for theology, if you enjoy mental
masturbation, I leave you to it.
>If you are advocating that I disbelieve everything that you say, I will
>tell you now that I am strongly inclined in that direction.
Of course you are. You have admitted you are biased against me.
Your references to astrology, alchemy and theology lead me to
believe you are incapable of rational thought.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:16 PDT 1996
Article: 38950 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!arclight.uoregon.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 07:55:00 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <319[email protected]> <4n5[email protected]> <31976[email protected]> <4n83[email protected]> <319[email protected]> <[email protected]> <83223924[email protected]> <31a141d8.1499[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 2:54:58 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Kimberley Ahlf
>On Fri, 24 May 1996, Matt Giwer wrote:
>> [email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <[email protected]>,
>> >Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
>>
>> > And gays were killed merely because they were gay and the
>> > handicapped because they were handicapped and the gypsies
>> > because they were gypsies and Slavs because they were Slavs.
>>
>> >That is not entirely correct. Most Slavs were killed because they
>> >represented a political or military threat to the Nazis, although a
>> >good number were killed for no reason. Moreover, Hitler never
>> >intended to murder every last Slav on Earth, as he clearly intended
>> >for every last Jew… [text deleted for brevity]
>>
>> Nor can you produce any evidence of any intent to murder “every
>> last” anyone. We have been over this before.
>>
>Jeez, Matt- even _I_ know that’s not hard to prove:
> “Today I will once more be a prophet: If the international Jewish
>financiers inside and outside Europe should again succeed in plunging
>the nations into a world war, the result will be…the annhilation of
>the Jewish race throughout Europe.”
> – A. Hitler, Sp. to Reichstag: January 30, 1939
>Who was Hitler expecting to initiate the policy of annhilation of the
>Jewish race if not him- or was Hitler not in charge of setting policy?
We have been over this before. It is clearly a reference to the
result of the war. It is also clearly contradicted by the
Wannsee Protocol.
Do you have anything else to add or shall I go over it again in
all of its boring detail?
You came into this first pretending innocense. Then when I
correctly guessed bias you admitted it. And now, you pull canned
quotations out of your hat just like a creationist quoted Gish.
Do you really think you are deceiving anyone with your act?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:17 PDT 1996
Article: 38952 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 23:31:14 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 83
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 4:31:10 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Kimberley Ahlf
>Matt,
>Your abrasiveness is mystifying. I have professed to be nothing more than
>ignorant of the facts surrounding the holocaust, a confession you have
>chosen to treat as pretension. I will admit that I have not been unbiased
>in my view of your positions, however, no true scholar who approaches his
>scholarship seriously would approach any audience, especially a critical
>audience, with the obvious hostility and siege behavior you have shown me
>and everyone else with whom you communicate.
Then I was correct. You are in fact biased.
And I have never pretended to participate in the discussion of
revising the orthodox view of the holocaust in the manner of a
research scholar.
I am approaching it primarily with a scientific attitude as it is
something that has been sorely lacking from this discussion for
as long as it has been going on. As such I have little interest
in eyewitness testimony because I know what strange things, like
UFO abductions, I can find such testimony regarding.
And when there are such aggregious examples, such as the
incredible disappearing extermination camp of Treblinka, I see no
reason not to apply science to the discussion.
Further I find no value in the “quote the expert” game as that is
a logical fallacy known as appeal to authority. Thus these
endless quotations from books, who are at times quoting from
other books, have nothing to do with evidence but only an
exercise in “Thus spake Aristotle,” a fallacy, having no
evidentiary merit.
>The only conclusion that a reasonable person can make from the discourse
>is that you are not a sincere scholar of the Nazi period but rather an
>intellectual toy who endeavors merely to incite and berate rather than
>enlighten and debate. You have done nothing to dispel the stated opinions
>of others as to your low intellectual honesty.
Scholarship is for people who can not handled analytic thought.
But there you go with an aspersion upon my “intellectual
honesty.” Were you reading all of those claims that I was lying
when I said that bones burned? Have you missed they “knew all
along” that it was that it was the trick statement about calcium
that I identified immediately? Whose intellectual honesty are
you talking about?
Are you judging for yourself? (And if you are, name something.)
Or are you merely believing what you are reading others say?
A more basic question, will you form your own independent
position and speak it REGARDLESS of what anyone else may say
about you for doing so? Will you stand on your own two feet and
make up your own mind without going along with the crowd?
>You have an obvious purpose as an amusement for others, a function at
>which you excel, but for those of us who would like to learn more about
>the history of the Nazi period you have no value.
What you will learn from me, if you have an open mind, is what is
possible within physical law. And after learning that, if you
have the courage to at least admit the claims that violate those
laws are questionable and not to be accepted you will have come a
long way.
Given the climate illustrated in this conference were you to
actually state what you have a problem with and fail to be
convinced you know the kind of attack you will be subject to.
Can you deal with that? Or do you imagine that you will agree
with all of the inconsistent beliefs regarding the holocaust?
will you retreat to, “it just was”?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:18 PDT 1996
Article: 38965 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!news.ironhorse.com!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Hoess Memoir and ‘Revisionist’ Insanity
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 19:11:27 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl3-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 2:11:21 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Howard Eisenberger) wrote:
>Greg Raven ([email protected]) writes:
>>
>> If only Hitler had used multi-engine bombers to murder thousands of innocent
>> civilians instead of those disappearing gas chambers; he’d be a hero instead of
>> Satan incarnate.
>Perhaps if Hitler were not the personification of evil he would not be
>so worshipped today.
As has been stated by a holohugger here that the history of that
period can not be understood until people get over that idea.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:19 PDT 1996
Article: 38971 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘The Bodies Were Dragged Out Of the Gas Chambers’
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 21:02:30 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 2:02:24 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (tom moran) wrote:
>[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>>Testimony of SS-Unterscharfuehrer Schluch, In the Belzec-Oberhauser
>>trial:
>>[Quoted in “BELZEC, SOBIBOR, TREBLINKA – the Operation Reinhard
>>Death Camps”, Indiana University Press – Yitzhak Arad, 1987, p. 70-71].
>>—————————————————————
>>After leaving the undressing barracks, I had to show the Jews the
>>way to the gas chambers. I believe that when I showed the Jews
>>the way they were convinced that they were really going to
>>the baths. After the Jews entered the gas chambers, the doors
>>were closed by Hackenholt himself or by the Ukrainians
>>subordinated to him. Then Hackenholt switched on the engine
>>which supplied the gas…
>>
>>I could see that the lips and tips of the noses were a bluish
>>color. Some of them had their closed, other’s eyes rolled. The
>>bodies were dragged out of the gas chambers and inspected by a
>>dentist, who removed finger rings and gold teeth…
> Blue lips and tips of noses? Is this a one time account of such a
>thing?
It is the first time anyone has gotten the right color for
cyanide. Unfortunately he got the right color for the wrong
camp. Ah, well, what can you expect from people like this?
> The dentist removed the rings? I thought the victims had to give
>up their possessions before going to the gas chambers.
The “cashier” was sick this year.
> Is this it, professor. Is this the extent of the testimony? Two
>paragraphs? If this is the best you could extract, the rest must be,
>well to insuffient to post.
Do you really think he has anything more than a collection of
extracts?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:20 PDT 1996
Article: 38972 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!news.sdsmt.edu!nntp.uac.net!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!bofh.dot!news.stylus.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Giwer’s eagle eye strikes again!
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 21:36:43 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 4:36:37 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>Matt Giwer
># Fine with me, it WAS Eichmann. And Eichmann only learned about
># the gassing vans on a visit to some camp or other.
>Because he was shocked to see the gassing being carried out,
>to see the corpses, you conclude he had no part in organizing
>the mass murder?
>This is ridiculous.
>How, exactly, did you conclude that he only learned about the
>gassing when he visited the camp?
>You should read more carefully what is posted here. Especially
>the Wetzel-Lohse letter about the gassings, which mentions Eichmann.
>With an alleged IQ of 163, surely you can understand that
>someone can order the killings and organize them, yet find it
>difficult to personally carry them out or witness them?
># So why was he hung when he was clearly an underling and had no
># part in ordering what was happening?
>Of course he had such a part.
What was his rank?
># You holohuggers need to get a grip.
>You need to stop being so stupid. You present reasoning powers
>of a not-so-bright five year old. Because Eichmann was shaken
>when we witnessed the gassings, you assume he was innocent.
His superior officer was a mere Gruppenfuehrer to whom he
reported.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 07:20:21 PDT 1996
Article: 38978 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Diesel exhaust that looks like steam
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 18:39:00 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nlrc2$agn@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl3-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 1:38:53 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Greg Raven
>DvdThomas wrote:
>>
>> M. Giwer wrote:
>>
>> It has been over a week now and the subject of ramifications of
>> diesel exhaust looking like steam, that is the gas chambers
>> becoming saturated with oil and being potential fuel air bombs
>> while in operation, appears to have fallen into the “too hard”
>> category for the holohuggers to deal with.
>My apologies for coming in late, but has it been mentioned that a
>gasoline engine creates copious amounts of water as a by-product of
>combustion? I don’t know if this is the same with diesel engines, but
>the chemistry should be similar.
In the perfect world the burning of hydrocarbons has only two
byproducts, CO2 and H2O. However they are in direct proportion
to the fuel burned.
However, steam does not produce anything white looking save when
being released under pressure and immediately dissipates when the
pressure drops. Steam into a room produces a high humidity only.
Clouds and fog consist of small condensed droplets
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 09:25:34 PDT 1996
Article: 20282 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsserver.jvnc.net!newsserver2.jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,soc.culture.jewish,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.current-events,soc.culture.israel,ba.israelis,alt.security.terrorism
Subject: Re: Israeli attack on Civilans — US Planes in Jordan
Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 23:27:29 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 17 6:29:35 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:37636 soc.culture.jewish:51497 alt.politics.nationalism.white:20282 soc.culture.israel:34025
[email protected](Moritz Rothschild ) wrote:
>In <[email protected]> [email protected] (Matt
>Giwer) writes:
>>
>>[email protected](Moritz Rothschild ) wrote:
>>
>>>In <[email protected]> [email protected] (Matt
>>>Giwer) writes:
>>>>
>>>>[email protected](Moritz Rothschild ) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Giwer Neither Jake nor I nor anyone else need lie about you. You
>>>are
>>>>>condemned by your own hand. Hilda
>>>>
>>>> But you accuse me of saying things I have not said. And then you
>>>>condemn me for what I have not said. I am condemned only by your
>>>>lies.
>>>>—–
>>>>
>>>> It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
>>>>the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>>
>>>I guess I am more “MAN” than you.
>>
>> Your line of “insults” appears to heavily gravitate towards
>>sexual references. Is there some point to it?
>>
>>I am willing to admit I’m wrong when
>>>I’m wrong —but I’m sure as “hell” not wrong about you. Keep
>writing
>>>you dig your own pit Your reputation is intact.
>>
>> What might be the consequences of this save for the constant mail
>>bombing and phone calls by those who have made it a personal
>>vendetta to “make me pay” for what I am saying? What is that
>>doing to “your” reputation?
>Are you accusing me of something? You better be damn sure you know
>what you are saying or you may be talking to a court of law.
What court takes violation of “netiquette” seriously? Or do your
courts consider all violations of etiquette worthy of
consideration?
But note the your is in quotation marks. I would never assume
that you personally have the knowledge to do such things.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 09:25:35 PDT 1996
Article: 20323 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.webdirect.ca!news.challenge.com!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!oleane!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,can.politics
Subject: Re: Les Griswold: Leader
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 07:46:27 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <4ngvmo$pu[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 2:48:32 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:20323 alt.discrimination:47082 alt.revisionism:37723 alt.skinheads:23741 can.politics:45900
[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes…
>>[email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>>>(Matt Giwer) wrote:
>>
>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >Please learn to use your editor, Mr. Giwer. 163 IQ should make it easy
>>>for you.
>>>>
>>>> When the messenger to me has used his, I do. When they do not, I
>>>> do not. I note that you have only posted to me.
>>>>
>>>> What point do you think you are demonstrating by this?
>>>>
>>>I am demonstrating that you are a rude, insensitive, childish clod. And
>>>demonstrating it quite well, I think.
>>>
>>>I edited my post to *you*, Mr. Giwer. You however, quoted the entire post
>>>back. Therefore your “When the messenger to me has used his, I do. When
>>>they do not, I do not” is yet another one of your lies.
>>
>>>Go away, little man. You’re way out of your league here.
>>
>> And none of your fellow holohuggers will disagree with you and
>>thus encourage you.
> That is because she is not wrong here. there is quite a bit of
> disagreement among the people you call holohuggers – you just don’t see
> it or pretend not to see it. I, for example, made it clear to Gord
> Mcfee that he ought to sue you or shut up about it already.
What does an idiot claim that the court will take judicial notice
of a violation of internet etiquette have to do with substantive
matters of holocaust claims?
Mike Stein
> has slapped me on the wrist several times for errors I have made. I
> corrected marty kelley not long ago for an incorrect response he made.
> (to you I believe). I am confident there are dozens of other examples
> out there.
To follow the rule that has been applied to me, quote them or the
do not exist.
> As Sara has said, “go away little man.”
It is only what she dreams her cunt were like.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 09:25:37 PDT 1996
Article: 20328 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!world1.bawave.com!news2.cais.net!news.cais.net!bofh.dot!nntp.crosslink.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.his.com!news.frontiernet.net!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!oleane!jussieu.fr!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,soc.culture.jewish,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.current-events,soc.culture.israel,ba.israelis,alt.security.terrorism
Subject: Re: Israeli attack on Civilans — US Planes in Jordan
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 03:07:39 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 17 10:06:06 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:37734 soc.culture.jewish:51585 alt.politics.nationalism.white:20328 soc.culture.israel:34062
Roger Froikin
>Shaqeeqa wrote:
>>
>
>> Perhaps Jews who have been occupying Palestine since 1948 will
>> submit the proper deeds of land ownership proving that they
>> are the rightful owners prior to 721 B.C.
>No need. The only nation to hold soverignty over Palestine based on
>local population was the Jewish Nation. That nation was forcibly
>exiled and kept away. Therefore they never lost national identity with
>that land.
>Arabs that came in later were squatters that settled without purchasing.
>It’s just that simple.
You really think it is a simple thing to sue the Senate and the
People of Rome at this late date?
And of course that was only the rebellious Judeans, not the rest
of the Hebrews who remained in the region (Samarians, Galileans)
and did in fact take over the land. That they converted to Islam
is your only excuse for falsely calling them to be “arabs.”
Israel died as a nation some time between the time of the kings
and the Bablyonian conquest. It was further split up by the
Selucidad (sp) rulers after the death of Alexander, although
formal Hebrews records (Maccabees) end just where you would
expect, just before they got the shit kicked out of them.
Consider the “Festival of Lights” to be the “Last Hurrah.”
The conditions between then and the Roman conquest were so bad
that the only continuation of the “history” of the regrion were
taken up by christians writing “passion plays” about they holy
man.
I know they don’t teach this stuff in schule but it is about time
you learned it.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 11:00:25 PDT 1996
Article: 38980 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Picture File: SS-Women in Belsen Camp
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 22:20:34 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 3:20:29 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Nele Abels) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wrote:
>>[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>>>Well-fed female members of the SS throwing skeletal corpses
>>>of Belsen victims into a mass grave.
>>
>> “FEMALE” SS?
>> How “modern” of the SS. Not only recruited them for the SS but
>>also shipped them off to Poland for manual labor.
>*sigh* Is this the guy who has claimed that he has read so many books that he
>cannot be bothered with keeping them all? Just to give one meagre example:
>In the Frauenkonzentrationslager Ravensbrück there were female guards. Here
>are the supervising female guards:
>Emma Zimmer 1939-1940
>Johanna Langefeld 1941-April 1942
>Maria Mandel April-Oktober 1942
>Johanna Langefeld Oktober 1942-April
>Dorothea Binz August 1943-April/Mai 1945
> These overseers led sometimes up to 150 female guards. In the hierarchy of the
>concentration camp they were mainly responsible for the “Apelle” and administrative
>tasks. Although they were first not formally linked to the SS in Ravensbrück (apart
>from those who volunteered as the female guards Binz, Closius, Mewes Mohneke
>and Rabe), they soon came closer due to their uniform and the constant contact to
>the formal SS.
So although they were not SS at all they became linked with the
SS. Thank you very much. They were not SS.
Got anything on Belsen?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 11:00:26 PDT 1996
Article: 38993 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!bofh.dot!insync!news.io.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘I Can’t Take This, I Said To Him’
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 21:27:27 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 154
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 4:27:21 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>Matt Giwer
># [email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>## From the interrogation of Adolf Eichmann
># Would it have been too hard for you to identify the person
># answering the questions?
>I’ll give you another chance. Hint: see line starting with “##” above.
># From who? For all anyone can tell, you made this up completely.
> ^^^^^^^^^
>I’ll give you another chance. Hint: see line starting with “##” above.
>Let’s see dem 163 IQ points in action. Go for it!
========
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: ‘I Can’t Take This, I Said To Him’
From: [email protected] (Daniel Keren)
Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 20:15:38 GMT
From the interrogation of Adolf Eichmann
[Quoted in ‘The Good Old Days’ – E. Klee, W. Dressen, V. Riess,
The
Free Press, NY, 1988., p. 221-222]
————————————————————————
A. I just know the following, that I only saw the following: a
room,
if I still recall correctly, perhaps five times as big as this
one,
or it may have been four times as big. There were Jews inside
it,
they had to get undressed and then a van, completely sealed,
drew
up to the ramp in front of the entrance. The naked Jews then
had to
get inside. Then the lorry was closed and it drove off.
===
This is the only thing “Eichmann” knows about what is happening.
===
Q. How many people did the van hold?
A. I can’t say exactly. I couldn’t bring myself to look closely,
even
once. I didn’t look inside the entire time. I couldn’t, no, I
couldn’t take any more. The screaming and, and, I was too
upset
and so on. I also said that to ueller when I submitted my
report.
===
“Eichmann” submits a report to someone presumably name Meuller,
who is otherwise an unknown.
===
He did not get much from my report. I then followed the van –
I
must have been with some of the people from there who knew
the
way. Then I saw the most horrifying thing I have ever seen in
my
entire life.
The van drove up to a long trench, the door was opened and
bodies
thrown out. They still seemed alive, their limbs were so
supple.
They were thrown in, I can still remember a civilian pulling
out
teeth with some pliers and then I just got the hell out of
there.
===
THE Adolph Eichmann just got out of there? Did not anyone know
he was there? Was he not given an escort? A car and driver?
===
I got into the car, went off and did not say anything else…
===
He appears to be driving himself.
===
I’d had
more than I could take. I only know that a doctor there in a
white
coat said to me that I should look through a peep-hole at them
in
the lorry. I refused to do that. I could not, I could not say
anything,
I had to get away.
I went to Berlin, reported to Gruppenfuehrer Mueller. I told
him
===
Eichmann, one of the men in the Riech and who played a major role
in what he can not stand to look at and appears to have
discovered for the first time, REPORTS to a Gruppenfuehrer, not
even an Obergruppenfuehrer.
===
exactly what I’ve just said, there wasn’t any more I could
tell him…
terrible…I’m telling you… the inferno, can’t, that is, I
can’t
take this, I said to him.
===
And of course we have the professor’s word that this is THE
Adolph Eichmann responding to the questions. Adolph Eichmann,
low ranking junior officer, if an officer at all, who was not
able to deal with what he saw, was charged with all kinds of
terrible crimes in Israel and hung for them.
If this man is truly Eichmann, there was a terrible miscarriage
of justice. Or perhaps an early example of Demjanjuk justice.
At the least they should have gotten his boss, Gruppenfuehrer
Mueller.
Danny boy, if this is really THE Adolph Eichmann then there is an
obvious and major revision required for this part of the story.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 11:00:27 PDT 1996
Article: 38994 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!news.ironhorse.com!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 03:46:57 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 75
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <319[email protected]> <4n5[email protected]> <31976[email protected]> <4n83[email protected]> <319[email protected]> <[email protected]> <83223924[email protected]> <31a141d8.1499[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 8:46:53 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
> And gays were killed merely because they were gay and the
> handicapped because they were handicapped and the gypsies
> because they were gypsies and Slavs because they were Slavs.
>That is not entirely correct. Most Slavs were killed because they
>represented a political or military threat to the Nazis, although a
>good number were killed for no reason. Moreover, Hitler never
>intended to murder every last Slav on Earth, as he clearly intended
>for every last Jew, gay, parapalegic, and Romani.
Excuse me, sir, the Slavs were identified as an inferior race and
as such were murdered for that reason and that reason alone.
OTHERWISE you have to consider the Jewish campaign and boycott
against Germany starting in 1932. If we accept your revision of
the Slav story we have to consider the Jews were abandoning
Germany in droves proving disloyalty.
You can not pick and choose what you will accept to make a case
after the fact.
Nor can you produce any evidence of any intent to murder “every
last” anyone. We have been over this before.
> Age, gender or occupation did not matter for them either. They
> were also civilian non-combatants.
>Except, once again, for the Slavs, many of whom were political
>leaders and partisans.
As you well know they were identified as an inferior race worthy
of extermination under the same ground rules you folks find it
for Jews. You are still being selective in what you choose to
accept without criteria for acceptance.
> In fact there is nothing unique about the Jews in this matter.
> But you still have the mindset that the Jews were in some manner
> unique. That only shows you what constant repetition will do.
>What was unique about the situation of the Jews, the gays, the
>infirm, and the Romani, is that the Nazis were driven to eliminate
>them even though they posed no political or military threat to the
>Nazis whatsoever. This is what makes the Holocaust unique among the
>many sordid episodes of genocide witnessed by history.
Bull. You can read of the Armenian slaughter every day on this
conference. You certainly know of Pol Pot’s little excursion
into extermination. You have never heard of the Hutus and the
Tutsis in your neck of the woods no doubt. You apparently never
heard of the Soviet extermination and Gulag work to death
programs for all foreign nationals they could arrest without an
international incident that went on from 1918 to 1986.
But of course, you selectively believe in a political or military
threat where in fact none existed.
> It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
> the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>For Mr. Giwer, it has never been a matter of how many survived, but
>how much attention he could get from insulting the memory of the dead.
You have been so brainwashed with your holocaust nonsense that
you know nothing of the rest of history.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 11:00:28 PDT 1996
Article: 38998 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Nizkor method: Any old response will do
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 05:58:55 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 10:58:56 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Kimberley Ahlf
>I don’t know how many of you read the above posting re: THE HOLOCAUST
>PLEA, but within it Mr. Giwer makes a rather stunning assertion about his
>scientific method. It reads as follows:
>> And I have never pretended to participate in the discussion of
>>revising the orthodox view of the holocaust in the manner of a
>>research scholar.
>Forgive me for taking it out of context, but please read the above posting
>from which it was taken, including the definitons of “research” and
>”scholarship” which I provided in my reply, and which Mr. Giwer apparently
>rejects as operating methods.
Your pretend impartiality even in the face of an admitted bias in
favor of the unquestional truths of orthodox holocaustry.
But to reiterate, academic scholarship as compared to the
analytic thought of science is as shit compared to gold. Anyone
can produce the former.
You see that commonly here with the mindless posting of other
people’s works.
One would expect them to be able to think for themselves. One
would expect them to exhibit the slightest ability to add to the
discussion. One would expect them to find at least the slighest
problem in some minor detail with what they mindlessly quote.
But you do not. We find no contribution. We find only mindless
repetition. We find total acceptance.
Think for yourself for a moment. Is there any other aspect of
history about which there is no question? About which no other
conclusion is permitted without vile and emotional names being
called?
Then why is this special? When was the official truth codified?
In which year? Where is it written?
Rather there are so many conflicting truths which must be
addressed. There is no codification yet they all claim their own
truths are the true truths.
Pay attention and you will learn.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 12:08:20 PDT 1996
Article: 47015 of alt.activism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!loki.tor.hookup.net!hookup!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!jussieu.fr!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.politics.reform,alt.activism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.guns
Subject: Re: #Dying Teen’s Hunting Trip Called Cruel ‘death wish’
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 06:48:02 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 1:50:10 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.misc:374588 alt.politics.libertarian:164571 alt.politics.democrats.d:76901 alt.politics.usa.republican:198713 alt.politics.usa.congress:37833 alt.politics.reform:68863 alt.activism:47015 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:306994
[email protected] (John Nahay) wrote:
>Jim Kennemur ([email protected]) wrote:
>: Make-A-Wish foundation president James Gordon declined to be
>: interviewed. But in a prepared statement, he said the foundation,
>: which has helped 38,000 youngsters, “grants wishes to children up to
>: 18 years of age who have life-threatening illnesses. Our wishes are
>: limited only by the child’s imagination, and often reflect the
>: activities and way of life to which the child is accustomed.
>Would the assholes at Make-a-Wish Foundation honor the teenager’s request
>if he wanted to purchase of pornographic magazines, something which
>physically hurts NO one? I’m sure that those shitheads would be up in
>arms over that. Too bad James Gordon was not on that Valujet flight
>that crashed in Florida.
Exactly the attitude expected from a tree hugger. May you some
day have the opportunity to hug a Kodiak.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 12:08:23 PDT 1996
Article: 47032 of alt.activism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!loki.tor.hookup.net!nic.wat.hookup.net!hookup!news.umbc.edu!haven.umd.edu!purdue!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.politics.reform,alt.activism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.guns
Subject: Re: #Dying Teen’s Hunting Trip Called Cruel ‘death wish’
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 06:15:46 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 1:17:52 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.misc:374634 alt.politics.libertarian:164599 alt.politics.democrats.d:76925 alt.politics.usa.republican:198767 alt.politics.usa.congress:37852 alt.politics.reform:68887 alt.activism:47032 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:307045
[email protected] (Jim Kennemur) wrote:
>Dying Teen’s Hunting Trip Called Cruel ‘death wish’
>Louis Sahagun of The Los Angeles Times, May 11, 1996.
One hopes he bags the limit.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 12:08:24 PDT 1996
Article: 47043 of alt.activism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!news.umbc.edu!haven.umd.edu!purdue!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.politics.reform,alt.activism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.guns
Subject: Re: #Dying Teen’s Hunting Trip Called Cruel ‘death wish’
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 06:45:18 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 1:47:26 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.misc:374665 alt.politics.libertarian:164622 alt.politics.democrats.d:76943 alt.politics.usa.republican:198800 alt.politics.usa.congress:37862 alt.politics.reform:68901 alt.activism:47043 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:307078
[email protected] (Jim Kennemur) wrote:
>On 17 May 1996 09:23:07 -0700, [email protected] (Theodore R.
>Krueger) wrote:
>>In article
>>Mark Shaw
>>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>>[email protected] (Jim Kennemur) wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 15 May 1996 01:45:03 GMT, [email protected] (Mark Shaw) wrote:
>>
>>>>>Sounds like the hunting trip of a lifetime. I wish the kid luck.
>>
>>>>I think its so nice that he wants to kill another living creature
>>>>before he dies himself. This whole sad affair says a lot about the
>>>>cult of gun worship here in Amerika.
>>
>>>You a vegetarian, Mr. Kennemur?
>>
>>>If so, great — ’cause that means you’ve at least got some solid moral
>>>justification for this attitude of yours. If not, well….
>>
>>Why does he have justification if he is a vegetarian?
>>
>>Don’t they kill and eat plants?
>>Aren’t plants living things?
>>Aren’t all living things imbued with “The Force?”
>>
>>Seriously though, I can not figure out why vegetarians feel so
>>morally superior to meat eaters.
>>
>>It must be a religious thing.
>So you gun loons are saying that the boy with the brain-tumor (sounds
>like perfect NRA material) is going to eat that bear after he shoots
>it?
The kid is only dying. Ridicule him. When he grows up he will
smash your face.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 12:08:25 PDT 1996
Article: 47044 of alt.activism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.politics.reform,alt.activism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.guns
Subject: Re: #Dying Teen’s Hunting Trip Called Cruel ‘death wish’
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 06:16:39 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 1:18:45 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.misc:374668 alt.politics.libertarian:164625 alt.politics.democrats.d:76945 alt.politics.usa.republican:198803 alt.politics.usa.congress:37864 alt.politics.reform:68903 alt.activism:47044 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:307081
[email protected] (Jim Kennemur) wrote:
>On Wed, 15 May 1996 01:45:03 GMT, [email protected] (Mark Shaw) wrote:
>>Sounds like the hunting trip of a lifetime. I wish the kid luck.
>I think its so nice that he wants to kill another living creature
>before he dies himself. This whole sad affair says a lot about the
>cult of gun worship here in Amerika.
>What’s next, hookers and crack?
Where are the licenses sold? Or are they protected species for
liberals?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 12:08:26 PDT 1996
Article: 47714 of alt.activism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.origins,alt.co-evolution,sci.skeptic,alt.activism
Subject: Re: We did not evolve from chimps! But from A. afarensis!
Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 02:43:36 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl4-21.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Mon May 20 7:42:41 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.origins:124465 alt.co-evolution:725 sci.skeptic:124910 alt.activism:47714
[email protected] (Ronal J. Baker) wrote:
>I think it is a mistake for anyone to take the position that the Bible has
>no value historically. The world just needs to realize that the bible has
>been mistranslated over and over. Once a new translation emerges with the
>identity of the sea serpents, pterosaurs, and dinosaurs in clear view, two
>things will happen. Both of the theories of evolution and creation will
>dramatically change.
Actually what will happen is that it will be laughed out of
publication.
—————————————————————
Live fast, love well, and have a glorious Website.
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/
Commentary from the right side of the curve
Maintaining http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/tech/ (tips and tricks for webs)
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/mgiwer4/ (eye candy, blantant advertising)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/ (my son)
From [email protected] Fri May 24 12:08:27 PDT 1996
Article: 48362 of alt.activism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.his.com!news.frontiernet.net!news.texas.net!newshost.comco.com!newsfeed.concentric.net!news.sojourn.com!news.eecs.umich.edu!caen!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.mathworks.com!newsgate.duke.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.origins,alt.co-evolution,sci.skeptic,alt.activism
Subject: Re: We did not evolve from chimps! But from A. afarensis!
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 04:21:43 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl3-23.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Wed May 22 9:21:32 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.origins:124774 alt.co-evolution:752 sci.skeptic:125623 alt.activism:48362
[email protected] (Ronal J. Baker) wrote:
>In article <4nra[email protected]>, [email protected] says…
>>
>>baker[email protected] (Ronal J. Baker) wrote: I think it is a mistake for
>anyone to take the position that the Bible has no value historically. The
>world just needs to realize that the bible has been mistranslated over and
>over. Once a new translation emerges with the identity of the sea serpents,
>pterosaurs, and dinosaurs in clear view, two things will happen. Both of the
>theories of evolution and creation will dramatically change.
>MGiwer wrote; Actually what will happen is that it will be laughed out of
>publication.
>Ronal Baker wrote: Actually people like you will be laughed at. The Bible is
>true, but it is the perverted translations in print today that has allowed
>for all the twisted turn of events.
You are the one who was taken in by a description of the penis of
the behemoth as refering to one of the four walking legs. You
are the one who is going to be shocked by a proper translation.
—————————————————————
Live fast, love well, and have a glorious Website.
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/
Commentary from the right side of the curve
Maintaining http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/tech/ (tips and tricks for webs)
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/mgiwer4/ (eye candy, blantant advertising)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/ (my son)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/mega/ (for internet advertising)
From [email protected] Fri May 24 16:36:55 PDT 1996
Article: 77827 of can.general
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.webdirect.ca!news.challenge.com!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!oleane!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!EU.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.discrimination,ab.general,can.general,tor.general,van.general
Subject: Re: Down with the nazis! Down with the hate mongers!!! – HATE CRIME
Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 01:06:35 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nich[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl7-23.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 8:05:09 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:37857 alt.discrimination:47136 ab.general:9381 can.general:77827 van.general:8533
[email protected] wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>UnserKampf
>>Hmmm. I read that about 4% of members of the NSDAP objected to the
>>anti-semitism of the NSDAP. So, what approach should be taken for
>>National-Socialists who are not racists? Or is it that “all
>>National-Socialists are alike!” ?
>>
>>[email protected]
>The nazis are biggotted sadists. that’s all. They misuse the term national
>socalist just as they misuse Christianity, as a cover for their true sick
>agenda. It is a flimsy attempt to hide their racist behind politics until
>they get enough control over the people they sucked in.
>Nazi doesn’t stand for national socialism, it stands for biggotted,
>sadistic hate monger.
You mean like this guy misued socialism?
–Hitler to Rauschning
The party is all-embracing. It rules our lives in all their
breadth and depth. We must therefore develop branches of the
party in which the whole of individual life will be reflected.
Each activity and each need of the individual will thereby be
regulated by the party as the representative of the general good.
There will be no license, no free space, in which the individual
belongs to himself. This is Socialism–not such trifles as the
private possession of the means of production.
“Of what importance is that if I range men firmly within a
discipline they cannot escape? Let them then own land or
factories as much as they please. The decisive factor is that the
State, through the party, is supreme over them, regardless
whether they are owners or workers. All that, you see, is
unessential. Our Socialism goes far deeper….”
“Private property” as conceived under the liberalistic economic
order was a reversal of the true concept of property. This
“private property” represented the right of the individual to
manage and to speculate with inherited or acquired property as he
pleased, without regard for the
“I have learned a great deal from Marxism, as I do not hesitate
to admit. The difference between them and myself is that I have
really put into practice what these peddlers and pen-pushers have
timidly begun…. I had only to develop logically what Social
Democracy repeatedly failed in because of its attempt to realize
its evolution within the framework of democracy. National
Socialism is what Marxism might have been if it could have broken
its absurd and artificial ties with a democratic order.”
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 16:36:56 PDT 1996
Article: 77892 of can.general
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.webdirect.ca!news.challenge.com!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsserver.jvnc.net!newsserver2.jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: edm.general,ab.general,can.general,tor.general,alt.revisionism,van.general,calgary.general
Subject: Re: Hate Material will NOT BE Tolerated!
Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 00:25:06 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nn88[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl6-30.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 19 7:27:35 PM CDT 1996
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca ab.general:9437 can.general:77892 alt.revisionism:37964 van.general:8566
[email protected] (DvdThomas) wrote:
>>That’s not true. It is agaionst the law to use the postal service to
>>distribute hate mail
>In totalitarian states maybe.
You mean like Canada?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 16:36:58 PDT 1996
Article: 77925 of can.general
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.webdirect.ca!news.challenge.com!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!oleane!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news.PBI.net!samba.rahul.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!rahul.net!a2i!coconut!fred.enteract.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: edm.general,ab.general,can.general,tor.general,alt.revisionism,van.general,calgary.general
Subject: Re: Hate Material will NOT BE Tolerated!
Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 05:55:08 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nn880$[email protected]> <4nnhd6$6f[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl6-30.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 19 10:55:03 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca ab.general:9462 can.general:77925 alt.revisionism:38020 van.general:8583
[email protected] (David Reilley) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes:
>>From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
>>Subject: Re: Hate Material will NOT BE Tolerated!
>>Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 00:25:06 GMT
>>[email protected] (DvdThomas) wrote:
>>>>That’s not true. It is agaionst the law to use the postal service to
>>>>distribute hate mail
>>>In totalitarian states maybe.
>> You mean like Canada?
>Canada, Germany.
>In the USA it is against the law to send “obscene” material.
>The original point was that that there were no laws of this sort affecting
>telephone calls or letters — the reality is that there are.
Actually in the US it is illegal only to deal in kiddie porn
under the presumption that those under age could not have
consented to the creation of the pornography. Written material
is an unprosecuted gray area. So far we have only photographic
material as precedent that is not under appeal. There has also
been a crack down on what appears to be snuff tapes under the
same presumption of non-consent.
It is a good thing, finally. Something that I have promoted for
decades — at least the loosening of the law. The only problem
at the moment is that the wannabe censors have so little left to
do that they are imaginging an attack upon morphing to youth even
though there is no evidence of such a tape in existance.
Our censors are desperate. At the moment they are focussing upon
TV violence and the V-chip (still not in production much less do
the standards for it exist.) It is the same children doing their
same juvenile thing that has made them a living for years.
Do not expect drastic changes but steady progress.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 16:36:59 PDT 1996
Article: 77944 of can.general
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,edm.general,ab.general,can.general,tor.general,van.general,calgary.general
Subject: Re: William Grosvenor believes in crap!
Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 23:38:46 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl6-30.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 19 4:38:38 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:38079 ab.general:9472 can.general:77944 van.general:8588
[email protected] (Captain Comrade) wrote:
>dr[email protected] (David Reilley) thought, and subsequently typed:
>>In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Zeljko ‘Zed’ Zidaric) writes:
>>>I am all for the creation of a citizen’s militia.
>>>Now tell us WHY you think Militias are a bad idea.
>>Because they are supported by people like you whose idea of “humour” is a
>>sig.file that says “Improve the country — kill a liberal today.”
>>You just don’t get it — most Canadians are appalled at the idea that problems
>>are solved with guns. This is how problems are “solved” in Yugoslavia and
>>Rwanda, not here.
>Good point. However, the idea that Canada is somehow less violent and more holy
>than other countries is really pushing it. There’s violence in Canada, all
>right, and I’ve experienced it first-hand (on the wrong side, of course). Don’t
>take this for preaching, I just get irritated when the same assholes who beat me
>up in grade school pretend that they’re somehow better than
>god-fearing, republican reactionaries with souped-up hunting rifles in the
>(shudder) United States
Actually, European descent Americans are marginally less prone to
violent crime than European descent Canadians. It is not a
statistically significant difference but it was there in the 94
(or 93) statistics.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 16:37:00 PDT 1996
Article: 78055 of can.general
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.discrimination,ab.general,can.general,tor.general,van.general,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Jews for Faggots in Alberta
Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 05:23:09 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <832279[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl4-21.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Mon May 20 10:22:09 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:38254 alt.discrimination:47252 ab.general:9505 can.general:78055 van.general:8618 alt.politics.homosexuality:92954
[email protected] (!Rack Jite) wrote:
>On Sat, 18 May 1996 03:17:35 GMT, [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
>wrote and is answered by the CONSERVATIVELY INCORRECT, Rack Jite:
>!Alexander Baron
>!>I just spoke to Rabbi Goldstein tonight and he affirmed yet again the
>!>Halakhic position that homosexuality is an abomination.
>!You need to remember that so many politically correct “jews” wish
>!to have it forgotten that “Jews were the only people persecuted
>!for what they were rather than for what they did.”
>Giwer you homophobic bigot, does this mean that every homosexual the
>Nazis put in camps or murdered was caught in the physical act of
>homosexuality?
If you have a problem with that statement take it up with Elie
Wiesel. He spoke it before it was politically incorrect to do
so.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 16:37:01 PDT 1996
Article: 78244 of can.general
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,tor.general,can.general,ont.general,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: ERNST ZUNDEL IN NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC
Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 20:10:03 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <3[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl3-23.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Wed May 22 1:09:47 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:38612 can.general:78244 ont.general:40868 alt.discrimination:47372
[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Richard
>Sexton) wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> Greg Macdonald
>> >
>> >Rah rah rah. Seems more like he is a proponent of the idea that
>> >killing ‘only’ one million Jews is somehow forgivable, and that the
>> >only reason people are mad at the Nazis is because they have been told
>> >that more died than really did. Shhhhure. Great logic.
>>
>> Oh I don’t know. Would you rather be accused of killing
>> 12 poeple or one; but even if the conclusion is flawed
>> are the premises open to suspicion or not ? I mean
>> whats the deal, I’ve heard, 1, 4, 7, 12 million.
>>
>> Does anybody know or agree on the real answer ?
>Historians are general agreement that around 6 million Jews and 6 million
>non-Jews died in the Holocaust. So when somebody cites 6 million died in
>the Holocaust this generally means 6 million Jews. When 12 million is
>cited this means the total number of deaths.
>> I’ve also heard typhoid, rather than gas wiped out most
>> of the dachau camp, from a lady I know who
>> lived there since before the war.
>Yes, this was the case at Dachau, which was a concentration camp and not
>an extermination camp such as was Auschwitz. Death from privation,
>starvation, disease, and brutality were the main causes of death at
>Dachua. Comparitively very few were actually gassed to death at Dachau.
>(However, far more were transported to nearby Hartheim and gassed to death
>in the “euthanasia” facility there.)
But obviously the conditions and treatment of people at Auschwitz
must have been much better simply to have so many survivors even
with all of that gassing.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 16:37:02 PDT 1996
Article: 78462 of can.general
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.webdirect.ca!news.challenge.com!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!oleane!hole.news.pipex.net!pipex!tube.news.pipex.net!pipex!lade.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,edm.general,ab.general,can.general,tor.general,van.general,calgary.general
Subject: Re: William Grosvenor believes in crap!
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 19:19:28 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 12:19:30 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:39013 ab.general:9684 can.general:78462 van.general:8721
Laura Finsten
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wrote:
>[edit]
>> Another person who believes that if the average Canadian were
>>permitted a handgun the first thing they would do with it is rob
>>a convenience store and then procede to murder his neighbors.
>> It is strange to discover Canadians must be kept from handguns
>>because of their inherently criminal nature.
>No, Mr. Giwer, we have just observed the result of widely
>available handguns in the land of our neighbours to the south,
>and not been overly impressed.
And were Canadians to have similar access their true criminal
natures would come out. I don’t see any other point to you
position. Were that not the case you folks would have no problem
with permitting Canadians easy access to handguns.
But then your real reason is hardly a secret. You just cover it
up with this kind of santimony.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 16:37:04 PDT 1996
Article: 78478 of can.general
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,edm.general,ab.general,can.general,tor.general,van.general,calgary.general
Subject: Re: Guns and Liberty
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 19:23:31 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 12:23:35 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:39029 ab.general:9696 can.general:78478 van.general:8726
Matt Cundill
>Matt Giwer wrote:
>
>> Another person who believes that if the average Canadian were
>> permitted a handgun the first thing they would do with it is rob
>> a convenience store and then procede to murder his neighbors.
>It doesn’t have to be the average Canadian, it doesn’t have to be the
>first time they get the gun. It just has to happen once. If you like to
>play with guns on a Sunday Afternoon… great. The U.S. has tens of
>thousands of handgun murders every year because the average American CAN
>get a handgun. C’mon people… use the math!
All I observed is the obvious. That Canadians would be just like
Americans if they had similar access to guns. Or are you saying
there is something inherently different about Canadians?
Why don’t you give the real reason for a change?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 17:08:59 PDT 1996
Article: 45900 of can.politics
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.webdirect.ca!news.challenge.com!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!oleane!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,can.politics
Subject: Re: Les Griswold: Leader
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 07:46:27 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <4ngvmo$pu[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 2:48:32 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:20323 alt.discrimination:47082 alt.revisionism:37723 alt.skinheads:23741 can.politics:45900
[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes…
>>[email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>>>(Matt Giwer) wrote:
>>
>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >Please learn to use your editor, Mr. Giwer. 163 IQ should make it easy
>>>for you.
>>>>
>>>> When the messenger to me has used his, I do. When they do not, I
>>>> do not. I note that you have only posted to me.
>>>>
>>>> What point do you think you are demonstrating by this?
>>>>
>>>I am demonstrating that you are a rude, insensitive, childish clod. And
>>>demonstrating it quite well, I think.
>>>
>>>I edited my post to *you*, Mr. Giwer. You however, quoted the entire post
>>>back. Therefore your “When the messenger to me has used his, I do. When
>>>they do not, I do not” is yet another one of your lies.
>>
>>>Go away, little man. You’re way out of your league here.
>>
>> And none of your fellow holohuggers will disagree with you and
>>thus encourage you.
> That is because she is not wrong here. there is quite a bit of
> disagreement among the people you call holohuggers – you just don’t see
> it or pretend not to see it. I, for example, made it clear to Gord
> Mcfee that he ought to sue you or shut up about it already.
What does an idiot claim that the court will take judicial notice
of a violation of internet etiquette have to do with substantive
matters of holocaust claims?
Mike Stein
> has slapped me on the wrist several times for errors I have made. I
> corrected marty kelley not long ago for an incorrect response he made.
> (to you I believe). I am confident there are dozens of other examples
> out there.
To follow the rule that has been applied to me, quote them or the
do not exist.
> As Sara has said, “go away little man.”
It is only what she dreams her cunt were like.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 19:12:19 PDT 1996
Article: 53257 of soc.culture.jewish
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!in2p3.fr!swidir.switch.ch!swsbe6.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!news.be.innet.net!bofh.dot!INbe.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,soc.culture.jewish,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.current-events,soc.culture.israel,ba.israelis,alt.security.terrorism
Subject: Re: Not a miracle (Was Re: Israeli attack on Civilans — US Planes in Jordan)
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 20:11:38 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 3:11:41 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:39037 soc.culture.jewish:53257 alt.politics.nationalism.white:20795 soc.culture.israel:34877
[email protected] (Boris Berkman) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wtote:
>> It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
>> the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>It is not a question of how many Germans knew of the fact 6 out of 12
>million Jews were exterminated nor it is a miracle some bastards are
>denying this fact today…
Why would you post that to me?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 21:18:30 PDT 1996
Article: 374570 of talk.politics.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.inc.net!uwm.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,alt.discrimination,alt.politics.socialism.trotsky,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.discrimination,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.culture.african.american,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory
Subject: Re: The Bell Curve
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 05:26:05 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 100
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4jngh5[email protected]> <4mmb[email protected]> <3190[email protected]> <4n5[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 12:28:25 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca rec.arts.books:102108 alt.discrimination:47072 alt.politics.socialism.trotsky:9843 alt.politics.usa.misc:82397 alt.politics.clinton:235051 alt.politics.libertarian:164561 alt.politics.usa.republican:198685 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:306974 soc.culture.african.american:117140 talk.politics.misc:374570 talk.politics.theory:62723
Bell Curve Welfare
by
Matt Giwer (c) 1995 <3/29>
I have recently had the good fortune to meet an evil welfare
worker. She is evil because she agrees with me about the welfare
system. She is also familiar with and opened minded about in
reading The Bell Curve.
A funny thing, the welfare system reflects the findings in
the book but not as you might imagine. The welfare system is
like most any other government system. Although popular wisdom
has it that one only has to show up and apply that it not the
case.
The method of getting benefits, the maximum benefits, is not
that clear. Take for example applying for food stamps. One of
the qualifying questions (the answer to which no one checks) is,
do you share meals with others in the household? It does not
matter if you have been buying the beans and sharing them, yes is
the wrong answer. No matter what, the answer is no.
It turns out that the smartest of the poor know all of the
answers for all of the questions for every benefit. And, as you
might expect, they get all the benefits to which the law
“entitles” them. The less smart, to be polite, do not know the
right answers nor even everything the law would permit them.
And thus the bell curve of welfare. Were welfare to take
care of the truly unemployable then there would be a different
means test. Anyone who smart enough to understand the welfare
system is smart enough to figure out the MacDonald’s system and
is disqualified. There would be house to house searches for
those not receiving benefits and, upon finding they do not
understand the system, would be awarded every benefit.
Obviously that is an unworkable system. But then the system
we do have rewards those who legitimately could be doing
something else. And this supports a suggestion in the book to
simplify all regulatory processes so that people can deal with
them rather than making it a test of getting through the maze of
regulations. It is clear that getting welfare benefits is in
fact such a test and that it selects for those least in need of
those benefits.
As you might not expect, the welfare class has a group
wisdom about the welfare system. Not only a wisdom where a close
neighborhood or social gathering place would have work matters as
a common discussion topic, discussions of welfare take their
place. It is like everyone works for the same boss and everyone
is sharing how to get on the good side of that boss. If you
think about it, it is hardly surprising the income related
matters whether from work or for free would be a primary topic of
discussion.
But again, the smartest learn the quickest, can find the
most obscure benefits, know the most sympathetic social workers,
everything you would expect from a good employee. As they can
master a system that is not designed to be simple and the
interpersonal relationships and when to invoke their rights just
what is it that disqualifies them from working?
At this point in any discussion the apologists for welfare
usually bring up the physically disabled, those with mental
problems and any other worst case they can think of. Guess what?
By the present system, even though those may be the most
deserving, they are also the least receiving.
Now let me make form a question. There are fixed dollars to
spend (or the case of welfare, borrow) on the needy. The
following are two disabilities. The first is a double leg
amputee who can not clean himself or his apartment nor always
successfully get on to the toilet resulting in his apartment
being covered with his one feces. The second case a woman whose
only impediment to working is a child. Question. Which is the
most deserving of limited assets?
And before anyone asks, the first case is not only true it
is worse than presented.
In the first case, there is no “program” to do a minimal
clean up of his apartment. It will remain that way until he ages
into one of the programs that would cover him. There probably
are programs and services out there that would help him but he
does not know how to find them and people have to seek out all
but emergency services for themselves. In the second case there
is no handicap, no impediment, to work save finding a neighbor to
care for the child.
Perhaps I have a perverted sense of need but I see no reason
why the system we have should favor the mother simply because
there is a program for mothers and no program for double
amputees. Clearly there are programs for the physically
handicapped, they are private not public but our low end bell
curve double amputee can’t connect with one. Our high end bell
curve mother knows enough that having different sex children gets
her a greater housing allowance as separate bedrooms are approved
by the system.
By the very nature of our welfare system is that it does not
care for the most needy, the truly needy. I see no reason to
continue it it was it is. Reforms that cut off the high end bell
curve welfare types will not harm the low end ones. It will not
help them either but at least they break even. Turning matters
over to the states allows for 50 times the experimentation to
find solutions to the real problems.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 21:18:32 PDT 1996
Article: 374588 of talk.politics.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!loki.tor.hookup.net!hookup!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!jussieu.fr!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.politics.reform,alt.activism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.guns
Subject: Re: #Dying Teen’s Hunting Trip Called Cruel ‘death wish’
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 06:48:02 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 1:50:10 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.misc:374588 alt.politics.libertarian:164571 alt.politics.democrats.d:76901 alt.politics.usa.republican:198713 alt.politics.usa.congress:37833 alt.politics.reform:68863 alt.activism:47015 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:306994
[email protected] (John Nahay) wrote:
>Jim Kennemur ([email protected]) wrote:
>: Make-A-Wish foundation president James Gordon declined to be
>: interviewed. But in a prepared statement, he said the foundation,
>: which has helped 38,000 youngsters, “grants wishes to children up to
>: 18 years of age who have life-threatening illnesses. Our wishes are
>: limited only by the child’s imagination, and often reflect the
>: activities and way of life to which the child is accustomed.
>Would the assholes at Make-a-Wish Foundation honor the teenager’s request
>if he wanted to purchase of pornographic magazines, something which
>physically hurts NO one? I’m sure that those shitheads would be up in
>arms over that. Too bad James Gordon was not on that Valujet flight
>that crashed in Florida.
Exactly the attitude expected from a tree hugger. May you some
day have the opportunity to hug a Kodiak.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 21:18:33 PDT 1996
Article: 374634 of talk.politics.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!loki.tor.hookup.net!nic.wat.hookup.net!hookup!news.umbc.edu!haven.umd.edu!purdue!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.politics.reform,alt.activism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.guns
Subject: Re: #Dying Teen’s Hunting Trip Called Cruel ‘death wish’
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 06:15:46 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 1:17:52 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.misc:374634 alt.politics.libertarian:164599 alt.politics.democrats.d:76925 alt.politics.usa.republican:198767 alt.politics.usa.congress:37852 alt.politics.reform:68887 alt.activism:47032 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:307045
[email protected] (Jim Kennemur) wrote:
>Dying Teen’s Hunting Trip Called Cruel ‘death wish’
>Louis Sahagun of The Los Angeles Times, May 11, 1996.
One hopes he bags the limit.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 21:18:34 PDT 1996
Article: 374665 of talk.politics.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!news.umbc.edu!haven.umd.edu!purdue!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.politics.reform,alt.activism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.guns
Subject: Re: #Dying Teen’s Hunting Trip Called Cruel ‘death wish’
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 06:45:18 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 1:47:26 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.misc:374665 alt.politics.libertarian:164622 alt.politics.democrats.d:76943 alt.politics.usa.republican:198800 alt.politics.usa.congress:37862 alt.politics.reform:68901 alt.activism:47043 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:307078
[email protected] (Jim Kennemur) wrote:
>On 17 May 1996 09:23:07 -0700, [email protected] (Theodore R.
>Krueger) wrote:
>>In article
>>Mark Shaw
>>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>>[email protected] (Jim Kennemur) wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 15 May 1996 01:45:03 GMT, [email protected] (Mark Shaw) wrote:
>>
>>>>>Sounds like the hunting trip of a lifetime. I wish the kid luck.
>>
>>>>I think its so nice that he wants to kill another living creature
>>>>before he dies himself. This whole sad affair says a lot about the
>>>>cult of gun worship here in Amerika.
>>
>>>You a vegetarian, Mr. Kennemur?
>>
>>>If so, great — ’cause that means you’ve at least got some solid moral
>>>justification for this attitude of yours. If not, well….
>>
>>Why does he have justification if he is a vegetarian?
>>
>>Don’t they kill and eat plants?
>>Aren’t plants living things?
>>Aren’t all living things imbued with “The Force?”
>>
>>Seriously though, I can not figure out why vegetarians feel so
>>morally superior to meat eaters.
>>
>>It must be a religious thing.
>So you gun loons are saying that the boy with the brain-tumor (sounds
>like perfect NRA material) is going to eat that bear after he shoots
>it?
The kid is only dying. Ridicule him. When he grows up he will
smash your face.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 21:18:35 PDT 1996
Article: 374668 of talk.politics.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.politics.reform,alt.activism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.guns
Subject: Re: #Dying Teen’s Hunting Trip Called Cruel ‘death wish’
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 06:16:39 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 1:18:45 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.misc:374668 alt.politics.libertarian:164625 alt.politics.democrats.d:76945 alt.politics.usa.republican:198803 alt.politics.usa.congress:37864 alt.politics.reform:68903 alt.activism:47044 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:307081
[email protected] (Jim Kennemur) wrote:
>On Wed, 15 May 1996 01:45:03 GMT, [email protected] (Mark Shaw) wrote:
>>Sounds like the hunting trip of a lifetime. I wish the kid luck.
>I think its so nice that he wants to kill another living creature
>before he dies himself. This whole sad affair says a lot about the
>cult of gun worship here in Amerika.
>What’s next, hookers and crack?
Where are the licenses sold? Or are they protected species for
liberals?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 21:18:36 PDT 1996
Article: 374683 of talk.politics.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!chi-news.cic.net!news.math.psu.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.clinton,alt.president.clinton,alt.fan.newt-gingrich,alt.fan.g-gordon-liddy,alt.current-events.usa,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.politics.usa.constitution,alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Nutty Newt’s re-election attempt! Boot Noot in ’96!
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 05:20:04 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 12:22:24 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:307098 alt.politics.democrats.d:76958 alt.politics.usa.republican:198824 alt.politics.clinton:235138 alt.president.clinton:71678 alt.fan.g-gordon-liddy:29210 alt.current-events.usa:14137 talk.politics.misc:374683 alt.politics.usa.misc:82463 alt.politics.libertarian:164636 alt.politics.reform:68912 alt.politics.usa.congress:37869 alt.politics.usa.constitution:62299 alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich:55698 talk.politics.libertarian:85611
[email protected] (RedIrishRose) wrote:
>In article
>>Path:
>> news.aristotle.net!news.mid.net!newsfeed.ksu.ksu.edu!news.physics.uiowa.edu!ma
>>th.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!news.haverfor
>>d.edu!s55.union_roberts.haverford.edu!user
>>From: [email protected] (Jacob Vaccaro)
>>Newsgroups:
>>alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.usa.constitution
>>Subject: Re: Nutty Newt’s re-election attempt! Boot Noot in ’96!
>>Date: 13 May 1996 06:21:28 GMT
>>Organization: Haverford College
>>Lines: 11
>>Message-ID:
>>In article <4[email protected]>, [email protected] (Gerry Clough) wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Obviously, you do not understand the English Language. I will try to
>>> make it very simple for those whose grammar studies were cut short
>>> somewhere along the line.
>>>
>>> ALL PEOPLE WHO VOTE DEMOCRATIC ARE IMMORAL.
>>
>> Well, I’m glad we got _that_ cleared up.
>Hmmmmnnnn…. Perhaps you (the writer of the original message) have missed out
>on basic human phsychology and study of the basic premises of the U.S.
>Constitution.
>
>Far-reaching wide band generalizations are almost never true, and our
>beloved U.S. Constitution was written with the purpose of prohibiting
>people like yourself taking over the morality and religious alignment of
>the whole country.
>Some of us vote Democrat because we refuse to join the Pat Robertson club in
>force feeding religion to the masses. Being that our Constitution guarantees
>freedom of religion and The Declaration of Independence the right to pursue
>happiness, we feel it to be grossly WRONG and IMMORAL to insist that all
>people convert to our particular brand of religion.
Save for a minor problem. Some 62% of the born again crowd give
their political affiliation as Democrat. So by your reasoning
you are supporting the wrong party.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 21:18:37 PDT 1996
Article: 374699 of talk.politics.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!overload.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsserver.jvnc.net!newsserver2.jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics,li,Soc.couples.intercultural,ca.politics,sci.physics,rec.arts.books,alt.discrimination,alt.politics.socialism.trotsky,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.discrimination,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.culture.african.american,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.theory
Subject: Re: The Bell Curve
Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 05:40:45 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <4n5tv[email protected]> <4n7sv[email protected]> <4n83h[email protected]> <4n9[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 17 10:35:11 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca sci.physics:99902 rec.arts.books:102113 alt.discrimination:47085 alt.politics.socialism.trotsky:9856 alt.politics.usa.misc:82474 alt.politics.clinton:235149 alt.politics.libertarian:164647 alt.politics.usa.republican:198844 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:307111 soc.culture.african.american:117168 talk.politics.misc:374699 talk.politics.theory:62743
Jim Halperin
> The book will be in book stores in October. In the meantime my
>publisher, Ivy Press, has posted the novel on the Web where it can be
>read FREE OF CHARGE IN ITS ENTIRETY by anyone willing to participate in
>an electronic survey. Howard Gardner of Harvard and Robert Sternberg of
>Yale have both given it glowing reviews, as have over 90% of those who
>have already read it on the Web since the site opened last Friday.
> The Truth Machine is mostly entertainment, so don’t expect a
>heavy tome. There’s a lot of drama, interesting characters, conflict,
>and non-gratuitous sex and violence. I’m told it is a “page-turner”
>first and foremost. Anyone interested, please go to:
The “threat” to market a voice stress analyzer as part of a
wristwatch was made and withdrawn in the early 1980s. It was on
all the talk shows at the time. What have I missed?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 21:18:38 PDT 1996
Article: 376177 of talk.politics.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!loki.tor.hookup.net!nic.ott.hookup.net!hookup!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.origins,alt.usenet.kooks,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Yehuda Silver visits comp.theory
Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 02:31:57 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl4-21.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Mon May 20 7:31:02 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.origins:124457 alt.usenet.kooks:24080 talk.politics.misc:376177
[email protected] (Yehuda SIlver) wrote:
>Evan Steeg ([email protected]) wrote:
>: In article
>: Michael L. Siemon
>: >
>: I agree, and already emailed an apology to Mr. Silver yesterday for
>: having hypothesized out loud about the possibility of cheating. There
>: is no firm evidence that he or his friend was cheating *per se*, and
>: the presumption of innocence ought to be respected.
>I am not interested in an apology, nor did I ask for one. I certainly
>couldn’t
>care less of your opinions of me, nor do I ask for an apology for them!
>The only thing I asked for was an ADMISSION, that
>evolution-religionists
> such as yourself
>Confuse your “personal religious beliefs” with “facts”
>and that you are willing to accuse (not hypothesize aas you now claim
>and assume as FACt, as you did) evolution-religious beliefs
>and attack “heretics” to your religion!
>You mistaken claimed FACTS about my background was typical!
>I wanted you to admit to YOURSELF, that you jump to comclusions without
>facts!
>I couldn’t care less for an apology, since you think that YOU are a
>monkeys cousin, your opoinions of yourself are so low alreadym, that
>your opinionns of me, do not concern me at all)!
You are as whacked out on this subject as you are on Israel.
—————————————————————
Live fast, love well, and have a glorious Website.
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/
Commentary from the right side of the curve
Maintaining http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/tech/ (tips and tricks for webs)
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/mgiwer4/ (eye candy, blantant advertising)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/ (my son)
From [email protected] Fri May 24 21:18:39 PDT 1996
Article: 376261 of talk.politics.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!news.nstn.ca!coranto.ucs.mun.ca!news.unb.ca!torn!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.origins,alt.usenet.kooks,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: What is science?
Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 03:25:33 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 126
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <4[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl4-21.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Mon May 20 8:17:35 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.origins:124470 alt.usenet.kooks:24086 talk.politics.misc:376261
[email protected] (Yehuda SIlver) wrote:
>Alex Duncan ([email protected]) wrote:
>: In article <[email protected]> Yehuda SIlver, [email protected]
>: writes:
>: >Science requries a hypythesis to be confirmed or fasified based
>: >on emprical evidence!
>: >
>: >Any “history” is NOT a Science!
>: >
>: >To begin with, at best evolution could be called “history”
>: Let’s see — I have an idea, based upon my study of comparative
>: morphology, that Old World Monkeys and Apes are more closely related to
>: one another than either of them are to New World Monkeys. How could I
>: test the idea?
>: Wait, I know — I could compare protein structure. I could sequence
>: mitochondrial genes. I could do DNA-DNA hybridization.
>: I predict based upon my hypothesis that such experiments would fail to
>: disprove that Old World monkeys are more closely related to apes than
>: they are to New World monkeys. Alternatively, I could say that I predict
>: the protein structure, mitochondrial genome and nuclear DNA of Old World
>: Monkeys will be more similar to those of apes than to New World monkeys.
>All what you could show is that the DNA matches by YOUR definition are
>Closer!
>: Perhaps you might explain how this wouldn’t qualify as science?
>Most definitions of sceince (as opposed to history) require experiments
>that verify the theorie’s PREDICITONS, not merely explain the past!
>What you are doing, is like English professors comparing the
>”witing styles” of Shakesphere, vs, Marlowe
>computing the number of verbs, adjectives etc to
>see if they are the same or different people!
>Or comparing a new found poem, by computer analysis, for
>”language patterns” to see if it’s really Shakesphere!
>
>This is ENGLISH lITERATURE, not Science!
>It may or may not be valid, but it is definately NOT science!
As you are completely and totally ignorant of science, how would
you know?
>Newton’s theory was fully accepted only AFTER his precise predictions
>of the date of Halley’s comet’s return,
>came true (after his death)
Proof of ignorance.
>Einsten himself new better than to rely on his
>”after the fact’ explanations of the Michaelson- Morley
>data, Lorenz had already explained it with his “contraction”
>(special relativity)
>or his explanation for the shift of pereihelion in the orbit
>of Mercury,
>but his general relativity, only gained acceptance after his prdection
>about the bending of light, observable only during a FUTURE eclipse
>was confirmed!
More ignorance.
>Darwin himself tried to get around this problem by making
>a “prediction” that MANY in between major species “misisng links”
>would be found and that FUTURE discoverys of many “transitional forms”
>as he called them, which should be the MAJORITY, would be found!
More ignorance.
>At the time, when there were only a Dozen Paleontologists in the
>entire world, the lack of such previous finds, made his future
>predicition seem a “verifyable hypothesis” to him, and he was sure it
>would work!
In fact there were none. There were however thousands of
professional naturalists and being an amateur naturalist was a
very popular passtime all over Europe and the Americas. More
ignorancc.
>But now, tens of thousand of paleontologists, later, and a “centenial”
>exhibit in the British museam that basically repudiated Darwin based
>on Darwin’s OWN criteria
>has sent the paleontologists
>back to the “drawing board” with all sorts of non-Darwinian
>dragons and monstors
>like
>”punctuated equillibrium”
>emerging!
More of the expected ignorance.
>But even “Darwin’s method” wasn’t really science!
As you know nothing of science, how would you know?
>The failed experimints in the labs to produce anything but
>bacteria color-changes in insects
Perhaps you could outline these “experiments” he conducted?
>(streaching the definition of what is usually meant by species in the
>”creation-evolution” debate) i.e.
>an animal higher species that reproducibly mates only within the species)
>also destroy his “predicition” as did the fossil record!
You are a consumate, ignorant, Genesis thumping, scientific
illiterate. And yet you pretend to talk abous science. Get back
in your hovel.
—————————————————————
Live fast, love well, and have a glorious Website.
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/
Commentary from the right side of the curve
Maintaining http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/tech/ (tips and tricks for webs)
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/mgiwer4/ (eye candy, blantant advertising)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/ (my son)
From [email protected] Fri May 24 21:18:40 PDT 1996
Article: 378242 of talk.politics.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,tx.politics,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.medicine,talk.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.drugs,alt.philosophy.objectivism
Subject: Re: Why Libertarians Favor Dictatorship
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 07:12:00 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 2:11:58 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.theory:63498 talk.politics.misc:378242 talk.politics.medicine:35966 talk.politics.libertarian:87540 talk.politics.guns:262769 talk.politics.drugs:47493 alt.philosophy.objectivism:68715
[email protected] (Mark Metzler) wrote:
>Libertarian philosophy is a formula for bringing about dictatorship….
>dictatorship by corporations.
>For modern corporations are anything but democratic. They are big
>dictatorships. (The former Soviet Union could best be described as
>one large monopoly corporate dictatorship.)
>Being against ‘Big Government’ (‘Big Democracy’) is a matter of
>being in favor of turning our society’s decision-making over to the
>corporations (‘Big Dictatorship’), for when big governemnt is gone,
>all decisions will be made by our ‘owners’, the corporate CEO’s, and
>not the individual.
As was brought out in the objections to the starter minimum pay
debate the employers of 70% of the country would be able to use
it. And that was just the official small businesses not the “big
corporations.”
Since these “big corporations” control so little and they do not
organize their efforts just what power does an idiot marxist like
you imagine they would have?
>It is ironical that only government intervention can bring about a
>’free-market’. For, when left to themselves, the corporate sector will
>always gobble each other up and form monopolies or other engage in other
>practices to control the market. Only government intervention can
>free this log jam.
Thus spake Marxithrusta.
The only problems we have ever had have been when governments
have cooperated with (been bought by) corporations and have
legislated in favor of the highest bidder. Under libertarian
government that would be strictly forbidden.
There would be no difference between an employer and an employee
in any manner. No employer would be required to be a surrogate
tax collector any more than would any employee. Engaging in
business would not be permitted to be an excuse for
discrimination.
—————————————————————
Live fast, love well, and have a glorious Website.
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/
Commentary from the right side of the curve
Maintaining http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/tech/ (tips and tricks for webs)
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/mgiwer4/ (eye candy, blantant advertising)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/ (my son)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/mega/ (for internet advertising)
From [email protected] Fri May 24 21:18:41 PDT 1996
Article: 378243 of talk.politics.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,tx.politics,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.medicine,talk.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.drugs,alt.philosophy.objectivism
Subject: Re: Why Libertarians Favor Dictatorship
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 07:15:27 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 2:15:24 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.theory:63499 talk.politics.misc:378243 talk.politics.medicine:35967 talk.politics.libertarian:87541 talk.politics.guns:262770 talk.politics.drugs:47494 alt.philosophy.objectivism:68716
[email protected] (Gconklin) wrote:
>In article <4nvp0c$[email protected]> [email protected] (Mark Metzler) writes:
>>Libertarian philosophy is a formula for bringing about dictatorship….
>>dictatorship by corporations.
>>
> Libertarians put forth the most perfect control mechanism
>invented: total control by people you cannot elect, do not know,
>but who control governments and business at the same time.
> And medical care.
It is a completely Marxist presumption that business would
control government and an activity that would be absolutely
forbidden under a libertarian government.
But then, in your ignorance, you will lie to the contrary.
—————————————————————
Live fast, love well, and have a glorious Website.
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/
Commentary from the right side of the curve
Maintaining http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/tech/ (tips and tricks for webs)
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/mgiwer4/ (eye candy, blantant advertising)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/ (my son)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/mega/ (for internet advertising)
From [email protected] Fri May 24 21:18:42 PDT 1996
Article: 378253 of talk.politics.misc
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!icarus.lon.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,tx.politics,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.medicine,talk.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.guns,talk.politics.drugs,alt.philosophy.objectivism
Subject: Re: Why Libertarians Favor Dictatorship
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 07:28:57 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 61
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4n[email protected]> <4[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 2:28:55 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca talk.politics.theory:63502 talk.politics.misc:378253 talk.politics.medicine:35970 talk.politics.libertarian:87547 talk.politics.guns:262779 talk.politics.drugs:47498 alt.philosophy.objectivism:68720
[email protected] (Mark Metzler) wrote:
>William House ([email protected]) wrote:
>: When Big Brother isn’t taxing my proporty anymore to pay for Socialist
>: Schools, I’ll just sit back and grow a garden – smoke a joint – and
>: watch you go off to your corperation.
>: Ultimate Authority Corrupts Ultimatelly
>: – Be it Corperations or Governments!!!
>This is a good point, but note that Libertarians do very little to oppose
>corporate dictators.
That is because there are none save in the small minds of
marxists who look for them under their beds every night. You
paranoia is your business. When you project it to the world you
should expect it to be challenged. But then, I do not dislike
you, else I would agree with you, as that is the worst thing one
can do to a paranoid.
>In government, there are some checks and balances,
>(although they don’t always work as well as we might like), but in
>corporations there are very few checks and balances, unless they are
>put there by government regulations.
You finally give a slight sign of understanding …
So getting rid of government,
>while leaving corporate power unchecked, results in worse abuses of
>power.
but lose it in the rest of the sentence. No government
regulations then no power. You said it yourself but it is too
hard for you to admit or to deal with.
>Good luck with your garden, and your joint, and voting with your feet!
You can not face what you have admitted, that government
regulation is the root of the problem.
You need a long rest in a place where all your needs will be
cared for.
—————————————————————
Live fast, love well, and have a glorious Website.
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/
Commentary from the right side of the curve
Maintaining http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/tech/ (tips and tricks for webs)
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/mgiwer4/ (eye candy, blantant advertising)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/ (my son)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/mega/ (for internet advertising)
From [email protected] Fri May 24 22:01:15 PDT 1996
Article: 261142 of talk.politics.guns
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.org.batf,alt.politics.usa.constitution,talk.politics.guns
Subject: The Right to keep and bear Arms
Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 06:57:41 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl7-23.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 18 11:57:30 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:307575 alt.politics.clinton:235475 alt.politics.libertarian:164958 alt.politics.org.batf:14394 alt.politics.usa.constitution:62513 talk.politics.guns:261142
Now available in a text only version of the following URL on
the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/mgiwer5/q0.html
This is purely an experiment. I figured my costs, doubled
them and came up with $5 US cash or money order, NO CHECKS unless
certified. Unless I have missed a lot in my time, doubling the
estimate of costs is the break even point. That means, no profit
for me. I am not interested in making money on this distribution
— but I would not turn it down either.
This will be in booklet format, 8 1/2 x 11 folded in half
sideways and stapled. This is 67 pages of pro-gun related
material. Browse the link and see for yourself.
If you have any further questions, want reproducible copies,
whatever, contact me at [email protected].
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 22:01:16 PDT 1996
Article: 262168 of talk.politics.guns
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.org.batf,alt.politics.usa.constitution,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Progun literature
Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 07:01:04 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Wed May 22 12:00:45 AM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:309260 alt.politics.clinton:236814 alt.politics.libertarian:166102 alt.politics.org.batf:14409 alt.politics.usa.constitution:63322 talk.politics.guns:262168
Now available in a text only version of the following URL on
the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/mgiwer5/q0.html
This is purely an experiment. I figured my costs, doubled
them and came up with $5 cash or money order, NO CHECKS unless
certified. Unless I have missed a lot in my time, doubling the
estimate of costs is the break even point. That means, no profit
for me. I am not interested in making money on this distribution
— but I would not turn it down either.
This will be in booklet format, 8 1/2 x 11 folded in half
sideways and stapled. This is 67 pages of pro-gun material.
Browse the link and see for yourself.
If you have any further questions, want reproducible copies,
whatever, contact me at [email protected].
Mail to Matt Giwer, #27, 14205 Nebraska Ave., Tampa FL
33613.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 22:01:17 PDT 1996
Article: 262768 of talk.politics.guns
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!jussieu.fr!oleane!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: gun righs material available
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 07:48:30 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 12:48:28 AM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Now available in a text only version of the following URL on
the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/mgiwer5/q0.html
This is purely an experiment. I figured my costs, doubled
them and came up with $5 cash or money order, NO CHECKS unless
certified. Unless I have missed a lot in my time, doubling the
estimate of costs is the break even point. That means, no profit
for me. I am not interested in making money on this distribution
— but I would not turn it down either.
This will be in booklet format, 8 1/2 x 11 folded in half
sideways and stapled. This is 67 pages of pro-gun material.
Browse the link and see for yourself.
If you have any further questions, want reproducible copies,
whatever, contact me at [email protected].
Mail to Matt Giwer, #27, 14205 Nebraska Ave., Tampa FL
33613.
—————————————————————
Live fast, love well, and have a glorious Website.
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/
Commentary from the right side of the curve
Maintaining http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/tech/ (tips and tricks for webs)
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/mgiwer4/ (eye candy, blantant advertising)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/ (my son)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/mega/ (for internet advertising)
From [email protected] Fri May 24 22:01:18 PDT 1996
Article: 263022 of talk.politics.guns
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!bofh.dot!insync!news.io.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: strange Canadians
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 06:57:18 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 11:57:17 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Has anyone missed the claim by Canadians that their strict gun
control law are what saves them from having a crime rate like
America?
So let me ask all those Canadians the following question.
Why do you believe that the instant you Canadians have access to
guns you will go on a violent crime rampage?
—————————————————————
Live fast, love well, and have a glorious Website.
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/
Commentary from the right side of the curve
Maintaining http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/tech/ (tips and tricks for webs)
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/mgiwer4/ (eye candy, blantant advertising)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/ (my son)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/mega/ (for internet advertising)
From [email protected] Fri May 24 22:43:29 PDT 1996
Article: 102031 of alt.politics.correct
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!surfnet.nl!sun4nl!xs4all!mail
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.flame,alt.syntax.tactical,alt.gothic,ba.israelis
Subject: Re: Holocaust?
Followup-To: alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.smokers,alt.revisionism,alt.flame,alt.syntax.tactical,alt.gothic,ba.israelis
Date: 22 May 1996 02:46:12 +0200
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 39
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nlbi9$q3t@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com> <4nlmje$[email protected]> <19MAY1996[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: basement.replay.com
X-XS4ALL-Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 02:46:14 MET DST
X-Authentication-Warning: infinity.c2.org: remail set sender to nobody using -f
X-To: [email protected]
Remailed-By: The NEXUS-Berkeley Remailer
Complaints-To: remailer-owner
Errors-To: [email protected]
X-Message-ID: <[email protected]>
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl6-30.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 19 8:25:16 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
X-Mail2News-Errors-To: [email protected]
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.correct:102031 alt.politics.usa.misc:83590 alt.flame:12056 alt.syntax.tactical:1575 alt.gothic:93920
[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Ehrlich606) writes…
>>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>>(Matt Giwer) writes:
>[snip]
>>
>>Even though I think some his posts are junk, the man deserves to be heard,
>>ESPECIALLY here. I will watch his posts, too, and if I catch him screwing
>>around I will say so, just to be fair. And in return, his opposite
>>numbers should try to answer his arguments without extended invective.
>>That means everybody, please?
> Sorry, you walked in on the middle of this dance and missed the opening
> few numbers. There were several months where discussion was attempted.
> Giwer simply twisted responses and spewed out trolling jabs. The
> current state of affairs grew from that.
> I will discuss the Holocaust forever with Tommy or others who will
> actually discuss it. Giwer twists it to continue argument. I have no
> interest in feeding that psychosis.
Which of course is a clear falsification of what happened.
I was clearly called a nazi and an antisemite for questioning
anything contrary to the Nizkor Creed. There were ZERO jabs
before that as I was specifically waiting for what I knew would
come before using any of them and very carefully refrained from
using any of them until I was called the above names.
But of course you holohuggers will claim otherwise. And you
folks even have your nazi-like files on me at Nizkor. How
JDL-like.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Fri May 24 22:43:30 PDT 1996
Article: 102044 of alt.politics.correct
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!surfnet.nl!sun4nl!xs4all!mail
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.flame,alt.syntax.tactical,alt.gothic,ba.israelis
Subject: Re: Europe has always hated Jews
Followup-To: alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.smokers,alt.revisionism,alt.flame,alt.syntax.tactical,alt.gothic,ba.israelis
Date: 22 May 1996 03:11:02 +0200
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 61
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4no[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: basement.replay.com
X-XS4ALL-Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 03:11:08 MET DST
X-Authentication-Warning: infinity.c2.org: remail set sender to nobody using -f
X-To: [email protected]
Remailed-By: The NEXUS-Berkeley Remailer
Complaints-To: remailer-owner
Errors-To: [email protected]
X-Message-ID: <[email protected]>
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl6-30.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 19 10:59:07 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
X-Mail2News-Errors-To: [email protected]
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.correct:102044 alt.politics.usa.misc:83619 alt.flame:12063 alt.syntax.tactical:1578 alt.gothic:93923
[email protected] (Yale F. Edeiken) wrote:
>> [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes:
>>
>>
>> There were a few Jewish settlements in Greece and Turkey which
>> were considered the Hellenist part of the Med, not Europe early
>> in the first century.
> You are incorrect. For one thing the largest Jewish settlements were in
>Egypt.
The subject was Europe, killfile challenged one.
>> They are not the ancestors of European
>> Jews. The direct ancestors are those who migrated up through the
>> Eastern Empire behind the Muslims starting in the 9th century.
> You are incorrect.
As predicted, no evidence, mere refutation. Sounds like a Monty
Python routine.
>> About that time there were only a few pockets of non-Christian
>> religions left in Europe mainly the Norse and some of the
>> Russias.
> How about the Iberian penisula including much of what is now southern
>France?
As noted, it was following the Muslims, and said penisula is more
correctly called Spain.
>> And of course at least three people will come back claiming I
>> have no idea what I am talking about while refusing to post what
>> they believe to be the real history.
> Why bother?
As predicted.
>Others will post recognized historians who emphatically
>disagree with you; you will make abusive ipse dixit statements based entirely on
>you own appalling ignorance. Can you name a single historian who agrees with
>you?
> Suggested reading: “The Jews in the Roman World” Michael Grant.
>read it; you might learn something.
I suggest you read it yourself before you imply I am in error
without stating what you consider to be the truth. Until then,
Judenland, Uber Alles!
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:06:41 PDT 1996
Article: 12056 of alt.flame
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!surfnet.nl!sun4nl!xs4all!mail
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.flame,alt.syntax.tactical,alt.gothic,ba.israelis
Subject: Re: Holocaust?
Followup-To: alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.smokers,alt.revisionism,alt.flame,alt.syntax.tactical,alt.gothic,ba.israelis
Date: 22 May 1996 02:46:12 +0200
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 39
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nlbi9$q3t@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com> <4nlmje$[email protected]> <19MAY1996[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: basement.replay.com
X-XS4ALL-Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 02:46:14 MET DST
X-Authentication-Warning: infinity.c2.org: remail set sender to nobody using -f
X-To: [email protected]
Remailed-By: The NEXUS-Berkeley Remailer
Complaints-To: remailer-owner
Errors-To: [email protected]
X-Message-ID: <[email protected]>
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl6-30.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 19 8:25:16 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
X-Mail2News-Errors-To: [email protected]
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.correct:102031 alt.politics.usa.misc:83590 alt.flame:12056 alt.syntax.tactical:1575 alt.gothic:93920
[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Ehrlich606) writes…
>>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>>(Matt Giwer) writes:
>[snip]
>>
>>Even though I think some his posts are junk, the man deserves to be heard,
>>ESPECIALLY here. I will watch his posts, too, and if I catch him screwing
>>around I will say so, just to be fair. And in return, his opposite
>>numbers should try to answer his arguments without extended invective.
>>That means everybody, please?
> Sorry, you walked in on the middle of this dance and missed the opening
> few numbers. There were several months where discussion was attempted.
> Giwer simply twisted responses and spewed out trolling jabs. The
> current state of affairs grew from that.
> I will discuss the Holocaust forever with Tommy or others who will
> actually discuss it. Giwer twists it to continue argument. I have no
> interest in feeding that psychosis.
Which of course is a clear falsification of what happened.
I was clearly called a nazi and an antisemite for questioning
anything contrary to the Nizkor Creed. There were ZERO jabs
before that as I was specifically waiting for what I knew would
come before using any of them and very carefully refrained from
using any of them until I was called the above names.
But of course you holohuggers will claim otherwise. And you
folks even have your nazi-like files on me at Nizkor. How
JDL-like.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:06:43 PDT 1996
Article: 12063 of alt.flame
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!surfnet.nl!sun4nl!xs4all!mail
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.flame,alt.syntax.tactical,alt.gothic,ba.israelis
Subject: Re: Europe has always hated Jews
Followup-To: alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.smokers,alt.revisionism,alt.flame,alt.syntax.tactical,alt.gothic,ba.israelis
Date: 22 May 1996 03:11:02 +0200
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 61
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4no[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: basement.replay.com
X-XS4ALL-Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 03:11:08 MET DST
X-Authentication-Warning: infinity.c2.org: remail set sender to nobody using -f
X-To: [email protected]
Remailed-By: The NEXUS-Berkeley Remailer
Complaints-To: remailer-owner
Errors-To: [email protected]
X-Message-ID: <[email protected]>
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl6-30.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 19 10:59:07 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
X-Mail2News-Errors-To: [email protected]
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.correct:102044 alt.politics.usa.misc:83619 alt.flame:12063 alt.syntax.tactical:1578 alt.gothic:93923
[email protected] (Yale F. Edeiken) wrote:
>> [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes:
>>
>>
>> There were a few Jewish settlements in Greece and Turkey which
>> were considered the Hellenist part of the Med, not Europe early
>> in the first century.
> You are incorrect. For one thing the largest Jewish settlements were in
>Egypt.
The subject was Europe, killfile challenged one.
>> They are not the ancestors of European
>> Jews. The direct ancestors are those who migrated up through the
>> Eastern Empire behind the Muslims starting in the 9th century.
> You are incorrect.
As predicted, no evidence, mere refutation. Sounds like a Monty
Python routine.
>> About that time there were only a few pockets of non-Christian
>> religions left in Europe mainly the Norse and some of the
>> Russias.
> How about the Iberian penisula including much of what is now southern
>France?
As noted, it was following the Muslims, and said penisula is more
correctly called Spain.
>> And of course at least three people will come back claiming I
>> have no idea what I am talking about while refusing to post what
>> they believe to be the real history.
> Why bother?
As predicted.
>Others will post recognized historians who emphatically
>disagree with you; you will make abusive ipse dixit statements based entirely on
>you own appalling ignorance. Can you name a single historian who agrees with
>you?
> Suggested reading: “The Jews in the Roman World” Michael Grant.
>read it; you might learn something.
I suggest you read it yourself before you imply I am in error
without stating what you consider to be the truth. Until then,
Judenland, Uber Alles!
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:06:44 PDT 1996
Article: 12114 of alt.flame
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.flame,aus.flame,alt.skinheads,misc.immigration.usa,alt.politics.immigration,aus.flame.usa,alt.usa-sucks
Subject: Re: Web Site for Yank Defectors!
Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 05:19:40 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Tue May 21 10:19:22 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.flame:12114 alt.skinheads:24414 misc.immigration.usa:11854
[email protected] (Ken Livingston) wrote:
>[email protected] (Gregg) wrote:
>> On 13 May 1996 09:16:04 GMT, David Gibson posted:
>>
>> >Gregg ([email protected]) wrote:
>> >: On Sun, 12 May 1996 23:03:12 GMT, Ken Livingston posted:
>>
>> >: >You’re missing the point. All it takes is ONE crazy asshole with an
>> >: >automatic weapon. How many more crazy assholes with automatic
>> >: >weapons do you need before we attempt to put a stop to it?
>> >
>> >: I’m afraid we’ll always have the crazy assholes. And they’ll always
>> >: find a way to obtain or create a suitable weapon. How will your new
>> >: laws guarantee safety? How will the removal of the means of defense
>> >: from the hands of the law-abiding increase public safety?
>> >
>> > No, _some_ crazy assholes will manage to get a weapon. The idea
>> >is make the proportion of crazy assholes who can get a weapon as small as
>> >possible.
>>
>> … leaving the law-abiding majority defenseless against that smaller,
>> but always significant, number of assholes.
>Please don’t misunderstand. I am not advocating a ban on all guns, but I would
>like to see more restrictions placed on automatic weapons. I realize that no
>matter how tough the laws are, these laws cannot eliminate the possibility of
>another incident similar to that of Port Arthur. We can only hope that such
>laws will serve as a deterrent. And in the process, perhaps we attempt to
>restore a portion of the lost sense of security that society has suffered.
>JMHO.
In fact what you are playing with is no more than than the loss
of the pretension of a totally safe world. If the people
involved had been armed, it would never have happened. The bad
guy would have been very dead very fast.
What you may some day learn is that laws only disarm the law
abiding people. No law can protect you from the scoff law.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:14:13 PDT 1996
Article: 39004 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Critical Thinking (Re: My Letter to the New York Times)
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 06:49:44 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 95
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl8-20.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 11:49:43 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Michael L. Siemon) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] wrote:
>+Gee, moggin, how did they decide that what they had was “a scientist
>+making an effort at critical thinking?”
>+Or did Sokal’s article pass for “critical thinking?”
>There is lurking (in amused and ironic wait) a serious point related
>to the social construction of reality, and political/cultural causation
>in science (or more generally, in any field driven by canons of critical
>thought.)
>The general method, in a manner roughly analogous to the theoretical
>defense of the Anglo-American style of juriprudence, is that ideas
>proposed to a critical community aquire a (tentative) acceptance by
>reasonable rebuttal of all (known) cogent criticism. Best practice,
>in critical scholarship, is of course for the proposer of an idea to
>act (so far as possible) as its most stringent critic. That seldom
>actually happens, but every attempt at it will help to spare the idea-
>proposer from some embarrassing moments with regard to reasonable
>criticisms not anticipated. :-))
>Within some very wide limits, this method works quite well to sort out
>mere partisanship or authorial over-enthusiasm or even the dead hand
>of an “established” school of thought. Given some trust in sheer human
>orneriness and creativity, one can see in this a reasonable ground for
>the idea (common in science) of a rational convergence on something
>sufficiently close to “true” as to be (for the moment, and in practice)
>indistinguisable from it.
>But one kind of situation slips through the cracks of critical method.
>Suppose *all* participants in a discussion *share* a particular notion
>(which, for the sake of this discussion we will stipulate to be hare-
>brained and in fact out of contact with reality.) It becomes difficult
>in such cases for critics of an idea that (in fact) depends only on the
>specious agreement (versus mixing that in with other substantive stuff)
>to offer a compelling critique. One can argue, on purely formal and
>logical grounds, against the metaphysical shell-games of Parmenides or
>those (in panicy response to Parmenides :-)) by Aristotle and others.
>But without the compulsions of modern physical theory to force such a
>critique, people will tend to categorize purely formal objection as mere
>quibbling, and of no serious import. [Later, when formal critique is
>allied with substantive, the formalists may cry, Aha! but that really
>doesn’t help much, does it? :-)]
>If a convergence of “critical opinion” is driven somewhere by a common
>prejudice of the “critics” then indeed it may not be a convergence on
>”truth” — even in the chastely circumspect sense of “fact” in the
>definition common on talk.origin, out of Gould.
>Some of the nasty bits in the history of “science” (Aristotle’s thing
>about women and barbarians, perhaps :-), mid-19th century American
>racism infecting “human biology” certainly) can be parsed in terms of
>this critical failure. Notably, this kind of thing happens most in
>those studies that happen to involve human beings — surprise, surprise.
>[This is one reason that blunderbuss stupidities about sexism in physics
>– as opposed to the quite blatant sexism in Physics Departments! — are
>so off-the-wall idiotic. There is an attempt to beat a straw man with
>a helium balloon.]
>One of the reasons that “hard scientists” can get (overly, at times)
>snotty about “social sciences” is that it is precisely the *latter*
>that demonstrate the problem — such *human* critical lapses are more
>strictly controlled — almost [certainly not totally!] excluded — in
>physics and chemistry. Social scientists, or [ahem!] literary critics,
>trying to posture about physics in such matters look inherently like
>hypocrites.
>The irony is that the critical problem remains true, and even the best
>can tend to forget it — what we do not know HOW to question, we cannot
>question. And hence, cannot evaluate answers to. This *is* a limit on
>the degree to which critical theories can converge to truth or to some
>facsimile of practical knowledge. The point could be made in Kantian
>terms, or Wittgensteinian ones — or even in Derridan terms. It is a
>sound point: and even the philosophically naive workers in laboratory
>trenches seem to me to have a better understanding of it than any of
>the oh-so-literate who cannot manage to make sensible statements with
>respect to *any* real science.
>Bottom line (and this obviously applies, usually with full agreement
>by the participants, to science) — one *cannot* make any kind of
>cogent critique of something one does *not* understand.
>–
>Michael L. Siemon “In so far as people think they can see the
>[email protected] limits of human understanding”, they think
> of course that they can see beyond these.”
> — Ludwig Wittgenstein
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:14:14 PDT 1996
Article: 39013 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.webdirect.ca!news.challenge.com!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!oleane!hole.news.pipex.net!pipex!tube.news.pipex.net!pipex!lade.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,edm.general,ab.general,can.general,tor.general,van.general,calgary.general
Subject: Re: William Grosvenor believes in crap!
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 19:19:28 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 12:19:30 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:39013 ab.general:9684 can.general:78462 van.general:8721
Laura Finsten
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wrote:
>[edit]
>> Another person who believes that if the average Canadian were
>>permitted a handgun the first thing they would do with it is rob
>>a convenience store and then procede to murder his neighbors.
>> It is strange to discover Canadians must be kept from handguns
>>because of their inherently criminal nature.
>No, Mr. Giwer, we have just observed the result of widely
>available handguns in the land of our neighbours to the south,
>and not been overly impressed.
And were Canadians to have similar access their true criminal
natures would come out. I don’t see any other point to you
position. Were that not the case you folks would have no problem
with permitting Canadians easy access to handguns.
But then your real reason is hardly a secret. You just cover it
up with this kind of santimony.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:14:15 PDT 1996
Article: 39014 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘Jews who are not fit for work can be eliminated without qualms’
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 18:38:29 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nj9gr$bm6@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 11:38:31 AM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes…
>>[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>>
>>>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes:
>>
>>># Let us not play this game again. The source was given.
>>># It was also posted in this NG over a month before I
>>># brought it up.
>>
>>>Maybe; I never saw it. Since you’ve lied so much in the
>>>past, I see no reason to believe you this time.
>>
>>>You have yet failed to give a source for your claim that
>>>Anne Frank was ill with typhus while in Auschwitz.
>>
>>>Show us the source, or admit that you lied.
>>
>> Watch my keystrokes.
>>
>> I don’t play that game.
> You don’t play that game of providing sources for your assertions when
> asked to?
> Not much of a scientist if you ask me…
I don’t play games that only apply to me. Why can you not
understand that?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:14:16 PDT 1996
Article: 39027 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Nizkor: Proof is for Goyim
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 19:10:27 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 2:10:29 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes…
>>
>> Prove there was any work done in the first place. This is the
>>Gentile Rule in action.
> I am certain you insisted just last week that you scientists knew it
> was impossible to prove anything. And that asking for proof was one
> way you detected who knew science from who didn’t, you alter kocker.
When you folks knock off the one sided application of the Gentile
Rule you will have achieved a level of intellectual honesty you
should have started with.
> {include mantra.h}
> Mr. Giwer is, as far as I can determine, a troller whose only interest
> is in causing fights. While he can sound superficially plausible, he
> has lied about what has been said in exchanges (while accusing others
> of lying), refused to document claims, pretended not to see posts which
> contain documented refutation of his claims (even when they have been
> emailed to him), engaged in actual libel, and generally conducted
> himself with such complete lack of intellectual and factual integrity
> that there seems to be no point in taking the time to read and respond.
> For detailed and documented evidence of this, please refer to: URL
> http://www.almanac.bc.ca/cgi-bin/ftp.pl?people/g/giwer.matt
Don’t forget to tell people that Nizkor pays $100 to anyone who
downloads the entire file.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:14:17 PDT 1996
Article: 39029 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,edm.general,ab.general,can.general,tor.general,van.general,calgary.general
Subject: Re: Guns and Liberty
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 19:23:31 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 12:23:35 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:39029 ab.general:9696 can.general:78478 van.general:8726
Matt Cundill
>Matt Giwer wrote:
>
>> Another person who believes that if the average Canadian were
>> permitted a handgun the first thing they would do with it is rob
>> a convenience store and then procede to murder his neighbors.
>It doesn’t have to be the average Canadian, it doesn’t have to be the
>first time they get the gun. It just has to happen once. If you like to
>play with guns on a Sunday Afternoon… great. The U.S. has tens of
>thousands of handgun murders every year because the average American CAN
>get a handgun. C’mon people… use the math!
All I observed is the obvious. That Canadians would be just like
Americans if they had similar access to guns. Or are you saying
there is something inherently different about Canadians?
Why don’t you give the real reason for a change?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:14:18 PDT 1996
Article: 39037 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!in2p3.fr!swidir.switch.ch!swsbe6.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!news.be.innet.net!bofh.dot!INbe.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,soc.culture.jewish,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.current-events,soc.culture.israel,ba.israelis,alt.security.terrorism
Subject: Re: Not a miracle (Was Re: Israeli attack on Civilans — US Planes in Jordan)
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 20:11:38 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 3:11:41 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:39037 soc.culture.jewish:53257 alt.politics.nationalism.white:20795 soc.culture.israel:34877
[email protected] (Boris Berkman) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wtote:
>> It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
>> the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>It is not a question of how many Germans knew of the fact 6 out of 12
>million Jews were exterminated nor it is a miracle some bastards are
>denying this fact today…
Why would you post that to me?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:14:19 PDT 1996
Article: 39066 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!loki.tor.hookup.net!nic.wat.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Holocaust?
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 00:34:02 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 103
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nlbi9$q3t@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com> <4nlmje$[email protected]> <19MAY199603[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 7:34:08 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) wrote:
> And you folks even have your nazi-like files on me at Nizkor.
>I responded:
> Mr. Giwer objects to the files as they prove he is a liar!
> The only thing “nazi-like” about the files is that the Nazis
> kept files, therefore — in Mr. Giwer’s warped mind — anyone
> who keeps files is “nazi-like!”
Speaking of warped minds, gratuitously labeling people neonazi is
in the same category. But how about if someone kept files on
Jews. What would you call that?
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
> I have been waiting for someone to defend them.
>Mr. Giwer once again demonstrates his inability to read and reason!
>I am not defending the files at all, as a close reading of my words
>will verify. I am only pointing out Mr. Giwer’s absurd preoccupation
>with them!
My preoccupation? When it is included with every recitation of
the mantra it would appear others are in fact obsessed with them.
I merely mention it as nazi-like on occasion. But then perhaps I
can start a site that keeps track of Jews just to test what it
will be called.
> They prove nothing, period. They are all mine. They do not
> include the other side of the exchange.
>The “other side” of the story is not necessary in order to prove that
>Mr. Giwer is lying. All that is necessary are his own words to damn
>him.
That is the same reasoning the never posts the crossexamination
or case disposition for holocaust “testimony.” That is rather a
poor excuse for reasoning actually. Not very bright either.
> In making them onesided there is no way to establish their
> completeness.
>Mr. Giwer hypocritically slams “onesidedness” in this post, while
>telling his opponents to get out of this newsgroup in others!
I merely suggested you find a newsgroup where your delicate
sensibilities will not be continually affronted. You seem to be
constantly upset with what is posted here.
> They are completely useless for evidentiary purposes.
> It is quite a waste of disk space.
>Mr. Giwer certainly does make them sound harmless enough! But that
>is belied by his reaction to my next comment.
>I wrote:
> To sum up, in Mr. Giwer’s twisted world, keeping records is a
> “nazi-like” activity, whereas insulting Jews and Holocaust
> victims is not!
>To which, Mr. Giwer retorts:
> But then I do not object to them. I welcome them as evidence of
> the nazi-like behavior of Nizkor.
>Note that Mr. Giwer does not deny that he insults Jews and Holocaust
>victims! Note that he does not consider such insults to be “nazi-like!”
>Note that he still maintains that files on Nizkor are “nazi-like!” —
>even though he himself has affirmed that they are harmless and represent
>his posts accurately!
Why should I deny what I have not done? I have not affirmed
anything regarding the files and I have no intention of ever
doing so as I have not read them all and do not intend to read
them all.
>Mr. Giwer seems to be using a definition of the word, “Nazi,” that
>has not made it into any dictionary yet!
I learned it from holohuggers.
> It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
> the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>For Mr. Giwer, it has never been a matter of how many died, but
>how much attention he could get from insulting the memory of the dead.
Find a group where you won’t feel offended.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:14:19 PDT 1996
Article: 39079 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!netcom.com!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘Jews who are not fit for work can be eliminated without qualms’
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 00:22:55 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nj9gr$[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 5:22:59 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
> 51 next month. But do not forget retired, youngster. When do
> you expect to be able to retire?
>I responded:
> I expect most of those reading this newsgroup expect to retire
> when we can contribute nothing more of use to society,
> like Mr. Giwer.
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) concurs:
> I never contribute. I charge.
>Mr. Giwer’s new sig reads:
> It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
> the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>I commented:
> For Mr. Giwer, it has never been a matter of how many died,
> but how much attention he can get by insulting the memory
> of the dead.
>Again, Mr. Giwer confirms my analysis:
> Go find a more appropriate conference if you don’t like it.
>Note that Mr. Giwer’s response is not designed to defend his
>practices or opinions, but is calculated to irritate and anger me.
>That is because Mr. Giwer is not interested in the truth in the least.
>He is only interested in provoking people — anyone will do!
Why would you consider that provocation? And why would you
expect me to defend what does not need defending? I am doing
what the NG is all about.
But speaking of silly taglines …
>–
>Harry Katz
>He that hires one garden will eat birds; he that hires many gardens,
>the birds will eat him.
> — The Wit and Wisdom of the Talmud, Madison C. Peters, ed.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:14:20 PDT 1996
Article: 39080 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Mike Curtis, scientific illiterate
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 19:08:28 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 139
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <317e33e1.3331[email protected]> <4mkdg3$i[email protected]> <4mlhh7$k[email protected]> <4mn58a$b[email protected]> <4mpa3s$7[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <4o2va1$[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 2:08:32 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Mike Curtis) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wrote:
>>[email protected] (Miloslav Bilik) wrote:
>>>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wrote:
>>>>[email protected] (Miloslav Bilik) wrote:
>>>>>Coke is produced since 1815, and on a large scale before the second
>>>>>war. Even in the 40’s, only CO could cause any trouble. The problem is
>>>>>about the HCN rates on the walls of the ‘vergassungkeller’, one floor
>>>>>beneath the furnacies. You should give a look on the composition of
>>>>>the coal oven gasses to know the rate of the HCN in the average coal
>>>>>heating conditions (1000°C-1400°C). The HCN rate is ridiculous low.
>>>>>Nothing to ‘stick’ on the walls.
>>>I have to add that coke was used in the furnaces, no coal.
>> You have lost me completely here. The subject was crematoria not
>>furnaces.
>What an idiot.
Explain then.
>>>> But since it is an acid, it has nothing to do with quantity.
>>>>Whatever would react would “stick” as you so quaintly put it.
>>>With a strong acid, certainly. Prussic acid is weaker than CO2.
>> CO2 is not an acid.
>He didn’t say it was, idiot.
Explain the use of the word “weaker” in any other context.
>>The
>>>furnaces produced too a lot of CO2, then you have to suppose on the
>>>top that the furnaces were not airtight to release some HCN to the
>>>beneath floor (and there isn’t any HCN produced with coke).
>> What are you talking about? The Krema ovens were at ground
>>level. That is what all this talk about raising the bodies back
>>out of the LK is all about.
>Depends upon which Crematoria *you* might be talking about. But I’m
>sure you are not focused. What an idiot.
Explain what you are talking about, boy.
>>>> And the quaint phrasing indicates you have not the least idea
>>>>what you are talking about but repeating what others have said.
>>>’Quaint’, good. ‘Stick’ came from anothers revisionists posts, that’s
>>>why I quoted this word.
>> If you knew better you should not have done it.
>Where does he say that he knew better? It is a moronic idiot that must
>add words to the post of others.
Your intent appears to be two fold. Simple name calling and to
divert the discussion from whatever this person is trying to get
at. Or are you under some misapprehension that you are adding
something to this discussion?
>>>My question remains without reply: you told that incinerators produced
>>>more HCN than the gassings. Do you have any sources, or only **one**
>>>reference case of intoxication with a domestic coke’s heating with HCN
>>>instead of CO ?
>> I said only that they probably did. I am not a “scholar.” I do
>>not need other people to tell me about basic science.
>I think you do.
What would you know about even basic science?
But it doesn’t matter. Convincing you is not
>important. Idiots can’t be convinced. They apparently don’t fade away
>like egotistical generals do. The keep splattering their shit
>throughout the newsgroup.
As you are completely ignorant of even basic science you choose
to denigrate its use. You are certainly not contributing to this
thread. So what is your point in this post?
>> Coke is simply coal with most of the non-carbon organics burned
>>out of it. There were plenty of organics available in the ovens
>>for a similar reaction to take place.
>> What do you mean intoxication? I have never heard of coke being
>>used for home heating in the US. It has always been coal and the
>>complete switch to gas, oil or electric was completed about 30-35
>>years ago in the US. There may be some places in West Virginia
>>that still use it but it is unlikely.
>> I would also be quite surprised to find it used as it produces a
>>much hotter fire than coal and thus would have been harder on the
>>furnaces.
>> So where are you going with all of this?
>He asked you for sources. Boy, did you fool us all by providing none.
>What an idiot.
Sources for WHAT? Accident reports for something that to the
best of my knowledge would have come from a cause the did not
exist? If residential home furnaces using coke did not exist
then a request for a source of accidents caused by them is like
asking for reports of gryphon attacks.
But you can not understand that. It is too complex for you to
comprehend. That best you can do is call names.
>There, I feel better. This is my very last response to Giwer posts
>that do not meet the new substantive information or query test. This
>is a personal test for citations backing opinions. The opinions can
>even be idiotic as long as they are backed by another idiot. Questions
>asked by the troll need to be true questions that hint of a desire to
>know. If the response is waved off, no more communication will take
>place. If a request for citation is not complied with, communication
>in that thread will cease.
You are simply another scientific illiterate unable to reason.
You want to use the lack of gryphon attacks to prove gryphons are
harmless and ignore that they do not exist.
You are very stupid.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:14:21 PDT 1996
Article: 39099 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Europe has always hated Jews
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 00:47:16 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 73
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4no[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 7:47:21 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) wrote:
> As predicted, no evidence, mere refutation. Sounds like a Monty
> Python routine.
>I responded:
> Indeed, considering that Mr. Giwer never offered any evidence
> to back up his own position to begin with! Mere assertion
> demands no better response than mere refutation.
Since when does anyone in this conference provide evidence? That
last to around had people confusing testimony with evidence.
Even a Pennsylvania attorney claimed the oath for witnesses
included the words “the evidence I am about to give” in it. It
was a very strange exchange.
Yet you when I pointed out that all the holohuggers did was post
mere assertion it was picked up by them to claim that was all I
did. That is a rather grade school routine.
Yet for example you have declined to respond to simple questions
such as where does the extra air come from to burn up the oil
that you claim is burned. Yet you assert and assert that it is
all burned. You even ignore that the original diesel post
claimed it was a rich mixture meaning had too much oil for the
amount of air and still you asserted it was all burned.
That is what is called mere assertion. Making statements as
though they were true and after refusing to answer the questions
to repeat the claim several times and continuing to refuse to
answer is called mere assertion.
And yet that is the best you are capable of doing.
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
> Then you have been technically unqualifed to comprehend what
> I have posted.
>Indeed! Perhaps I better review Mr. Giwer’s technically complex post:
> As predicted, no evidence, mere refutation. Sounds like a Monty
> Python routine.
>I must have completely missed the technical meaning of the term
>”Monty Python!”
You are still unqualified and engaging in nothing but a bandwidth
wasting response to my messages which contains no content. Not
that I object of course it gives the opportunity to restate my
positions and repeat demonstrations of what you holohuggers are
like.
> It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
> the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>For Mr. Giwer, it has never been a matter of how many died, but
>how much attention he could get from insulting the memory of the dead.
There must be a group where your delicate sensibilities will not
be so shocked. But then, perhaps this is your short form mantra.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:14:22 PDT 1996
Article: 39102 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: That lovely bomb morgue/bomb shelter
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 02:54:24 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 7:54:31 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
It was a lovely discussion. My protagonist insisting with every
fiber of his being that they were really morgues turned gas
chambers, never answering a single critical question, and then
finally declaring victory because the design changes from II/III
to the IV/V design proved his case for gas chambers.
But then I had to tell him that at IV, according to Nizkor’s site
and sworn to be several of the Gang of Six, that a different
building entirely was used for this “gassing” at IV. With that
of course, his design improvements and therefore his entire
argument collapsed.
Whatever happened to this boy? Is he still alive? Did he simply
forget about it? Does he now agree their most likely secondary
function was a bomb shelter? If the boy had been smart he would
have taken a different tack entirely.
But instead he had to go through his silly “ALERT” routine and
miss his opportunities. But then, holohuggers and particularly
the Gang of Six from Nizkor have no intention of living up to
their stated objective of a critical and skeptical awareness of
history. Rather they would avoid any discussion of this part of
history and bury all non-acceptance in the vilest terms
imaginable.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 01:14:22 PDT 1996
Article: 39103 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘The Bodies Were Dragged Out Of the Gas Chambers’
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 05:03:12 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 10:03:21 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Richard J. Green) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer
>>>Does Mr. Giwer have evidence that victims of CO poisoning can never look
>>>pinkish? Does he think it’s a binary operation? Either all CO victims
>>>are cyanotic or else all CO victims are pinkish? One wishes Mr. Giwer
>>>would be more explicit in what claim he is making. Does he claim that
>>>CO victims are never cyanotic? Does he claim that CO victims are never
>>>pinkish? Of course, he will not give a straight answer because:
>>
>> Trying to decieve people again?
>When Mr. Giwer has no rational response he resorts to ad hominem
>attacks. If Mr. Giwer is not trying to “decieve [sic]” anyone, then why
>won’t he answer two simple questions. Does Mr. Giwer have evidence
>contrary to what I posted from OSHA that shows that CO victims are never
>cyanotic? Does Mr. Giwer have evidence that CO victims never appear
>pinkish?
>I thought not. Watch for more ad hominem arguments from Mr. Giwer in
>this space.
Then perhaps you will explain all the people who spread the word
that I lie by stating that I lied when I said that bones burned.
All of those who proved I lied when I said HCN was produced in
coke fires. Who was it who deliberately started those false
claims and has now retracted the deception?
It is you who engaged in the willful and deliberate character
assassination as you well know. And you instigated it and now
these claims are on your shoulders. I seem to recall there is
something in the Hebrew religion that holds what you did to be
particularly culpable. But then you are most likely an atheist
and don’t give a damn about anything but tribal membership.
But of course those who called me a liar for claiming that bones
burn and that there is HCN production is fires are saying they
were never decieved. In that event they are calling themselves
as particularly culpable as you are in fact wehn they called me
a liar for what they now claim they know is true.
You started this. You are responsible for it. And you know it.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 07:26:39 PDT 1996
Article: 39110 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 04:39:20 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 11:39:29 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (DvdThomas) wrote:
>The preceding seems to me to be an eminently reasonable approach to this
>situation and the disagreements that exist. The technical discussions
>could, of course, be conducted much more efficiently and conclusively in a
>neutral setting amongst people more qualified to discuss the topics. That
>it has to be done in places like this by people not overly qualified to do
>so is simply a reflection of the “DO NOT DISCUSS!!” bias which exists in
>considerable force in our society. You could go to jail for trying to do
>this in Europe, which I believe is an utterly sorry state of affairs for a
>Western world that professes to endorse freedom for all.
But of course if the “do not discuss” attitude continues now then
there was never a time when it could be discussed. Therefore the
only conclusion is that there was never any critical and
skeptical review of history which, by the way, is one of Nizkor’s
objectives.
One finds it strange the Gang of Six do everything they can to
discourage their own objective.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 07:26:41 PDT 1996
Article: 39114 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: alt.revisionism
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 05:37:33 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 10:37:43 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Lets see if you holohuggers can deal with this for the first
time.
The purpose of this conference, alt.revisionism, is for the
discussion of the revision of the orthodox beliefs about the
holocaust. Perhaps that can be expanded to the discussion of the
revision of other aspects of history.
It is not the place for the mindless repetition of orthodox
holocaustry. It is not the place to support orthodoxy. It is
not the place to achieve the objectives of Nizkor, to call anyone
who revises orthodoxy antisemitic, neo-nazi or anti-democratic.
It is perhaps the place to achieve at least one of the claimed
but never attempted objectives, to exercise critical and
skeptical analysis of history but that is not done by any of the
supporters of orthodox holocaustry.
When it is done it leads only to the more common objective of
Nizkor to call the skeptics and the critical thinkers, neo-nazis
and antisemites.
It is not as though this is any secret. They struggle mightly to
prevent the critical and skeptical objective of Nizkor in the
very newsgroup that is for it.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 07:26:42 PDT 1996
Article: 39123 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Europe has always hated Jews
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 00:55:11 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 78
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4n3ti[email protected]> <4nmv7[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 5:55:17 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
> And of course at least three people will come back claiming I
> have no idea what I am talking about while refusing to post what
> they believe to be the real history.
>I responded:
> On the contrary, Mr. Giwer will demand that anyone responding to
> this post provide complete citations, even though he will never
> produce even a single, solitary one!
You see, once more you folks will try the gradeschool technique
of switching roles. As you are well aware you holohuggers
started with making that demand of me. Now when I adopt it in
the form of the Gentile Rule, I am the one who has always done
it.
Your misrepresentations are interesting but hardly well done.
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
> I will require evidence…
>But he will never, ever provide a single, solitary shred of evidence
>himself to back up any of his outrageous assertions.
> …that is not contrary to physical law.
>Mr. Giwer is being disingenuous, as he is not in the least interested
>in establishing the truth. He is merely interested in goading anyone
>he can collar to anger, to satisfy some perverse need in his psyche.
>To that end, he himself has provided “evidence” that is contrary to
>physical law. For example, he maintains, against all reason, that
>oil vapors can pass through the cylinders of a deisel engine without
>burning up, even though the gasoline that it is mixed with burns
>completely!
Yet you refuse to answer any of the questions I asked you. Where
does the air come from to burn oil in a Diesel engine that is
deliberately run with more oil than there is air to burn? Answer
the question for the first time.
At this point it is becoming clear that you don’t have the
foggiest idea how an IC engine works.
> You failure to recognize technical information is simply your
> ignorance of science speaking.
>My presumed “failure” to recognize “technical information” does not
>change my analysis in the least, which is that Mr. Giwer continually
>demands evidence while never, ever providing any himself.
You have performed no analysis. You have merely asserted a
falsehood. And you have not the technical background to know how
transparently false it is.
>Moreover, this crude attempt to win his point with insults only
>demonstrates Mr. Giwer’s failure to provide verifiable technical
>information in the first place. Real evidence speaks for itself.
>Phoney claims require the addition of personal abuse to hide their
>inadequacies.
A statement of fact, your technical ignorance, is not more an
insult that mentioning the color of your hair. Both are facts.
If it bothers you to have it pointed out you certainly can either
correct it or remain silent on matters you know you do not
understand.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 07:26:43 PDT 1996
Article: 39124 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Crematorium Rates
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 01:39:17 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 8:39:21 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>tom moran ([email protected]) whines:
> Even though modern day cremation facilities take two and half
> hours to cremate one body, the cremation ovens at Auschwitz,
> barely the size of a regrigerator, could cremate up to three
> bodies in twenty minutes, as the Holocaust story has it.
>The Nazis did not have to collect the ashes for the victims’ survivng
>relatives, nor did the bodies have to be burned inside of coffins.
>This has been explained to Mr. Moran before, but he has never, ever let
>facts stand in the way of his favorite pastime, Jew-bashing!
It has already by explained to you that the reference is to the
burning time alone. It has also been explained to you that your
precious eyewitnesses say that the objective was to burn the
bones down to ash as there were special grinding machines when
they didn’t happen to burn down to ash.
Nor in any manner would a coffin alone account for a 22.5 times
slower cremation as the wood would burn much more quickly than
wet flesh. But of course you are so scientifically illiterate
you can not see that. You probably can’t even do the math.
To bad he didn’t mention the 400 degree higher ovens in use
today. That makes your defense of this much more difficult.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 07:26:44 PDT 1996
Article: 39126 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.ernst-zundel,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: 960520: No difference between the Nazis and the Israelis
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 01:30:00 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <19[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 6:30:06 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.fan.ernst-zundel:1250 alt.revisionism:39126
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Donna ([email protected]) whines:
> As an Italian,I feel the same way you do. When I show pide in
> being White and Catholic ,I am labled a racist. Blacks and Jews
> do this,…
>As well as her fellow white Catholics, and any other decent person
>who feels that “pride” in being white does not consist of berating
>and demeaning everyone who is not white!
> …they are credits to their races.
>Jews are not a race.
You mean Jews are a religion?
—————————————————————
Live fast, love well, and have a glorious Website.
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/
Commentary from the right side of the curve
Maintaining http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/tech/ (tips and tricks for webs)
http://www2.combase.com/~mgiwer/mgiwer4/ (eye candy, blantant advertising)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/ (my son)
http://www2.combase.com/~matt/mega/ (for internet advertising)
From [email protected] Sat May 25 07:26:45 PDT 1996
Article: 39132 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Neo/Paleo-Deholocaustolithification
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 04:50:48 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 11:50:56 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>tom moran ([email protected]) whines:
> Neo/Paleo-Deholocaustolithification: The result of comparing
> older Holocaust accounts that were once written in stone to
> newer accounts that are currently written in stone.
>Once again, having nothing of substance to contribute, Mr. Moran
>resorts to baiting Jews. Mr. Moran is fond of demanding a death
>certificate for each victim of the Nazis, but feels free to libel and
>slander Jews without so much as a shred of evidence.
>Mr. Moran is, to use his own words, corrupt, and insults the
>intelligence of the readers of this newsgroup.
Hairy Cats, by his own words will not address the clear fact that
the story has changed over the years. He may retreat one more
time into the “reputable historian” dodge but fail to explain how
untrained amateurs with ZERO resources managed to pull out of
thin air a number that is essentially correct.
But most likely he will simply answer this post with another of
his heavily editted responses with a real shit message system and
not address the matter in the least.
And he will still refuse to answer the basic questions I asked
him about rich mixtures even though he comes on as knowing
something about what he asserts.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 07:26:46 PDT 1996
Article: 39147 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.his.com!news.frontiernet.net!news.texas.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!winternet.com!mr.net!newshub.tc.umn.edu!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 21:34:10 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 222
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nv3em$po[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 2:34:17 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Kimberley Ahlf
>[previous text editted for brevity, see above postings for complete text]
>> You appear to be pretending to a knowledge of science and math
>>when you have none. As for theology, if you enjoy mental
>>masturbation, I leave you to it.
>>>If you are advocating that I disbelieve everything that you say, I will
>>>tell you now that I am strongly inclined in that direction.
>> Of course you are. You have admitted you are biased against me.
>>Your references to astrology, alchemy and theology lead me to
>>believe you are incapable of rational thought.
>Matt, I’m not _pretending_ to have a knowledge of anything, perhaps a
>distinction between us.
>ALL human knowledge is based on scholarship, except those things which you
>can touch or see for yourself. You are asking me to discard an entire
>vein of human knowledge (50 years spent gathering photographic,
>documentary, testimonial and annecdotal evidence) based on what?
I am suggesting you critically look at this “evidence” for
yourself and not blindly accept “this is what it means” from
anyone.
A while ago there was a picture uploaded to this conference with
a caption something like “Jewish women executed by SS.” But as I
pointed out there was only one indication that one of them might
have been a woman and no indication of their being Jewish. I
suggested that, on the assumption they were all women, that it
could have as easily been wiping out the evidence for a gang
rape.
Now where did the caption come from? Who added it? Why that
caption? The answer is never any more than handwaving reference
to it being in some book. But consider, a picture is taken, it
is developed some time later, maybe gets back to the
photographer. What did he do? Write on the back of it what it
was? Was it entered into a log book some where? If so, there
was no frame or roll number on the picture so there was no way to
connect it with a log entry. Mounted in a scrapbook perhaps?
Yet it was clearly presented as evidence of what the caption
claimed. There have been similar incidents with pictures such as
the infamous direction of walking on a platform indicates the
desitination was the Kremas but when the layout of the camp was
given their destination would have been the women’s camp.
Anecdotal evidence is completely inadmissable as scientific
evidence. As I have discussed here eyewitness testimony is
wholly unreliable given the UFO abduction and ritual, satanic
child abuse stories. I have even read the story of a woman who
claimed to have been kidnapped by Bigfoot.
There have been several UFO deliberate hoaxes that demonstrate
the negative value of researchers who want to believe. One of
them involved some lights on a hill. One of the hoaxsters shot
six pictures and later produced pictures that bore not only zero
relation to the lights but each had obvious impossibilities that
did not track with what the eyewitnesses actually saw and said
they saw the night in question.
After seeing the pictures, their stories changed to claiming to
have seen what was in the pictures. “Expert” UFO hunters were
given the pictures to analyze. Not ONE of them reported any of
the obvious impossibilities in the pictures.
It spawned a dozen articles in the UFO literature. And it was
all a hoax. And it all happened because people wanted to
believe. That includes the eyewitnesses and the experts.
Another hoaxster reports that the experts came to his home to
interview him. He was asked if he was familiar with any UFO or
Science Fiction literature. He said no. They reported his
answer as no and used that statement to support the credibility
of his report.
Unfortunately for the experts, he revealed later that the
interview was conducted in his library and the bookshelves behind
him and in plain view of the interviewers were filled with books
of science fiction and UFO literature.
That is the value of “experts” who want to believe. Experts HAVE
TO start off skeptical and look for simpler explanations. They
have to reject claims that contain the incredible and impossible.
Yet that is not the way the “experts” in the holocaust field
work. They want to believe what they are being told. They
exhibit zero skepticism and never have.
Then will come the claim there was skepticism long ago and that
it has all be resolved to everyone’s satisfaction. Unfortunately
whoever those highly critical skeptics were, they never
published. There is no evidence these people ever existed.
And today we are still regularly regailed in this conference with
stories that do not stand critical analysis yet they are
presented as truth from on high. If there had been such critical
analysis these stories would have been discarded long ago.
Of all the things you would have accepted all that we have left
is documentary evidence. First of course this can be faked as
easily as the above UFO pictures and be just as flawed and still
have people uncritically accept it. But let us ignore the
possibility of forgery for the moment.
Let us look as the Wannsee Protocol. This is one of the very few
documents that exist. And you will find that it has been claimed
to support every aspect of all of the holocaust stories.
However, if take the time to read it in its entirety, it is
clearly one of the most “revisionist” documents around.
It contradicts almost every major claim about the holocaust YET
people will still read it and claim that is supports every major
claim. You may read it for yourself and see what I am talking
about.
You will note this is a high level conference that discusses both
the pre and the post conference plans. Before the conference
there were not even plans for work camps. After the conference
there were plans for work camps from which they would not return
alive. But there were thousands perhaps tens of thousands of
Jews that would have qualified for the exceptions contained in
the new plan.
The document is damning as to ultimate intent but it is
completely “revisionist” if it is to be accepted as true and
genuine. But as you should have read by now, people will read
into anything they want to read into it.
Based on
>of some vague notion of a worldwide Jewish desire to gain sympathy? (I’m
>only supposing there, because I don’t know your general thesis
>explaining why so much scholarship is suspect.)
Again you are showing your bias. You have to impute a motivation
to me where none is called for. And even before you read my
answer.
>From what I’ve read so far, you are debating minute details of the
>established scholarship without offering scholarship of your own. In fact
>you have explicitely disavowed the use of scholarship in your pursuit.
I am doing something that has not been done in the holohugger
movement, critical analysis. What areas of “scholarship” would
you suggest? Reading the credulous work of “scholars” who have
clearly accepted testimony contrary to science? What value are
they?
I am really not prepared to travel to Moscow and Germany to pour
over the original documents rather than what others who exhibit
no greater skepticism than a UFO investigator says about them.
But that would appear to be the only thing that would satisfy
your idea of “scholarship.”
Would you have me talk to survivors? Would anyone but someone
who wants to believe accept memories over fifty years old even if
the other problems I mentioned above did not exist?
So what would YOU consider scholarship in this matter?
>If this is indeed the case, then I would be just as well advised to
>believe the alchemist who comes along and disallows your “scientific”
>examination of HCN in gas chambers. He too would reject the scholarship
>on which your scientific findings are based. He, like you, would reject
>citations of “physical law” as appeals to ‘experts’ or reject experimental
>proofs as ‘testimonial’ evidence.
Excuse me, I AM THE ONLY ONE citing physical law in this matter
and it appears that other than a chemist who deliberately
misleads people, the only person with the credentials to back up
citation of physical law.
It is only the deceiving chemist and those with ZERO credentials
in science who are saying I am wrong when they have absolutely no
way of knowing.
In other words you have either not been reading the exchanges
here OR you are simply indulging in your bias again.
>Every reason you give for why ‘they’ should be disbelieved is at the same
>time a reason for why you should not be believed. If their evidence is
>worthless, then yours is too.
You are very foolish and have not been reading what I have been
saying in the least.
>Unfortunately for your position, ‘they’ choose to embrace the techniques
>of research and scholarship, which means that they stand a far greater
>chance of adding to the base of human knowledge.
I have yet to read one of them claim to have done original
research. Perhaps you could name the person who has? The best
we see is uncritically reading the work of others. And that is
what is lacking, applying a healthy skepticism to what others
have claimed.
And there was recently an excellant example of that when there
was a long publication of long narration about the production
facilities of Zyklon-B being damaged and the aftermath of it.
There was a compelling narration woven around information that
was supposedly in the footnoted documents. And then someone
pointed out that the narration required one of the events to have
occurred “the next week” for the story to hang together. Yet the
footnote puts the event two month before rather than a week
afterwards. And as such the narration collapsed.
Now who was being uncritical? The original author? The person
who posted it? All of the above?
Who was it that WANTED to believe that narration? Again, all of
the above.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 07:26:47 PDT 1996
Article: 39148 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.his.com!news.frontiernet.net!news.texas.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!winternet.com!n1ott.istar!n3ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘The Bodies Were Dragged Out Of the Gas Chambers’
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 21:43:42 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 4:43:46 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Miloslav Bilik) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wrote:
>>>I could see that the lips and tips of the noses were a bluish
>>>color. Some of them had their closed, other’s eyes rolled. The
>>>bodies were dragged out of the gas chambers and inspected by a
>>>dentist, who removed finger rings and gold teeth…
>> Don’t you think it curious that he sees the color characteristic
>>of cyanide rather than of CO poisoning?
>> Argue with this guy and Keren who swears by him. Pinkish. Do
>>you have a problem with this eyewitness? Just say so. One of
>>them is lying.
>>>Dr. Theodor Friedrich Leidig, testifying about one of the first
>>>gassings in Sachsenhausen, in which Soviet POW’s were murdered
>>>that the people were dead. The van was opened. Some bodies fell
>>>out; the others were unloaded by prisoners. Those of us who were
>>>chemists could ascertain that the bodies had that pinkish look
>>>which is typical of victims of carbon monoxide poisoning.
>If you were a physician, you would soon have some deaths among your
>patients, if you don’t make a difference between a constant sign, and
>a sign proving the diagnosis.
>The pink color of the skin with CO is characteristic but very rare.
>The fact is well known. The victim is more often pale and cyanotic
>(*).
Reports of color are quite rare also. But you know that. I am
simply pointing out the clearly wrong color reported. Had no
color been reported I would have said nothing.
>You should, as you often give us your misconceptions about the HCN, CO
>poisonings, buy a rudimentary medical manual about these matters. It
>could avoid you doing such absurd claims.
>MB.
>(*) A reference if you’re not too tired: Matthew H., Acute poisoning:
>some myths and misconceptions, British Medical Journal, 1, 519, 1971.
Since you are implying you are such a studied expert, where is
your position on the matter?
Why is it you folks never stick your necks out with a position
but imply that it is is some other source and that you know all
about it? It would appear obvious that for anyone to recommend a
source they have clearly read it and remember the contents to the
point that it addresses what is under discussion.
But then (no longer surprisingly) the people making these
assertions, such as yourself, never post what they must clearly
remember. That certainly brings the credibility of the reference
into question.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 07:26:48 PDT 1996
Article: 39150 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.his.com!news.frontiernet.net!news.texas.net!cdc2.cdc.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Diesel exhaust that looks like steam
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 22:00:13 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 72
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nlrc2$agn@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 5:00:18 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>Matt Giwer
> The point is that if you had any technical competence you
> would have known enough to be skeptical of the claim yourself.
>[email protected] (Daniel Keren) asked:
> Why?
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) does his sleight of hand:
> Because you should know what breathing oil vapors does to the
> lungs and you should have realized from the description that it
> was oil vapors that claim were misidentified as steam.
>Not oil vapors, but burnt oil. When oil mixes with fuel in an
>internal combustion engine, the exhaust turns white.
Back to famous auto mechanics school for you.
> You should know by now that scuba tanks are not filled with oil
> lubricated piston pumps as even that amount of oil in the tanks
> is lethal.
>Mr. Giwer should know that scuba tanks are not internal combustion
>engines, so oil vapors would indeed pass through the system to the
>diver’s lungs. But a deisel engine will burn any oil that seeps in
>along with the gasoline.
The school is only awaiting your application.
> You should at least be able to imagine the consequences to
> breathing concentrated oil vapors on the lungs.
>This is rich! We are discussing the gassing of Nazi victims, and
>Mr. Giwer is concerned that oil vapors will damage their lungs
>as they die!
You are playing the fool. If you had spent any time following
the discussion you would know that the claim was CO poisoning
that lead to this discussion in the first place. Now at least we
have a better answer of suffocation. But then it is not your
intention to contribute to this discussion as I have already
provided you with a detailed discussion of your “burnt oil” claim
and you have failed to respond.
>Mr. Giwer introduced this red herring originally in order to claim
>that oil vapors represented a danger of explosion, not a danger to
>the lungs of the condemned victims. Apparently, he realizes how
>stupid it is to claim that the oil vapors would not be completely
>burned by the engine before ever reaching the exhaust system, and
>decided to change his tune. Unfortunately, he did not think this new
>objection out very carefully before switching over to it.
As I said, you have failed to respond to my message and simply
reiterate what you have imagined to be true.
> It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
> the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>For Mr. Giwer, it has never been a matter of how many died, but
>how much attention he could get from insulting the memory of the dead.
Find another conference or is that beyond your abilities also?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 07:26:49 PDT 1996
Article: 39154 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.his.com!news.frontiernet.net!news.texas.net!news1.best.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!newshub.csu.net!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The shy, retiring Giwer-troll
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 18:45:47 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 11:45:50 AM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes…
>>[email protected] (Harry W. Mazal OBE) wrote:
>>
>>>On 20 May 1996 13:32:22 -0400, [email protected] (Michael P.
>>>Stein) wrote:
>>
>>>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>Matt Giwer
>>>>>[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>>>>>> […] And the saddest thing is that Giwer is
>>>>>>no teenage punk; he’s 50 years old.
>>>>>
>>>>> 51 next month. But do not forget retired, youngster.
>>>>
>>>> Why should anyone bother to remember a claim that could be made by
>>>>anyone on a psychiatric disability pension?
>>
>>>Mr. Stein is quite right. It is one thing to be retired because one
>>>has the financial ability to maintain a high style of living; another
>>>to be retired because one’s business has collapsed. Evil tongues hint
>>>that the gentleman in question is hampered by a severe disability.
>>>Can this brought upon by the less than moderate consumption of
>>>certain ethanolic beverages?
>>
>> It is an amusing fantasy you folks are creating, that I was
>>”retired.” Want to try to back up your claim?
>>
>> How very Jewish of you.
> How very antisemetic of you.
> While I can’t say that there is anyone on usenet I despise more than
> Giwer (though I can think of a couple of contenders), I consider the
> line of insinuation taken by Mr. Mazal above to be inappropriate.
> While I greatly respect Mr. Mazal, I don’t quite understand why he is
> choosing to pursue such issues.
> Giwer may be guilty of ad homimems and innuendo; and is clearly guilty
> – despite his denials – of antisemitism, but that does not justify
> anyone else playing the same game with him.
And I am supposed to ignore it? Have you posted a public message
admonishing him?
Although I have gotten a lot of shit from a lot of fools in my
time this is the first time there has been such a continuing
effort to create rumors about me to be read my others. It is
clearly an attempt at the lowest form of character assassination.
What I named is the one and only thing that distinguishes this
subject from all of the rest.
Would you conclude differently and why?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 07:26:50 PDT 1996
Article: 39155 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.his.com!news.frontiernet.net!news.texas.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!news.sojourn.com!news.eecs.umich.edu!newshub.tc.umn.edu!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Testimonial Fiction
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 20:11:32 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 94
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <31a31339.3[email protected]> <4nvnk3$l[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 3:11:38 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Marty Kelley
>On Fri, 24 May 1996, Matt Giwer wrote:
>> Marty Kelley
>>
>> >On Thu, 23 May 1996, tom moran wrote:
>> >> You say the “point” is that many Jews died. I agree – many Jews
>> >> did probably die – and so did many others. How many Jews died and by
>> >> what means is the point.
>>
>> >Unless I’m very much mistaken, Mr. Moran has just avoided the essence of
>> >Mr./Ms. Ehrlich’s comment: note how Moran simply says “many Jews died,”
>> >but avoids acknowledged that the Nazis killed them “just because they
>> >were Jews.”
>>
>> EVERYONE save for the identified criminals was killed just
>> because of who they were. Jews were NOT unique in this regard.
>I’m glad to see you acknowledge that the Nazis targeted people who they
>considered “racial inferiors” for murder. Mr. Moran, however, has not
>made such an acknowledgement, which is why I’m asking him for
>clarification of his views. He has elsewhere implied that he believes
>that the deaths were accidental, or ordinary civilian casualties of war,
>not the result of a program of deliberate killing.
In this context this is the only way to phrase it. The means
however was clearly work camps similar to those run by the Soviet
Union for nearly 70 years.
>[snip]
>> >So, let me put the
>> >question to you more directly, Mr. Moran: do you acknowledge that the
>> >Nazis deliberately killed Jews because they were Jews? (We’ll get into
>> >numbers, means, and the Nazi genocide against other “untermenschen
>> >later). A simple question, Mr. Moran. It will be interesting to see how
>> >you answer it.
>>
>> Do you deny they killed gays because they were gay? Gypsies
>> because they were gypsies? Slavs because they were Slavs?
>>
>> Upon what extraordinary grounds do you imply uniqueness?
>>
>> But sorry, there was nothing unique about Jews in this matter.
>I certainly do agree that the Nazis targeted other groups for
>extermination solely because they were, in the Nazi ideology, inferior.
>However, I would also point out that virtually all Nazi documents and
>propaganda laid particular “blame” for Germany’s problems at the feet of
>Jews, and that Jews were, for the Nazis, the lowest of the low, and the
>highest priority for their extermination efforts. Hence, to the Nazis
>themselves, and for the purposes of studying the Holocaust, the treatment
>of Jews was indeed unique.
To make that claim it would be required to go over all of the
documents and propaganda. Although that appears to have been
done, it is unclear that there has been any more than a culling
of references to Jews for presentation to the public. This is
suggested by the near total lack of reference to the groups that
formed the majority of those who died.
And then the references are to the “tear jerk” groups, the ill,
disabled, that sort of thing. For example, Jews are supposed to
hve comprised 5.2 out of 12 million. It is hard enough to come
up with serious documentation gassing (or shooting or whatever)
the 5.2, but have you ever seen any documentation of the
intentions towards the 6.8 million others?
Have you ever seen a picture captioned to the effect of “Group of
Slav (or gypsy or whatever) women executed by SS” for example?
I commented on one of those pictures captioned Jewish women a few
months ago but when I pointed out there was only one minor
idication that one was a woman and no indication of religion.
The point of my comment appears to have been missed.
If there is so much claimed solid information on Jews what
explains the near total lack of information on all the rest?
There must be some explanation for this. The culling explanation
is obvious.
Yet it would certainly make a much more credible presentation
were the equivalent for the Wannsee Protocol for the other groups
presented. The absence of such other documents doesn’t really
add to the case but leads to curiosity.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 09:31:36 PDT 1996
Article: 39163 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,edm.general,ab.general,can.general,tor.general,van.general,calgary.general
Subject: Re: Guns and Liberty
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 23:02:47 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 195
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 4:02:56 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:39163 ab.general:9721 can.general:78523 van.general:8738
Martin Tolton
>On Fri, 24 May 1996, Matt Cundill wrote:
>> play with guns on a Sunday Afternoon… great. The U.S. has tens of
>> thousands of handgun murders every year because the average American CAN
>> get a handgun. C’mon people… use the math!
>I would like to confirm this statistic. Lets assume there were
>10,000 handgun murders in the US per year. That would mean that 1 in
>35,000 persons will be murdered within the next year. This would
>also equal on average, 500 handgun murders per year per state.
>Do these figures seem a bit high?
I don’t. Here are some real numbers and comparisons.
However, for on year the FBI was directed to collect crime statistics by race. As some may know the FBI performs that
function for Canada also for inclusion into the Uniform Crime Report published annually. For that year it was
discovered that Caucasians of European descent (commonly called whites) in the US were marginally less prone to violent
crime than “whites” in Canada.
Thus it is clear that the pious Canadian concern over access to handguns has a particularly focus that they would rather
die than admit.
Continuation of Gun statistics from Keith Elias …PART II from Patrick
PAtriarca as D/L’ed from INTERUSER:
Gun Crime statistics 2 of 3
============================================
HANDgun Crimes
USA vs International (including Switzerland)
============================================
The USA has the highest rate of HANDgun ownership and the highest
rate of murder of any industrialized nation:
======================================================== |
Household Gun ownership versus Murder Rates |
| in 13 nations |
======================================================== |
| || HOMICIDES |
| Country | Households with || per million pop.|
| | Guns Handguns || Total |With guns|
| | || |
| | Netherlands | 1.9% 1.0% || 11.8 | 2.7
| | England & Wales| 4.7% 0.5% || 6.7 | 0.8 | |
Scotland | 4.7% 0.5% || 16.3 | 1.1 |
| West Germany | 8.9% 7.0% || 12.1 | 2.0 |
| Spain | 13.1%> 2.0% || 13.7 | 3.8 |
| Belgium | 16.6% 6.5% || 18.5 | 8.7 |
| Australia | 19.6% 2.0% || 19.5 | 6.6 |
| France | 22.6% 6.0% || 12.5 | 5.5 |
| Finland | 23.2% 7.0% || 29.6 | 7.4 |
| Switzerland | 27.2% 14.0% || 11.7 | 4.6 |
| Canada | 29.1% 5.0% || 26.0 | 8.4 |
| Norway | 32.0% 3.5% || 12.1 | 3.6 |
| U.S. | 48.0% 29.0% || 75.9 | 44.6
| |======================================================|
|The percentage of households with guns is from a |
|direct telephone survey made by the International |
|Crime Survey in 1989. The Homicide numbers are taken |
|from World Health Organization data from 1983 to 1986.|
========================================================
Switzerland is not an example of a country with many HANDguns and few
murders:
====================================================================
|COUNTRY |HOUSEHOLDS WITH GUNS| HOMICIDES |
| | | | per million population |
| | Any type | With | Total | With |
| | of gun | Handgun | | gun |
| |==========+=========+===========+============+
|England | 4.7% | 0.5% | 6.7 | 0.8 |
|Switzerland(Private)| 12.0% | 7 % | 11.7 | 4.6 |
|Switzerland (All) | 27.2% | 14.0% | ” | ” |
|Canada | 29.1% | 5.0% | 26.0 | 8.4 |
|U.S. | 48.0% | 29.0% | 75.9 | 44.6 |
|==================================================================|
| Note that 44% of all guns and 52% of the handguns “owned” by the |
| Swiss respondents were said to be army guns. Access to ammunition|
| for army guns is restricted. |
| |
| Switzerland(P) includes only “private” arms, while |
| Switzerland(A) includes all firearms, army and private. |
| |
| The percentage of households with guns is from a direct telephone|
| survey made by the International Crime Survey in 1989. The |
| Homicide numbers are taken from World Health Organization data |
| from 1983 to 1986. |
====================================================================
Additional info. for Swiss table:
Title: Gun Ownership and Violent Crime: The Swiss Experience
in International Perspective” Author: Dr. Martin Killias of the
School of Forensic Science and Criminology, University of Lausaunne,
Lausanne, Switzerland published in: Security Journal, 1990, Vol. 1,
no. 3, pgs 169 to 174; Publisher: Butterworth Publishers of
Massachusetts. Via: J.S. Canner & Co. Mass. 1-617-449-9103
=================================================================
Gun ownership in the USA does not prevent crime:
================================================================= |
Household Gun ownership versus rates for three types of crime | |
in 13 nations |
================================================================= |
Country | Households ||Robbery | Burglary | Theft |
| with || with | with | of | |
| Guns |Handguns|| Force | Entry | Car | |
| | || | | |
| Netherlands | 1.9% | 1.0% || 2.1% | 8.8% | 1.8% |
| England & Wales|> 4.7% | 0.5% || 1.9% | 9.3% | 6.5% |
| Scotland | 4.7% | 0.5% || 1.8% | 8.8% | 5.2% |
| West Germany | 8.9% | 7.0% || 2.8% | 4.7% | 1.9% |
| Spain | 13.1% | 2.0% || 9.0% | 5.5% | 5.0% |
| Belgium | 16.6% | 6.5% || 4.0% | 7.7% | 4.0% |
| Australia | 19.6% | 2.0% || 2.25% | 16.4% | 7.9% |
| France | 22.6% | 6.0% || 2.8% | 10.4% | 7.1% |
| Finland | 23.2% | 7.0% || 2.75% | 2.0% | 1.7% |
| Switzerland | 27.2% | 14.0% || 2.2% | 4.0% | 0.9% |
| Canada | 29.1% | 5.0% || 2.6% | 10.1% | 2.75% |
| Norway | 32.0% | 3.5% || 1.5% | 3.2% | 2.7% |
| U.S. | 48.0% | 29.0% || 5.6% | 13.6% | 6.3% |
=================================================================
The percentage of households with guns is from a direct telephone survey
made by the International Crime Survey in 1989. The crime rates
which are taken from the same survey are the cumulative totals for
the years 1984 through 1988 inclusive. Note that I converted
measurements for the crime rates and handgun rates from bar graphs to
the numbers shown above.
=================================================================
Gun Ownership does NOT cause suicides:
=================================================================
SUICIDES
Country Households Households per million pop.
with guns with Handguns Total With/Gun
Netherlands 1.9% 1.0% 117.2 2.8
England & Wales 4.7% 0.5% 86.1 3.8
Scotland 4.7% 0.5% 105.1 6.9
West Germany 8.9% 7.0% 203.7 13.8
Spain 13.1% 2.0% 64.5 4.5
Belgium 16.6% 6.5% 231.5 24.5
Australia 19.6% 2.0% 115.8 34.2
France 22.6% 6.0% 223.0 49.3
Finland 23.2% 7.0% 253.5 54.3
Switzerland 27.2% 14.0% 244.5 57.4
Canada 29.1% 5.0% 139.4 44.4
Norway 32.0% 3.5% 142.7 38.7
U.S. 48.0% 29.0% 124.0 72.8
=================================================================
The two main sources for the above four tables:
1 Title: International correlations between gun ownership and
rates of homicide and suicide. Author: Martin Killias of the
Universit‚ de Lausanne. Publisher: Canadian Medical Association
Journal May 15, 1993
2 Title: Experiences of Crime Across the World. Key Findings of
the 1989 International Crime Survey Author: Van Dijk JJM, Mayhew
P, Killias M Publisher: Kluwer Law Tax Publishers, Cambridge, Mass,
1990
In the Netherlands Kluwer’s Tel: 011-31-5700-47261 Fax:
011-31-5700-22244
semiautomatic pistols. In a sample of guns seized during the first
three months of 1989 by the LA police department 49.8% were
semiautomatic pistols.
Thus 50% of the criminals were using semiautomatic pistols, while 55%
of the newly purchase handguns were of this type.
Between 1980 and 1989 a total of 810 police officers were killed in
the US and its territories. One was killed with an Uzi in Puerto
Rico and only 33 (4%) were killed with “assault weapons”.
Source: “Point Blank” Guns and Violence in America”, by Gary Kleck.
Published by Aldine de Gruyter, 200 Saw Mill River Road, Hawthorne,
NY 10532 (Note that Kleck is one of the leading advocates of the
right to bear handguns for personal protection)
The same publisher has a book called: “Under the Gun: Weapons, Crime,
and Violence in America” by Wright, Rossi, and Daly which may(?) be
more balanced. be more balanced. (I haven’t read it.)
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sat May 25 09:31:37 PDT 1996
Article: 39178 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.his.com!news.frontiernet.net!news.texas.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!winternet.com!n1ott.istar!uniserve!news.sol.net!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Diesel exhaust that looks like steam
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 22:04:07 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 61
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 24 5:04:11 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines at Dr. Keren:
> You have admitted you are unqualifed to discuss any technical
> subject.
>I responded:
> Yet another example of Mr. Giwer’s intellectual dishonesty!
> No one has admitted any such thing!
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
> He has not only admitted be demonstrated it.
>Dr. Keren has neither admitted nor demonstrated anything of the
>sort. If he had, Mr. Giwer would have provided the example. As he
>has no example, he merely blusters, hoping no one will notice.
How could you judge? You are not qualified to do so either.
> That you can not recognize it means only that you are
> equally unqualified.
>I can recognize that Mr. Giwer is not only technically unfit, but
>ethically unfit to discuss the subject, as he has been shown to be
>quite willing to lie and to distort facts to maintain his untenable
>opinions.
You are incapable of judging that.
>My last post continued:
> Apparently, Mr. Giwer still has trouble reading plain English.
>To which, Mr. Giwer counters:
> I read it quite well.
>That is not supported by any of Mr. Giwer’s posts. In fact, he
>thrives on misreading posts and putting words into the mouths of his
>opponents, because he cannot refute what we have really said.
> It is your technical illiteracy the prevents you
> from recognizing the issues.
>On the contrary, it is Mr. Giwer’s enormous ego that prevents him
>from admitting when he is wrong.
How in the world would you know? You who has declined to explain
where the extra air comes from to burn the oil. You who does not
even know what “rich” mixture means.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:24:50 PDT 1996
Article: 39218 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!news.nstn.ca!newsflash.concordia.ca!newsfeed.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!msunews!agate!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 17:39:14 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 104
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 12:39:30 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Kimberley Ahlf
>[preceding text deleted for brevity]
>Matt,
>I will accept, as a point of argument, all of your criticisms of me.
>I have never claimed to be an expert or scholar, in fact I have
>specifically pointed out that I am neither, and if my lack of knowledge
>has made me appear “foolish” to you then so be it. Also, please forgive
>me if in my postings I have ever appeared combative or abusive, but I’m sure
>you’ll grant me that the tone of this conference tends to be less than cordial
>and at times, I’m affraid, it’s impossible not to be affected.
>I will also accept at face value your assertion that you approach your
>vocation as a ‘revisionist’ scientifically, withdrawing my previous points
>of contention as being non-essential to this discussion.
>Recognizing the fact that I will give you the benefit of the doubt,
Let us get something straight right now. I do not care if you do
or do not. Your participation in the Nizkor objectives, you
bias, in fact even this digression into motives and agendas is
off topic and is part of thwarting the purpose of this newsgroup.
I hope
>that you can grant me that I have given your postings my careful
>attention, approaching them with an open mind. Also allow me the point
>that any revisionist, whether motivated nobly or ignobly, must face
>and overcome almost exclusive skepticism before his or her ideas or
>criticisms stand any chance of prevailing. Having said that, I make no
>apologies for approaching your ideas and criticisms regarding the orthodox
>view of the holocaust with skepticism.
Excuse me, but go read the objectives of Nizkor. One of them,
never honored, is to look at history critically and skeptically.
The orthodox view is exactly that history I am viewing critically
and skeptically. What the Nizkor Gang of Six is doing is
promoting the orthodox of that history in an attempt to twart the
purpose of this newsgroup.
>As a revisionist, the orthodox scholars are your adversaries and I, a
>member of the informed public, am one of the jurors for whom your
>arguments must prevail in order to transform your revisionism into
>orthodoxy (I assume that is your ultimate goal.)
Not a one of these people has claimed or earned “scholar” status.
They are all mindlessly repeating the words of others. They are
not doing any original research. They are not forming and
defending their own opinions.
As to what you presume my goal to be, you are wrong. I have not
the slightest interest in any fixed, immutable, eternal,
damn-those-who-question truth about anything in history including
the holocaust.
>As a scientist I am sure you are interested in feedback as to how your
>case is progressing. The following is my feedback:
Only from those qualified to judge, which you are not and
apparently no one else here is either.
>I came to this conference four days ago uninformed, curious, and skeptical
>of your revisionist theories and criticisms.
What did you expect to pick up in four days? You must have
jumped in the first day you were on. Whhen was this lurking time
you mentioned in another message?
>I leave this conference four days later somewhat informed, unimpressed and
>hostile to your revisionist theories and criticisms.
So what?
>Still, I do sincerely believe that the possibility exists for revising the
>orthodox record of the holocaust and the Nazi period.
But as you have said, you are biased against that happening.
>If it is your goal to revise the orthodoxy, and if it is your intention to
>progress with this revision scientifically, then you should seriously
>re-evaluate your methods of science and/or your methods of reporting
>the science.
You mean I am supposed to dumb it down and trust you will spend
the time to learn enough science to catch up? I do not pretend
to be an Asimov. But for starters you might read ten or so of
his books that relate to physics, chemistry and biology. At that
point you may be ready for something that takes serious effort to
learn.
>I wish you all the best and that you may someday come to know the truth.
Again, your bias is towards the orthodox view that has NEVER been
critically or skeptically examined yet that is what you view as
the truth. You certainly have never questioned it.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:24:50 PDT 1996
Article: 39222 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 18:23:40 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 204
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 1:23:58 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>(Matt Giwer) wrote:
>> [email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>>
>[snip]
>> >The long time required to kill insects with Zyklon is not due to any
>> >long time required for the Zyklon to produce HCN gas. It is solely
>> >due to the higher resistance of insects to HCN poisoning. Therefore,
>> >there is no reason to separate the arguments and no effort has been
>> >made to separate them. But Mr. Giwer has made every effort to imply
>> >that these two facts are not mentioned in the same breath because he
>> >has no real argument. In fact, all of his arguments require him to
>> >put words into the mouths of the opposition, because he can never
>> >refute what we have really said.
>>
>> But as you know even in a sealed house the air changes about once
>> an hour.
>EVIDENCE CHECK: And Giwer’s documentation that this is the case is?
Are you so young you missed the Jimmy Carter, energy conservation
years? It was rather common knowledge at the time. Perhaps you
have simply forgotten it. Or are you one of those who thinks it
only changes when the door is opened?
You folks seem to think elementary information that you should
know (and probably do know except for purposes of these games)
requires some sort of special attention. It is a matter of time
before want evidence for the sun rising in the east.
>> As you also know it was used to fumigate barracks. As
>> the cyanide is coming out of the barracks so quickly are you
>> suggesting someone was going back inside to replace it?
>POOR LOGIC ALERT: Given that Giwer is basing his argument on an
>unsubstantiate assumption, he is assuming the answer here.
I am basing it upon very well known information that you are
pretending not to know.
>> Or perhaps they poured more in through a hole in the roof?
>REALITY CHECK: Or perhaps, considering Giwer’s unfounded claims, the
>disinfestation of the barracks was done according to: Translation of Doc.
>NI-9912 Office of the Chief of Counsel for War Crimes, _Directives for the
>use of Prussic Acid (Zyklon) for the Destruction of Vermin
>(Disinfestation)_? (Pressac, _Auschwitz: Techique and operation of the gas
>chambers_, pp. 18-20.)
Thank you for providing (below) support for EXACTLY what I have
been saying about a slow and temperature dependent release.
>> Or perhaps you can dig up some documentation that the barracks
>> were tented as is done today to keep the poison inside.
>REALITY CHECK: First, Giwer, makes an incorrect assumption about the use
>of tents in fumigation of dwellings today. After calling a local pest
>control firm I was told the following: Tenting is used strictly in
>conjunction with fumigation for _termites_ and is required because a
>lengthy period of time and high concentrations of insecticide is required
>to penetrate the building to reach the termites that reside in the wood of
>the structure. This is NOT the case for the disinfestation of fleas,
>cockroaches, etc., which is done by hand application with sprayers and
>requires no tenting.
And of course you are describing the long time and high
concentration required to get lice that is always given with one
part of the holocaust story, particularly when Leuchter is
involved. And of course you are talking about comparing liquid
spraying to actual fumigation by a gas for termites which is of
course the same as for Zyklon-B, a gas. It is good that you have
confirmed what I have said.
>In addition, I asked about the use of “foggers” and if any special
>measures, such as tenting, was required. I was told that it is sufficient
>to simply close all entrance/exit doors and windows in the room(s) to be
>fogged. (And, I would assume, to turn off the central air-conditioner, if
>present.) No other special measure are required.
And again, the termite stuff is a gas. Zyklon-B was a gas.
Foggers are not involved in either case. Again you have
confirmed what I said.
>Second, referencing the _Directives for the use of Prussic Acid (Zyklon)
>for the Destruction of Vermin (Disinfestation)_ (Ibid.), sections VIII and
>IX, it reads:
>—————————————————————————-
>[…]
>VIII Preperation for fumigation
>1. Seal.
>2. Open all doors, closets, drawers, etc.
>3. Pull bedding apart.
>4. Remove all liquids (remains of coffee, washing water etc.).
>5. Remove all food.
>6. Remove all plants, domestic animals (aquaria etc.).
>7. Remove all undeveloped photographic plates and film.
>8. Remove adhesive plaster, all medical supplies, whether open or in paper
> bags (particularly [char]coal).
>9. Remove all gask mask filters.
>10. Prpare for check on results.
>11. Clear out personnel.
>12. Take over keys (every door key)
>IX The strength of the gas and time required for it to take effect depend on:
>The type of vermin
>The temperature
>The amount of furniture in the rooms
>The imperviousness of the building
>For inside temperatures of more than 5 degrees Cent. it is customary to
>use 8 g prussic acid per m3.
>Time needed to take effect: 16 hours, unless there are special
>circumstances such as a closed-in type of building, which requires less
>time. If the weather is warm it is possible to reduce this to a minimum of
>6 hours. The period is to be extended to at least 32 hours if the
>temperature is below 5 deg. Cent.
This certainly shoots the shit out of those “all in 10 minute”
claims doesn’t it. It certainly supports my statements that the
release is temperature dependent doesn’t it.
You do realize this entire thread is related to my claim of slow
release do you not?
You do realize this confirms everything I have said don’t you?
>The strength and time as above are to be applied in the case of: bugs,
>lice, fleas, etc., with eggs, larves, and chrysales.
>For clothes moths: temperatures above 10 deg. Cent.: 16 g per m3 and 24
>hours to take effect.
>For flour-moths: same as for bugs.
>X Fumigation of a building
>[…]
>—————————————————————————-
>Furthermore, Pressac writes (Ibid. p.18):
>”Concentration in g/m3 and contact times reccomended in disinfestation:
>”* Mosquitos: 0.25 for 30 minutes.
>”* Bugs: 2.5 for 1 hour.
>”* Fleas: 1.25 for 2 hours.
>”* Fleas: 1.25 for 2 hours.
>”* Lice: 5 for 2 hours.
>”* Destruction of all insects: 5 for 6 hours.
>”* Rats and mice: 2,5 for 2 hours.
>”(Or according to Degesch: 2-4g/m3 for 4 hours).
Notice he fails (or at least you fail) to provide the temperature
for which these recommendations apply.
>> Of course you will not understand what I wrote.
>REALITY CHECK: Rather, it is Giwer who does not understanding what he is
>writing about, which is par for the course.
You don’t even realize that what you quoted supports everything I
have been saying. Thank you again. You have confirmed a slow
and temperature dependent release, EXACTLY what I have been
saying and you folks have been challenging.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:24:51 PDT 1996
Article: 39223 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Diesel exhaust that looks like steam
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 19:34:14 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 165
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nlrc2$agn@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 12:34:33 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>Matt Giwer
># And you have nothing of the kind.
>I happen to have a Ph.D in science. I never made a big deal
>of it, unlike you, who really believes your B.Sc from 30
>years ago means something to anyone.
And that is Computer Science, and the title is as close to
science as your applied math field comes. You will of course be
honest enough to admit that, will you not? Or will you join our
favorite chemist in his games?
>## You have failed to prove that a concentration sufficient for explosion
>## would be reached. You forget that, in the experiments, white fumes
>## were also produced when the engine was run with light load and in
>## normal fuel-air ratio, which would result in less oil in the fumes.
># YOU have claimed that it was thick enough to be confused with
># steam. That is sufficient.
>Surely, a great scientist like yourself should be aware of
>the fact that “thick enough” is not a scientific term. Give the
>minimal concentration and prove it was achieved.
Prove it was achieved? We are still in the “prove it happened
this way” stage of your excuse for claiming people were killed by
steam. And we have not even gotten to the death by electrocution
and death by vacuum chamber as yet. And on the oil explanation
we haven’t even gotten to the problem of it being nearly
impossible for a person to confuse oil vapor with steam.
On the other hand one of your “supporters” is trying to tear your
story apart claiming that no matter how rich the mixture it is
still all burned before it gets to the exhaust. Of course he
appears to be claiming that burnt oil is white so all that he
needs to learn is the color of burnt oil and he will have
demolished your idea.
As to a ballpark number you will have to provide type and grade
of oil and additives to it that was used in your hypothetical
diesel engine before I can even begin that. I am certain one of
your favorite authors must have reported it.
>## You failed to explain how the British researchers ran engines
>## in conditions you claim would result in an explosion, without
>## any explosion taking place.
># It would take only avoiding a backfire and open flame.
>Good, I see that you gave up your brilliant “they were lucky”
>explanation. Now, why could they do it, and the SS couldn’t? There
>was no open fire anywhere close enough to the gas chambers.
First off, you are reporting a one time test, not two years of
continuous operation. Second, there was casual open pit burning
in lots of pits according to you folks and obviously there is
always the wind. Third there are always sparks from the
locomotives that were coming in and out either once or three
times a day and the wind.
And last but not least, BACKFIREs. Only one of them in the two
years of operating TEN such chambers would have been enough to
destroy and one of them and send the debris all over the camp and
particularly to other oil soaked gas chambers certainly setting
one or more of them on fire. And if it was in operation, which
by description they were all certainly in operation at the same
time, that would be another fire and explosion.
So as you see, we are still in the hypothetical stage for your
explanation of just one of the three stories that you will have
to explain.
># Would you care to provide a few titles of your publications and
># the journals of publication? Perhaps you could even post one of
># them here.
>Most recent one is titled “Data Driven Priors for Hyperparameters
>in Regularization”. It was presented in the recent “Maximum Entropy
>and Bayesian Analysis” conference, and is to appear as a chapter in a
>book by Kluwer. I offered to send you the postcript file, but
>you said you can’t print postscript.
Ah, yes, Baysian Analysis. That which requires the assumption of
both the conclusion and that Baysian analysis applies and is not
admissable in court as it violates the presumption of innocense.
>It’s very nice that you have presented your CV, but I’m hardly
>impressed by it. You’ve worked as an engineer for 30 years
>or so, and you have a B.Sc. Very good. But what are we supposed
>to do when confronted by your amazing qualifications? Believe
>every piece of nonsense you post? Wake up. Do you really think
>being a university graduate and having been employed as an
>engineer is such a big deal? But, let it be noted: I would
>regard your ignorant, false articles exactly the same, even if you
>were a university professor. They are simply false and worthless.
What would a mathematics type know about science? But are we to
accept the word of a CS or statistician type upon fuel/air bombs?
The functioning of diesel engines? The difference of course is
that I have spent years making things work and specifically
things the come from the lab. They never quite work as predicted
in the real world.
Thus your charming reliance upon a lab test of what would most
likely be a well calibrated and tuned up research diesel engine
when the real question involves two years of field use. That is
the difference between a design prototype engine and the one in
your car.
We have to be talking real life, real people, real engines. We
can not be talking the idealized world of academia. “Assume a
cow is a perfect sphere” just doesn’t cut it out here in the real
world.
>## The problem of extra pressure was easily solved in the so-called
>## “gaswagons”, by using a simple mechanism that released this
>## extra pressure. There would have been no problem using such a
>## mechanism in the gas chambers as well.
># But in any event, please post the story that includes a
># description of this pressure releasing device. Or is that just
># another product of your fertile imagination?
>This is described in the well-known letter from Just to Rauff
>about the “gassing vans”, quoted in “Nazi Mass Murder”, Yale
>University Press, 1993. I can copy the relevant paragraph if
>you want; I don’t have the book here, it’s in my office.
I will certainly be interested in reading about the use of device
that is made necessary by the type of door and construction used.
But wait, you said gassing vans. We are talking about buildings
here, quite large buildings. Will you find a description of
that?
And of course if you can find a description of how this building
was built such that it could build up pressure in the first place
I will be greatly interested. Or course, not the hypothetical
way you would do it in the lab but the way it could be done in
the real world with 1940s construction methods.
># Face it. The story is fiction.
>All you have to do is prove this.
Given your math background you certainly realize that you are
requiring the proof of a negative. Given the credentials you
claim, you certainly know that is not an acceptable request. Of
all the people here you should know that the burden of proof is
upon the person making the claim. In this case that is the
story.
Or did you never have to defend a thesis? And if not, what is
this doctoral claim of yours all about? Or did they let you
simply give your paper and then demand the faculty prove it
wrong?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:24:52 PDT 1996
Article: 39224 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘The Bodies Were Dragged Out Of the Gas Chambers’
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 20:34:15 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 1:34:32 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Chuck Ferree
>Chuck Ferree writes:
>See how we play right into his dirty hands. This guy is among other
>things, (he’ll have an orgasum) about now…I’m sure. Perhaps he has
>become hooked on those prostate massages he warned me about earlier.
>Enjoy, Gywer!!!
If you folks had not made this adversarial, if you would stick to
discussing revision, their would be no hands to play into. You
folks started it. You want it this way.
I’ll give you a hint though. If you folks stop trying to defend
so many mutually contradictory stories, you effort will be a lot
easier.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:24:53 PDT 1996
Article: 39225 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,edm.general,ab.general,can.general,tor.general,van.general,calgary.general
Subject: Re: William Grosvenor believes in crap!
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 21:03:40 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 2:03:57 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:39225 ab.general:9735 can.general:78552 van.general:8749
[email protected] (Ken Lewis) wrote:
>In article <4o3b[email protected]>, [email protected] says…
>>>Perhaps no more holy but definitly less violent thanks to very restrictive
>>>handgun legislation. Compare statistics between the U.S. and Canada on
>crimes
>>>committed with guns and you will see a vast difference. As a U.S. citizen, I
>>>feel much safer here in Canada than someplace where any fool can carry a gun
>>>around (and often does).
>>
>> Another person who believes that if the average Canadian were
>>permitted a handgun the first thing they would do with it is rob
>>a convenience store and then procede to murder his neighbors.
>>
>> It is strange to discover Canadians must be kept from handguns
>>because of their inherently criminal nature
>Twisting the truth again? Don’t you ever get tired of it? I’m surprised you
>don’t get lost in your own half truths.
>My contention supported by fact that handgun legislation in Canada has
>resulted in a lower incidence of crime committed by handguns is a far cry from
>stating or implying that if given guns the average Canadian would run out and
>committ crimes. Only a brain dead fuck could draw that conclusion from my
>posts. Which, I suppose, is why you did.
You have simply confirmed my position. You have stated that the
difference in crime rate results from (has resulted, as you say)
handgun availability. Do you think there is any other reason for
the difference or is this the only one?
But you will notice you are using a very old bit of nonsense.
Literally reading your words you are saying that handguns commit
crimes. Presuming of course you meant to say with handguns then
you are clearly saying that if Canadians had more handguns they
would commit more crimes with them.
What is it you are really trying to say?
>Isn’t it strange that the NRA continues to lobby for something that is tearing
>the fabric of American society apart?
No it isn’t. Tearing America apart that is. As for the NRA,
they are simply speaking for the protection of our right to guns
that is also in our Constitution.
>Isn’t it strange that you suffer from such a sever case of rectal-cranial
>insertion that you cannot read a post without disroting it’s meaning?
I know what you really want it to mean but you Canadians are too
holier than thou to say it.
But remember, US European descent caucasians are slightly less
prone to commit crimes the Canadian European descent caucasians.
So why don’t you let it all hang out and say what you really
mean?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:24:54 PDT 1996
Article: 39226 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘The Bodies Were Dragged Out Of the Gas Chambers’
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 20:37:29 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 1:37:47 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Chuck Ferree
>Chuck Ferree writes:
>Gywer is really pushing it. First of all, not being an engineer like
>Gywer claims to be, (which is more bullshit from Gywer.) A little
>common sense would require the medical opinon of an autopsy surgeon to
>continue his silly argument about …blue lips, pink noses and other
>medical matters which this turkey isn’t even close to being qualified
>to discuss. This guy is 100% bluff! He has never proven a single
>statement he made about any subjects discussed here. It’s a pity that
>so many serious and qualified people continue playing his game. He’s a
>troller, a total liar, doesn’t know shit from Shineola, and all he
>craves is attention, and we give it to him. Like a real bunch of dumb
>shits. I’m as bad or worse than any body, and I kick my ass for doing
>it, but, he’s such a lying son of a bitch, and gets his nuts off, by
>anyone calling him names. There must be a reason why this total
>useless person is still here. But it beats me.
>Chuck Ferree
>maybe my shrink can explain some of this tomorrow. (she’s so sweet!)
>:-)
At least you are getting the help you need.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:24:54 PDT 1996
Article: 39229 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Where Did the Ashes Go?
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 20:52:45 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 3:53:02 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>In article
>wrote:
>> I know a gas chamber skeptic who wants to know how all the ashes of the
>> some millions of bodies gassed at Auschwitz were disposed of. Would
>> someone please go into the arguments back and forth here WITHOUT a single
>> ad hominem?
>”…The incompletely incinerated bones fell through the grille [of the
>muffle] into the ash pit [of the furnace], were ground with wooden morters
>along with the ashes, then poured into pits near the crematorium. Next
>they were removed from the pits and poured into the Vistula River or
>nearby ponds. Sometimes they were used to prepare compost; other times
>they were used directly to fertilize the fields of the camp farms.”
>_Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp, ISBN 0-253-32684-2; p.171.
Of course the ashes will still form a layer of sediment in the
nearby ponds. Yet no one reports finding it. Then perhaps, no
one looked.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:24:55 PDT 1996
Article: 39230 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!kryten.awinc.com!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Neo/Paleo-Deholocaustolithification
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 18:33:50 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <31[email protected]> <4o[email protected]> <4o63j[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 1:34:07 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Hilary Ostrov) wrote:
>In <4[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt
>Giwer) wrote:
>>[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>>tom moran ([email protected]) whines:
>>> Neo/Paleo-Deholocaustolithification: The result of comparing
>>> older Holocaust accounts that were once written in stone to
>>> newer accounts that are currently written in stone.
>>>Once again, having nothing of substance to contribute, Mr. Moran
>>>resorts to baiting Jews. Mr. Moran is fond of demanding a death
>>>certificate for each victim of the Nazis, but feels free to libel and
>>>slander Jews without so much as a shred of evidence.
>>>Mr. Moran is, to use his own words, corrupt, and insults the
>>>intelligence of the readers of this newsgroup.
>[snip]
>As is his alter-ego echo-clone, the Giwer-troll, who proceeded to
>demonstrate this by his gratuitous non-contribution to the discussion
>(herewith deleted for the sake of brevity). Because … as others
>have noted …
>Giwer is a troller whose only interest is in causing fights. While
>he can sound superficially plausible, he has lied about what has been
>said in exchanges (while accusing others of lying), refused to
>document claims, pretended not to see posts which contain documented
>refutation of his claims (even when they have been emailed to him),
>engaged in actual libel, and generally conducted himself with such
>complete lack of intellectual and factual integrity that there seems
>to be no point in taking the time to read and respond.
> For detailed and documented evidence of this, please refer to: URL
> http://www.almanac.bc.ca/cgi-bin/ftp.pl?people/g/giwer.matt
And for the sake of brevity you add this mantra? You are a very
strange person.
But tell me, if you are not interested in discussing the revision
of your orthodoxy, what are you doing in this newsgroup other
than attempting to prevent that discussion from occurring?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:24:56 PDT 1996
Article: 39233 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: one more time
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 21:33:42 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 2:33:58 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Who was the person speaking in that post that so many claimed was
Adolph Eichmann? Does anyone know yet?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:24:56 PDT 1996
Article: 39238 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: No righteous indignation here
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 21:48:29 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 2:48:46 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Alexander Baron
>On May 12 the Sunday Times carried a story about a Russian politician named
>Gennady Zyuganov. He appears to be something of a Holocaust Revisionist. He
>claims that Stalin murdered (only!) half a million, and has found the proof
>in the archives. No protests have yet been recorded from Harry Mazal, Dan
>Keren or the Simon Wiesenthal Center. No outrages, no demonstrations, no
>”educational” books are planned to refute this monstrous calumny. Any ideas
>why not Mr Moran? Giwer? Doubting Thomas?
Too busy preventing it from happening again?
Prefer to dishonor their memory?
Russians might take it personal?
Aren’t members of the … No. Couldn’t be.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:24:57 PDT 1996
Article: 39239 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: That lovely bomb morgue/bomb shelter
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 21:49:59 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 2:50:16 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Chuck Ferree
>Chuck Ferree says:
>Gywer, you don’t know your own ass from a putting green! So please
>refrain from the P.R. job of trying to persuade us all that you are
>some kind of expert on everything. If you could write just a little
>better, you might be able to get a book published, and make an honest
>buck or two. But first, you gotta get your credibility fixed. Maybe I
>can help, but it’s gonna cost ya; big time. Send me your net worth
>statement and your current credit rating. I’ll peek at it, and decide
>it your ass is worth salvaging or not. It’s about $$$$ money,
>dipstick.
You need money for your psyrinck?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:24:58 PDT 1996
Article: 39240 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 22:11:12 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <4o1di[email protected]> <4o1pt5$s2g@hackberry.zilker.net> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 5:11:30 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Gord McFee) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>(Matt Giwer) said:
>>
>>[email protected] (Mike Curtis) wrote:
>>>[email protected] (Ehrlich606) wrote:
>>>This forum is to discuss the Holocaust and it’s denial. The Gypsies
>>>and the Jewish people were not at war with the Germans. The retarded
>>>were not fielding armies against the Germans. The mentally ill were
>>>not fielding armies against the Germans. We can name all the targeted
>>>group in this manner.
>> This conference is for the discussion of the revision of the orthodox
>>holocaust stories. Discussion of the orthodox holocaust is off topic.
>Now the Giwer-troll would define the “rules” of this newsgroup? If he had
>any understanding of common sense, let alone logic, he would be pretty hard
>pressed to explain how one can discuss the orthodoxy of something without
>considering its antithesis.
At least you agree it is not for holocaust orthodoxy.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:24:58 PDT 1996
Article: 39248 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Giwer Does It Again (Re: Picture File: SS-Women in Belsen Camp)
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 23:25:30 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 4:25:48 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes:
># [email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>## I didn’t say “only one person”. You apparently can’t read
>## plain English. I was referring to a rather well-known person.
>## Do you know who he was?
># And I was asking for support for the claim that there were many
># criminals working in the ranks of the SS.
>There were. It was just amusing to contrast your claim that there
>were no criminals in the SS with the fact that a rather senior SS-man
>in Auschwitz had criminal record and even spent time in a German
>jail before the war. You wouldn’t know who he was, would you?
In other words, no support for the many criminals claim. And you
want to divert the answer by starting another guessing game and
then implying I claimed there were none.
But of course if you merely mean a criminal record some time in
the 20s or early 30s it is hardly unusual for military life to
straighten people out but it is not common that the military
takes people with a history of serious crimes.
Therefore I am asking after the nature of the people that were
referred to or at a minimum a support for the claim of many, not
of one.
># Why not simply admit you have nothing to support the original claim?
>Sorry, you must have confused me with one of you “revisionist”
>imbeciles.
>In “Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp”, page 22, SS-Haupsturmfuherer
>Hans Aumeier is quoted; he said that most “block elders” (those
>appointed by the SS as chiefs of prisoner blocks) were criminals.
Those appointed by the SS were not members of the SS, or were
they? And if so, why were they inmates? Or were they inmates
because they were criminals while in the SS?
Do you have any support for the claim that many of the SS were
criminals?
Or is this going to be another game like the one of demonstrating
there were women in the SS by showing there were women who were
hired by and became associated with the SS but were not in the SS
are examples of women in the SS?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:24:59 PDT 1996
Article: 39255 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Diesel exhaust that looks like steam
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 00:02:40 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 7:02:59 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes:
># Rather get back to the original claim, that WHITE is produced in very
># rich mixtures where it clearly can NOT all burn because of the mixture.
>But I’ve told you many times that the Pattle et. al. paper states
>that white fumes were also present under low fuel-air ratio, with
>light load.
>I posted this about 10 times. You continue to ignore it.
>But then, you have an IQ of 163 (har-har) and (gee, whiz, wow) a B.Sc
>you obtained 30 years ago (har-har-har). So, with all these credentials
>you’re so proud of, why should you let the facts get in the way?
You mean to say you really didn’t understand what you were
reading all along. Perhaps you should post the entire article so
I can see what it really says. Who knows what else you have
gotten backwards.
What is it you think I am ignoring? 1:1 is a low ratio. So is
2:1, 3:1 and 5:1. That means there is not enough air to burn all
the oil. That is what we commonly call a rich mixture.
Low means not enough air to burn it all. Rich means the same
thing. Rich comes for our only having control over the gasoline.
Ratio is more technically correct as it considers variations of
air density with temperature and altitude.
From memory (probably wrong and probably much higher) a car runs
at 16:1 or 20:1 by volume, a comparatively high ratio. The first
number is air.
The first order estimate for the optimum ratio should be the
inverse ratio of the molecular weights of oxygen and diesel oil.
And then correct for air being only twenty something percent
oxygen.
And now it is only a matter of time for some clown, probably
named Alstine, to claim you can burn a gallon of gasoline with a
gallon of air. Or perhaps our deceitful chemist will try to play
another game with a distinction between technical terms.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:00 PDT 1996
Article: 39262 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!xmission!news.uoregon.edu!news.sol.net!uwm.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!news.cc.swarthmore.edu!netnews.upenn.edu!dsinc!newsfeed.pitt.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Diesel exhaust that looks like steam
Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 18:29:38 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 105
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl3-13.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu May 23 1:29:32 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>Matt Giwer
># Good sir, I have the degree and the working credentials. You
># have nothing of the kind.
>You’re boasting of a B.Sc you got 30 years ago? And of working
>as an engineer? Wow, with an IQ of 163 couldn’t you go a little
>further? You’re pathetic. The guy has a stinkin’ B.Sc degree, and
>he thinks this makes him something. Wake up, Giwer. Anyway, you’ll
>be judged by what you post here, not by your alleged past.
And you have nothing of the kind.
>And what you post here is absolute rubbish.
You are completely incapable of judging, and you know that.
># It means it was oil vapor. It means the building was a fuel/air
># bomb and a fire waiting to happen.
>You have failed to prove that a concentration sufficient for explosion
>would be reached. You forget that, in the experiments, white fumes
>were also produced when the engine was run with light load and in
>normal fuel-air ratio, which would result in less oil in the fumes.
YOU have claimed that it was thick enough to be confused with
steam. That is sufficient. ALSO you ignore the oil settling on
every surface and soaking in creating a major fire hazard even
when not in operation.
>You failed to explain how the British researchers ran engines
>in conditions you claim would result in an explosion, without
>any explosion taking place.
It would take only avoiding a backfire and open flame.
But you still have to explain what construction method was used
to make the entire building capable of being pressurized such
that the “eyewitness” testimony of their “hermetically sealed” by
a door.
># Further you are completely incapable of judging the
># quality of the research, so why would you describe it as such?
>I’m incapable of evaluating research? I review articles submitted
>to scientific journals. I write such articles myself. Why don’t
>you tell us of your record of scientific work?
Would you care to provide a few titles of your publications and
the journals of publication? Perhaps you could even post one of
them here.
BS, Physics, 1967, University of Cincinnati
Various defense related employers including, US Navy,
SofTech, AICON, D. Gordon International, MAR Inc. Working in R&D
management, primarily on computer based sonar systems but
including international arms sales and artificial intelligence.
The systems I managed include the AN/SQS-53C, AN/BQN-17, and
the AN/WLR-9. The naval areas I have worked in are sonar,
anti-submarine warfare and acoustic warfare. The technical areas
I have managed include computers, computer programming, computer
modeling, oceanography, ceramics, power supplies, and ocean
acoustics.
The AN/SQS-53C was the first all digital sonar system in the
Navy.
I participated in many training courses including the 20
week Program Management Course from the Defense Systems
Management College at Ft. Belvoir, Virginia, PMC 78-2.
># Not only is the story pure fabrication but we have and OBC
># certified true statement that the buildings were air tight and
># thus the exhaust pressurized the rooms and thus raised the back
># pressure to the diesels.
>The problem of extra pressure was easily solved in the so-called
>”gaswagons”, by using a simple mechanism that released this
>extra pressure. There would have been no problem using such a
>mechanism in the gas chambers as well.
Then there is no need for any “hermetically seal” by the door and
having such a door makes the addition mechnism.
But in any event, please post the story that includes a
description of this pressure releasing device. Or is that just
another product of your fertile imagination?
Face it. The story is fiction.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:01 PDT 1996
Article: 39264 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘The Bodies Were Dragged Out Of the Gas Chambers’
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 00:25:14 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 5:25:33 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Miloslav Bilik) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wrote:
>>>(*) A reference if you’re not too tired: Matthew H., Acute poisoning:
>>>some myths and misconceptions, British Medical Journal, 1, 519, 1971.
>> Since you are implying you are such a studied expert, where is
>>your position on the matter?
>My position is that it was no reason to have the same signs between
>two victims, and moreover between two gassings. If **one** victim is
>pinkish, the CO poisoning is more likely for this victim; if the
>others victims are cyanosed, no diagnosis can be made since more
>reasons are equally likely.
Cyanotic skin of course. But this was a specific reference to
lips and the tip of the nose. That links fairly directly to
cyanide poisoning with the two mechanisms of toxicity in that
there is not enough time to completely turn the blood a lovely
shade of prussian blue so it would only show up where it is
easiest to see.
But of course in either case a more complete work up or pathology
needs be done. And again I note references to color are rather
rare. And it was striking the first place we find the right
indication for cyanide it is in a camp that used CO where if
there was any mention of color it should have been of pink.
But as a bottom line we really should not make too much of the
color. It was simply striking by its rarity and being in the
wrong place.
>> Why is it you folks never stick your necks out with a position
>>but imply that it is is some other source and that you know all
>>about it? It would appear obvious that for anyone to recommend a
>>source they have clearly read it and remember the contents to the
>>point that it addresses what is under discussion.
>> But then (no longer surprisingly) the people making these
>>assertions, such as yourself, never post what they must clearly
>>remember. That certainly brings the credibility of the reference
>>into question.
>I can not recommend you what you would have to read to avoid to tell
>stupidities. You would not accept to submit me your messages before to
>send them. It is to you to read sufficiently sources to insure the
>quality of your assertions.
But rather, as I believe the above demonstrates, I sufficient
information to hold this discussion. I was not intending to make
a diagnosis but rather to comment upon the clearly out of place
color.
Now should the other exchange where death was by suffocation from
oil inhalation that would certainly be one of the candidates for
the cause of cyanosed skin but it is difficult to see a
limitation to lips and nose tips only.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:01 PDT 1996
Article: 39265 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘The Bodies Were Dragged Out Of the Gas Chambers’
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 00:31:41 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 5:31:58 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes:
># It is the first time anyone has gotten the right color for
># cyanide. Unfortunately he got the right color for the wrong
># camp.
>Who said that in this particular case, they died of CO poisoning?
Excuse me. This was at Treblinka was it not? Someone did switch
on an engine, did they not? What are you suggesting was the gas
in this case?
>So, we know what Giwer will answer. He will claim – and lie, of
>course – that, during the recent exchanges here, I claimed death
>was caused (only) by CO poisoning. Then, I’ll ask him to document
>where I said this, and he’ll fail to find any such quote.
Please deal with the questions above first. I can get to the
“switched on” a diesel engine later as that may simply be a
translator without no familiarity with diesel engines.
># Ah, well, what can you expect from people like this?
>What can you expect from a miserable clown, who boasts of his
>B.Sc degree obtained 30 years ago, and thinks that Belsen camp
>was in Poland?
Just deal with the first three questions.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:02 PDT 1996
Article: 39282 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 02:20:26 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4o5a[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 9:20:45 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Alexander Baron
>In article <[email protected]>
> [email protected] “Matt Giwer” writes:
>> A while ago there was a picture uploaded to this conference with
>> a caption something like “Jewish women executed by SS.” But as I
>> pointed out there was only one indication that one of them might
>> have been a woman and no indication of their being Jewish. I
>> suggested that, on the assumption they were all women, that it
>> could have as easily been wiping out the evidence for a gang
>> rape.
>>
>> Now where did the caption come from? Who added it?
>Where and who indeed, Mr Giwer. There has been quite a bit of controversy in
>the British media recently after the deputy leader of the Labour Party was
>photographed drinking with his wife. A bottle of beer was painted out of the
>photo and attempt was made to portray him as a “champaigne socialist”. This
>may seem frivolous but the point is that a photograph is a document, and a
>document which has been altered or has an inaccurate caption is a lie.
Back when I was a kid there was an anti-gambling candidate for
sheriff of Newport, KY. There was a picture of him naked with a
prostitute/ stripper April Flowers with the headline FELL ASLEEP
IN MAY AND WOKE UP IN APRIL. He won by a huge margin after
turning it around. Whoever did the frame even had the caption
ready.
As to altering the pictures, it would be valuable to have high
res scans of the originals but the best anyone appears to have
are pre-captioned pictures from books. From what I have seen
>from some of the book quotes here, the captions may have come
>from a previous book. And of course the original author is long
dead and his notes (if any) long disposed of.
As far as a chain of evidence goes, it never existed in the first
place. That a chain of evidence is essential in a murder case
involving one person is obvious. But extraordinary claims
require extraordinary evidence yet in the holocaust matter any
old thing will do.
>> Anecdotal evidence is completely inadmissable as scientific
>> evidence.
>Not in the Holocaust Mr Giwer, only an anti-Semite would suggest so!
Does that mean I should discount all Jewish scientists? There
are a lot of them. That 6 IQ point shift at the mean makes a
hell of a lot of difference out at the tails.
>> And today we are still regularly regailed in this conference with
>> stories that do not stand critical analysis yet they are
>> presented as truth from on high.
>Dan Keren for one is not the slightest bit interested in any critical analysis
>which undermines his faith.
He should be written out of the gang then as that is one of the
objectives of Nizkor.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:03 PDT 1996
Article: 39283 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 02:23:15 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 9:23:34 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (tom moran) wrote:
>[email protected] (DvdThomas) wrote:
>>Mark Van Alstine wrote:
>>
>>>[A great deal of general info about patents which has no connection to
>>what I wrote.]
>>
>>And (almost) concludes with this statement:
>>
>>>So, it would appear, contrary to your assertion, that a patent must not
>>>only have something to do with what is being patented, but it must
>>>_specifically_ state the “manner and process of making and using it, in
>>>such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person
>>skilled
>>>in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly
>>>connected, to make and use the same.”
>>
>>You substitute the word “patent” for my word “claim”:
>>
> This is one of their practices – to replace the poster’s words
>with their own words to respond to.
What else can peole bereft of integrity do?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:03 PDT 1996
Article: 39284 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Hoess Memoir and ‘Revisionist’ Insanity
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 02:38:20 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4njeuc[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <8329[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 7:38:39 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>In article <832961608s[email protected]>, [email protected] writes…
>>In article <[email protected]> [email protected] “Mike Curtis” writes:
>>
>>> >This is NOT a fantasy; Jews do work together behind the scenes, but so
>>> >does everyone else.
>>>
>>> Really? And the proof of this contention is?
>>
>>The very fact that Jewish organisations exist means that Jews work together.
>>Have you never heard of lobbying?
> Not much of an answer on the part of Al, but he is in fact correct in
> his original point. Jews – and members of many other self identified
> group – provide mutual support behind the scenes. You might consider
> the organizational anthropological work of Rosabeth Moss Kanter called
> _Men and Women of the Corporation_, Basic Books, 1977. While, as I
> recall, she does not discuss Jewish workers per se, she does discuss
> patterns of support and benefaction among workers of similar race,
> gender, ethinicity, and sexual preference in the organization she
> studied. She labelled this behavior as “homosocialization.” It would
> be reasonable to conclude that Jews behave in a manner similar to other
> groups in this regard.
Excuse me but if you go to Nizkor and read QARs 10 and 11 you
will find that there is an acceptance by the Nizkorites of the
worldwide organized boycott of German products that started in
1933. If it were unsuccessful one would expect that to be the
response rather than placid acceptance of it.
It is difficult to conceive of a powerless, never acting as a
religion or birth member group could possibly have organized a
worldwide boycott so quickly given the communications of the time
without a prior structure to it. Or did this organization start
ub 1932 and vanish in 1946?
=========
FWIW: That QAR at Nizkor is a treasure trove of refutations of
the orthodox party line (see above) being spouted in this
conference, despite what they think it is. Of course it may
disappear before you get there again. Be warned, it is very
poorly organized like the rest of the site.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:04 PDT 1996
Article: 39289 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!kryten.awinc.com!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Crematorium Rates
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 18:35:07 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <31[email protected]> <4o[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 1:35:24 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Chuck Ferree
>Chuck Ferree writes:
>Here, once again, this turkey trys to use irrelivant math to try and
>make his futile point.
>Folks, Gywer, knows nothing about the Holocaust. He doesn’t even care
>about the Holocaust, or even World War Two. This turkey once said to
>me and I quote: “don’t worry about it, it’s only a hobby.”
>Whatever, this idiot says, (even when he’s sober) is just a hobby for
>him to make his dreary days pass before he begins consumption of the
>cheap wine, and little blue pills. It’s OK with me, if he goes out
>this way. I don’t like the guy as a person, I’m totally convinced that
>he is a fruitcake. However, as another human being, I just can’t help
>myself from feeling a little pity.
>Chuck Ferree
And you singlehandedly won WW II but Ike got the credit. That is
truly a shame. You need to stay on your lithium.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:05 PDT 1996
Article: 39295 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news-feed.iguide.com!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Giwer’s eagle eye strikes again!
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 03:09:21 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 10:09:41 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>(Matt Giwer) wrote:
>> [email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>>
>> >Matt Giwer
>[snip]
>> What was his rank?
>Eichmann’s rank was Obersturmbannfu”hrer (lieuteneant colonel).
And in what was posted the speaker reported to a mere
Gruppenfuehrer named Mueller. So who in the hell was the
speaker?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:06 PDT 1996
Article: 39312 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Dr. Klein Testifies About Auschwitz
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 03:24:25 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 10:24:46 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>Testimony of SS-Obersturmfuehrer Dr. Fritz Klein
>[Quoted in “The Belsen Trial” – Edited by R. Phillips, William Hodge and
>Company, 1949.p. 717]
>—————————————————————-
>When transports arrived at Auschwitz it was the doctor’s job to pick
>out those who were unfit or unable to work. These included children,
>old people and the sick. I have seen the gas chambers and crematoria
>at Auschwitz, and I knew that those I selected were to go to the gas
>chamber. But I only acted on orders given to me by Dr. Wirtz.
This is an old one. He should have seen them at Birkenau where
the gas chambers migrated to a few years ago.
>I never protested against people being sent to the gas chambers,
>although I never agreed. One cannot protest when in the army.
And another bird colonel who is completely ineffectual
=====
BTW: Don’t stop. Your mindless postings of orthodoxy are a gold
mine of information. I am thinking of creating side by side
presentations of the conflicting nonsense parts.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:06 PDT 1996
Article: 39314 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Hoessler Testifies About Auschwitz
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 03:21:05 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 10:21:24 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>Testimony of SS-Obersturmfuehrer Franz Hoessler
>[Quoted in “The Belsen Trial” – Edited by R. Phillips, William Hodge
>and Company, 1949, p. 714-715]
>—————————————————————-
>Everyone in the camp knew about the gas chamber at Auschwitz,
Objection, your honor, hearsay on the part of the witness.
>but at
>no time did I take part in the selection of prisoners who were to go to
>the gas chambers and then be cremated. Whilst I was there selection of
>prisoners for the gas chambers was done by Dr. Klein, Dr. Mengele and
>other young doctors whose names I do not know. I have attended these
>parades, but my job was merely to keep order. Often women were paraded
>naked in front of the doctors and persons selected by the doctors were
>sent to the gas chamber.
Excuse me, a person with the same rank of Eichmann was only there
to keep order? A Lt. Col. equivalent doing such a menial job?
Even being there in the first place?
>I made many complaints to Hoess about the way people were being sent to
>the gas chamber, but I was told it was not my business.
>
Not any bird colonel I have ever met.
If in fact this is the person speaking and not another of the
Obersturmfuerher Eichmann reporting to a Gruppenfuehrer
confusion, this person is obviously lying in saying that such a
high ranking officer as himself was actually working in crowd
control. What in the hell do you folks think the enlisted and
2nd louies are for?
Do you folks have the slighest idea how the military operates?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:07 PDT 1996
Article: 39315 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Lambert Testifies About Sobibor
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 03:30:50 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 8:31:09 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>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.
For the record here we will note that this person was either at
BELZEC or SOBIBOR and that those two used diesel engine exhaust
ELSE the “according to the model of Treblinka” and the “exact
directive” are meaningless statements.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:08 PDT 1996
Article: 39316 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: One More Time (for the Giwer-troll)
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 03:35:22 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 8:35:43 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Hilary Ostrov) wrote:
>In <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt
>Giwer) wrote:
>> Who was the person speaking in that post that so many claimed was
>>Adolph Eichmann? Does anyone know yet?
>Too bad the Giwer-troll in his selective editing of my post in another
>thread seems to have missed the following: (Big Hint Giwer-troll: you
>can use the same technique for any book which is cited as a referenc
There appears to be no point to this post other than to avoid
answering the question of who the person really is. It is
clearly not Eichmann due to who he reported to by his own words.
Do you have anything serious to add or are you spending too much
time learning HTML as advised?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:08 PDT 1996
Article: 39317 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!nntp.coast.net!oleane!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 03:43:49 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4o3hng$[email protected]> <4o4hnk$a15@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <4o7fgt$k7v@dfw-ixnews10.ix.netcom.com> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 10:44:08 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes…
>>[email protected] (Mike Curtis) wrote:
>>
>>>Kimberley Ahlf
>>
>>>>[Previous text deleted for brevity]
>>
>>>>To: Erlich606,
>>
>>>>Thank you for your advice and cautions. I will assume that you have
>>>>provided the above list of references in good faith, setting aside
>>>>whatever agenda(s) you may otherwise possess in your participation in the
>>>>alt.revisionism conference.
>>
>>>>I must confess that my initial interest and amusement while lurking and
>>>>participating in the conference is turning to disappointment. I have not
>>>>given up yet, though.
>>
>>>My understanding is that this conference is left with te dregs of
>>>denial. The most famous refuse to have any kind of discussion here.
>>>You might have to ask some of the long time members what the history
>>>is. Taking the high road with Matt Giwer is laudable. He’s been
>>>playing this game for 3 years that I know of and 10 according to
>>>archives. Good luck.
>>
>>You[r] understanding is quite false. The purpose of this conference
>>is to discussion revisions of the orthodox views of the
>>holocaust. It has nothing to do with mindless reiteration of the
>>orthodox views. But is the objective of the Gang of Six to
>>prevent that by any means (nonviolent means as one of their
>>objectives says) to prevent such discussions.
> Actually, Kimberly, Matt Giwer has been active in alt.revisionism for
> only a half year or so and has little knowledge of the history of this
> group. He is makinng up the objective to fit his needs.
Four the record I was participating about four years ago but you
folks appear to have either not been here or have forgotten or
would prefer not to remember. I recall I was mainly doing
multiplication, what you folks would call higher math, at the
time.
> But, the objective he has created is not that bad of a statement.
> Unfortunately for Matt, if the purpose of this conference to discuss
> revisionism of the orthodox view of the Holocaust, then the discussion
> is open to those who wish to defend the orthodox view. He may huff and
> puff, but there is no getting around that simple dialectic.
It is good to see you agree with me. It is in fact only open to
discussions of where the revisions may or may not be wrong. It
is not open to mindless postings of the orthodox view. It is not
open repeating anecdotal evidence as fact. It is only open to
serious refutation of the revisions that are proposed.
It is good that you agree with this. Now please comply with
your agreement.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:09 PDT 1996
Article: 39320 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Ultimate Extermination System
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 05:23:16 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <4o2v <4o7q91[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 12:23:37 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Richard J. Green) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer
>>>Now, if Giwer is talking about the bodies in the muffles, and NOT coke
>>>combusted in the furnace- as he was ORIGIONALLY, I would say that Giwer is
>>>trying to change his claim of HCN production in the furnaces! Could it be
>>>that Giwer, knowing that his claim of HCN production from coke in the in
>>>the furnaces is completely bogus, is desperately trying to jump ship and
>>>claim that he was taling about _bodies combusting in the muffle_?
>>
>> Excuse me, but you are not making much sense here. Are you
>>saying there were not bodies burned? Or are you saying bodies
>>are not organic? Are you saying that 120-160 lbs of human body
>>is not “plenty”?
>Bodies contain organics and yes these organics burn. I believe the
>topic was production of HCN. Mr. Giwer fails to present evidence for
>its production. I note that he has dropped his original claim that N2
>burns and forms HCN (a laughable statement).
Actually it was you who attempted in mid stream to change the
criteria for bodies self combusting and failed to continue the
discussion. It was also you who got me called a liar for
claiming that bones burn.
I have dropped no such claim as you are well aware. All you were
doing was using the formal meaning of the term burning to make it
appear I was lying and those you deceived claimed I was lying for
saying that HCN was a “burn” byproduct.
Thus you have engaged in willful and deliberate character
assassination. As I have noted before, it is only in this
conference in 15 years of experience that such things have
occurred and then by self identified Jews.
Were you not an atheist you would not have done such a thing.
Were there any rightieous Jews on this conference they would have
publically condemned you for what you have done.
But there are none and that means everyone who posts on this
conference and reads this post without exception.
Yes, I mean you.
And you personally, Green, are working very hard to give Jews a
bad name. But then you are not alone. The Gang of Seven is
right behind you.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:10 PDT 1996
Article: 39321 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsserver.jvnc.net!newsserver2.jvnc.net!netnews.upenn.edu!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 04:53:32 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 174
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4n83[email protected]> <319[email protected]> <[email protected]> <83223924[email protected]> <31a141d8.1499[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 9:53:54 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Kimberley Ahlf
>On Sat, 25 May 1996, Matt Giwer wrote:
>> Kimberley Ahlf
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Fri, 24 May 1996, Matt Giwer wrote:
>>
>> >> Kimberley Ahlf
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >On Fri, 24 May 1996, Matt Giwer wrote:
>>
>> >[Previouis text deleted for brevity]
>> >>
>> >> You came into this first pretending innocense. Then when I
>> >> correctly guessed bias you admitted it. And now, you pull canned
>> >> quotations out of your hat just like a creationist quoted Gish.
>> >>
>> >> Do you really think you are deceiving anyone with your act?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >Matt,
>>
>> >I believe I did not PRETEND innocense, I did not attempt to appear as a
>> >malleable intellectual child devoid of all preconceptions, but rather I
>> >PROFESSED ignorance; an important distinction when discussing someone’s
>> >character.
>>
>> Then why the quotation all of a sudden?
>I am sorry if my ignorance is not extensive enough to be non-threatening
>to you. Hitler’s quotation from the Nuremburg speech is quite famous
>(as you indicated when you ridiculed me earlier for citing it.) I found
>it in the one book I own which pertains exclusively to the holocaust.
Please do not kid yourself into thinking that anything you are
ever going to do are say short of pointing a gun at me will be
considered threatening. In which case you better be faster than
me or you die without a second thought.
Now please drop the “non-threatening” feminist gambit once and
for all.
As to your quote, you just happened to have a saved file of it?
Or you had memorized it? Or you just happened to have a book
that had it and you had the page marked so you could type it in?
>> Regarding bias, I’m affraid I assumed that a person
>> >undertaking the daunting task of revisionism on any subject expects bias
>> >in his audience as a matter of course and would consider skepticism a NATURAL
>> >and not a SINISTER position of the uninitiated. For this assumption I have
>> >already apologized; I did not intend to mislead you.
>>
>> Daunting? It is rather trivial actually. The problems with the
>> story really do leap off the pages at you once you stop looking
>> at it credulously.
>If you view the task of historical revisionism as ‘trivial’ then you can
>add ‘gross arrogance’ to the growing list of reasons why you are losing
>credibility with me.
Fine with me. You are not important to me.
>Another reason: You have specifically disavowed reference to published
>materials- denying the value of citations- yet you cite, “problems with
>the story really do leap off the pages” without explaining where those
>problems can be found and examined critically and independently. If you
>simply state the ‘problem’, such as “the amazing disappearing Treblinka”,
>without citing its source for corroboration, then I must accept the
>’problem’ as your testimonial evidence (another evidentiary matter you
>specifically disallow.)
Excuse me but anecdotal information is inadmissable in science.
If you had been reading this conference you would know about the
amazing disappearing Treblinka. It existed for only two years
and every last bit of evidence for its existance down to the
footing for the foundations of the buildings and the tons of
ashes have vanished without a trace. If you had been reading you
would know that is a holohugger claim. They ARE the
corroboration. I am simply restating their claims in a different
form.
>> >As for as my “act”- well, I’m going to assume that as someone who spends
>> >all of his time swimming upstream, all of the other fish have
>> >understandably begun to look alike to you and as such you have trouble
>> >accepting me for what I am.
>>
>> Quotes and all?
>Yes, please accept that I have the ability to recall what I have read and
>retrieve the source of my recollections. If you expect that only people
>who have no prior exposure to history can give you a fair shake, then you
>have been correct in the past when you have judged me ‘unfit’ to judge
>your positions. Being on a jury of your selecting would be an insult to
>anyone.
But then your readings did in fact bias you and rather than
pursue the matter openly it was about your third reply that
elicited the quote. That is exactly how the pretend innocent
seekers of the truth work in talk.origins. A couple of seeming
innocent exchanges and then a quotation right out of Gish.
Perhaps you simply innocently did the same thing. However,
having seen the same pattern many times before I will rest with
my conclusion.
>> >I will tell you again: I arrived knowing a little and with a healthy
>> >skepticism of your ideas and criticisms.
>>
>> Excuse me. How would you know what my ideas were before you
>> arrived? Again, an admission of a very strong bias towards
>> orthodoxy. And of course the wrong conference.
>I was unclear. I arrived knowing a little about the holocaust history and
>with a healthy skepticism of ideas and criticisms of that which I already
>believed I knew. Read it this way: I had to that date been given no
>reason to doubt the history which had already passed through my critical
>examination into my own cognizance, but I would allow any revisionist
>criticisms of that history pass through the same process of critical
>examination.
>That is what I have been doing, and the results of that critical
>process are what I have reported truthfully to you.
You have asserted it in the face of what has occurred.
>> I leave knowing more but with a
>> >definite hostility toward your ideas and criticisms, a hostility I did not
>> >previously possess.
>>
>> Were you more honest you would admit you arrived with that
>> hostility in full bloom and have not changed in the least.
>I think I have been very honest and I regret that the greatest failing in
>my discourse with you has been my inability to convey that to you.
My apologies but I find the parallel between your actions and the
“truth seeking, skeptical” creationists so compelling I can not
accept anything you are saying in this regard.
>> >If you choose to explain this outcome as a result of my being doltish or
>> >dishonest (I am neither) then you will be cursed to forever send your
>> >audience away hostile toward your positions, whether the positions possess
>> >merit or not.
>>
>> >Again, I wish you the best and that you may come to know the truth.
>>
>> What is truth?
>My opinion:
>’Truth’ goes beyond individual cognition and it can be neither confirmed
>nor denied by human beings. The ‘perception’ of truth is within the realm
>of cognition and it is subject to debate, fixation, revision and distortion
>by human beings. It is possible to at once both percieve the ‘truth’
>cognitively and possess the ‘truth’ actually, but that state too can be
>neither confirmed nor denied by human beings.
>Truth can never be more than a goal.
Socratic nonsense.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:11 PDT 1996
Article: 39322 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Nizkor: Proof is for Goyim
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 05:44:07 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 12:44:27 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Su Majewski) wrote:
>>When you folks knock off the one sided application of the Gentile
>>Rule you will have achieved a level of intellectual honesty you
>>should have started with.
>I would be very interested in knowing … what is the Gentile Rule?
I coined the phrase.
It comes from when I posted many non-confrontational messages
>from your father where I simply asked him to tell his story with
a few “interviewer” type questions thrown in to get the next
message. I have no problem with his willingness to go to
extremes to win but this exchange was completely non-hostile and
in fact I recognized that tendency in his posts before I
conducted this exchange.
Now as background there have been dozens of mindlessly repeated
quotes for “who the hell are they” people purporting to support a
particular version of the holocaust. Nothing about these people
was ever questioned save for the content of what they are
supposed to have said.
Yet when I posted some of the messages Al posted the first
challenge was to his very existance as is prove he is a real
person. That was quickly rejoined by others demanding proof he
really was in the army, did what he said he did, and all the
rest.
So the Gentile Rule is that ANY and ALL statements introduced
about the Holocaust be subject to the same standards of proof as
were the statements of Al Gentile, thus the Gentile Rule.
I will note that you and Alec have come forward to support at
least the existance of Al Gentile, not one person has come
forward to support even the existance of any one person who has
been cited as knowing somthing about what happened.
By that rule, Al Gentile is head and shoulders in credibility
over any of the other people who have been quoted here. In fact,
compared to them, the others are not even on the map. At least
there are people who agree he exists. There has been no one to
speak for even the existance of the Obersturmgruppengrabbers who
give such strange testimony.
You presence alone has dramatically increased his credibility to
everyone but those who insist upon one sided rules.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:11 PDT 1996
Article: 39325 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 06:14:04 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 11:14:27 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes…
>>Let us get something straight right now. I do not care if you do
>>or do not. Your participation in the Nizkor objectives, you
>>bias, in fact even this digression into motives and agendas is
>>off topic and is part of thwarting the purpose of this newsgroup.
> Matt Giwer, content policeman. Guarding newsgroups against off-topic
> postings since 1996.
Excuse me but your prior agreement with my position regarding
content has been noted.
This one is particularly in regard to the so far hypocritical
claim of Nizkorites to be encouraging an analytic and skeptical
review of history.
No Nizkorite or amen corner type has ever encouraged that.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:12 PDT 1996
Article: 39326 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!inter2.interstice.com!news2.cais.net!news.cais.net!bofh.dot!world1.bawave.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 17:48:20 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 77
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <319[email protected]> <4n5[email protected]> <31976[email protected]> <4n83[email protected]> <319[email protected]> <[email protected]> <83223924[email protected]> <31a141d8.1499[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 10:48:36 AM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Kimberley Ahlf
>On Fri, 24 May 1996, Matt Giwer wrote:
>> Kimberley Ahlf
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Fri, 24 May 1996, Matt Giwer wrote:
>[Previouis text deleted for brevity]
>>
>> You came into this first pretending innocense. Then when I
>> correctly guessed bias you admitted it. And now, you pull canned
>> quotations out of your hat just like a creationist quoted Gish.
>>
>> Do you really think you are deceiving anyone with your act?
>>
>>
>Matt,
>I believe I did not PRETEND innocense, I did not attempt to appear as a
>malleable intellectual child devoid of all preconceptions, but rather I
>PROFESSED ignorance; an important distinction when discussing someone’s
>character.
Then why the quotation all of a sudden?
Regarding bias, I’m affraid I assumed that a person
>undertaking the daunting task of revisionism on any subject expects bias
>in his audience as a matter of course and would consider skepticism a NATURAL
>and not a SINISTER position of the uninitiated. For this assumption I have
>already apologized; I did not intend to mislead you.
Daunting? It is rather trivial actually. The problems with the
story really do leap off the pages at you once you stop looking
at it credulously.
>As for as my “act”- well, I’m going to assume that as someone who spends
>all of his time swimming upstream, all of the other fish have
>understandably begun to look alike to you and as such you have trouble
>accepting me for what I am.
Quotes and all?
>I will tell you again: I arrived knowing a little and with a healthy
>skepticism of your ideas and criticisms.
Excuse me. How would you know what my ideas were before you
arrived? Again, an admission of a very strong bias towards
orthodoxy. And of course the wrong conference.
I leave knowing more but with a
>definite hostility toward your ideas and criticisms, a hostility I did not
>previously possess.
Were you more honest you would admit you arrived with that
hostility in full bloom and have not changed in the least.
>If you choose to explain this outcome as a result of my being doltish or
>dishonest (I am neither) then you will be cursed to forever send your
>audience away hostile toward your positions, whether the positions possess
>merit or not.
>Again, I wish you the best and that you may come to know the truth.
What is truth?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:13 PDT 1996
Article: 39329 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!serv.hinet.net!nctuccca.edu.tw!howland.reston.ans.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Cyanide Traces at Auschwitz Today
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 20:54:43 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <316a7397.68[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <4no[email protected]> <4np[email protected]> <[email protected]> <4[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 3:55:00 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>(Matt Giwer) wrote:
>> [email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <[email protected]>,
>> >Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines at Mr. Stein:
>>
>> > And you continue to lie about what happened as expected.
>>
>> >No one has ever caught Mr. Stein in a lie, whereas Mr. Giwer has been
>> >caught lying several times! It is no oversight that Mr. Giwer has
>> >provided not a single, solitary shred of evidence to back up his
>> >accusation. On the other hand, evidence of Mr. Giwer’s duplicity
>> >abound.
>>
>>
>> > Do you have anything else to offer?
>>
>> >Mr. Stein has always had hard, cold, verifiable facts to offer, which
>> >is more than can be said of Mr. Giwer.
>>
>>
>> > It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
>> > the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
>>
>> >For Mr. Giwer, it has never been a matter of how many died, but how
>> >much notoriety he can milk from a few callous insults offered to the
>> >memory of the dead.
>>
>> If you don’t like it, go to a holocaust NG. This is for
>> discussion of revisionism.
>DOGMA ALERT: Giwer’s response is somewhat illuminating in the light of Mr.
>Katz’s cogent observation of Giwer’s habit of lying, unsubstantiated
>claims, and reliances on incredulus conjecture. Given this, one might
>construe that Giwer considers proper “revisionist” discussion (i.e
>Holocaust denial) is based on lies, unsubstantiated claims, and incredulus
>conjecture- and that Giwer approves of (and practices) such!
>Illuminating indeed.
In other words, you agree that holohugging is not the purpose of
this group. Very good.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:14 PDT 1996
Article: 39335 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 17:20:14 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4o3hng[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 12:20:29 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Mike Curtis) wrote:
>Kimberley Ahlf
>>[Previous text deleted for brevity]
>>To: Erlich606,
>>Thank you for your advice and cautions. I will assume that you have
>>provided the above list of references in good faith, setting aside
>>whatever agenda(s) you may otherwise possess in your participation in the
>>alt.revisionism conference.
>>I must confess that my initial interest and amusement while lurking and
>>participating in the conference is turning to disappointment. I have not
>>given up yet, though.
>My understanding is that this conference is left with te dregs of
>denial. The most famous refuse to have any kind of discussion here.
>You might have to ask some of the long time members what the history
>is. Taking the high road with Matt Giwer is laudable. He’s been
>playing this game for 3 years that I know of and 10 according to
>archives. Good luck.
You understanding is quite false. The purpose of this conference
is to discussion revisions of the orthodox views of the
holocaust. It has nothing to do with mindless reiteration of the
orthodox views. But is the objective of the Gang of Six to
prevent that by any means (nonviolent means as one of their
objectives says) to prevent such discussions.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:14 PDT 1996
Article: 39337 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Diesel exhaust that looks like steam
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 22:56:31 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 136
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nlrc2[email protected]> <4nt375[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 5:56:49 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Charles Don Hall) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, Harry Katz
>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) whines:
>>
>> As I said, science does not prove anything. Even less the
>> applied science of engineering.
>[OK, here’s the deal. I can see from the references line that Mr.
>Giwer is responding to an article that I wrote, but his actual
>response hasn’t shown up at my site.]
>[Anticipating Mr. Giwer’s reaction: I have indeed complained to my
>ISP. In fact, I harangued him for hours, using several advanced
>rhetorical tactics including ‘hyperbole’, ‘threats’, and ‘sarcasm’.
>I suceeded in reducing him to tears, and I imagine that it will be
>a cold day in Hell before he even *thinks* of inconveniencing
>me again.]
>[In the meantime, the article still hasn’t shown up, so I’m going
>to attempt to attempt to piggyback my response off of Mr. Katz’
>article. (E-mail copies of replies are always welcome, of course.)]
>Anyway, as to Mr. Giwer’s points: I see that he’s still arguing
>that it’s absolutely wrong to say that it’s possible to “prove”
>things using science. In another thread, he argues that the
>word “demonstrate” should be used instead.
>In other words, he claims that it’s correct to say: “Demonstrate
>that a gas chamber with this design would be likely to explode.”
>But the sentence “Prove that a gas chamber with this design would
>be likely to explode” is just a meaningless collection of words,
>which instantly mark the speaker as a Creationist.
>I don’t agree with this. The words “Demonstrate” and “Prove”
>are pretty much synonyms. There are a few subtle differences,
>but I don’t think they matter much in this context.
If you do not learn the difference you will never have a clue in
science. The difference is far from subtle. Try it this way.
Mathematicians prove things. Did you ever take geometry?
Now, what powers the sun? Fusion. Prove it. I am certain you
can see at least one obvious problem with proving it. What can
be done is collect enough data about it to show that it is in
line with what we know about fusion reactions.
To keep this on topic, consider the “prove it’s not a gas
chamber” or “prove it’s a bomb shelter.” It can’t be done. What
can be done is show characteristics that are common to either or
not found in either.
>Still, if it will make Mr. Giwer happy, I’ll try to use
>”Demonstrate” from now on in this thread. (Although it seems
>to me that he should be a little bit more tolerant, given
>his propensity for bringing made-up nonsense words into the
>debate. “Paupacy” and “Tortable” are the most commonly-cited
>examples.)
>> I have already explained to him what he has posted means, oil
>> vapors. Now if he is not honest enough to admit what that means
>> when mixed with air, there is nothing I can do to help him.
>OK, it’s been demonstrated to my satisfaction that high concentrations
>of fuel vapors can be made to explode. But it’s also been demonstrated
>to my satisfaction that low concentrations of fuel vapors *don’t*
>explode.
>So, the question becomes: Was the concentration of fuel vapor in the
>gas chamber high enough that an explosion was likely?
We are not talking vapor but droplets. I am not certain of the
mechanism of their formation but I have seen it from old time toy
guns and from air rifles. On the presumption the mechanism is
related it is the exhaust cycle of the cylinder where it is
subject to the high speed of the hot exhaust gas turbulence that
forms them. Air rifles can actually diesel if too much oil is
used.
Sufficient to support his claim that concentration was high
enough to be mistaken for steam. The actual concentration
necessary for flame from the burning of one droplet to reach the
next droplet which would create a flame front. He has them so
close together that it looks white, reflecting all light. Thus
the separation is on the order of the wavelength of light, violet
light.
On the other hand, if we are talking vapors, it would not be
visible at all. It has to be suspended droplets to scatter light
back and appear white.
This is also why we can not be talking burned oil as that would
produce particulate carbon which by itself absorbs like and
produces a black looking smoke.
And still we have the problem of the droplets coating everything
in the building making it an oil soaked fire trap simply from
use.
>If Mr. Giwer believes that the answer is “Yes”, then he can “help”
>all of us by showing us some calculations that demonstrate this.
>A good place to start
This is the wrong place to start.
would be by contemplating the mixture of
>gases in the exhaust. At what concentration would the exhaust
>have been lethal? At what concentration would the exhaust have
>been visible? At what concentration would the exhaust have been
>likely to explode?
The above is talking about suspended droplets.
But to this point, my father was a cop at one point and told me
about a fad that was made illegal very fast. That was mounting a
spark plug at the end of the exhaust pipe. Then when they did
their drag racing starts that would ignite the unburned gasoline
that came out.
The general answer is that at no concentration outside of a
laboratory would these gases be visible and I don’t think there
are more than a handful that become visible under pressure, in
fact there may be none. I just have some vague memory of one
that does that that may be about something else entirely.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:15 PDT 1996
Article: 39339 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!serv.hinet.net!nctuccca.edu.tw!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Hoess Memoir and ‘Revisionist’ Insanity
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 22:17:27 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <31a1482[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 3:17:45 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>Alexander Baron
>## Victor E. Marsden
># Who died 20 years before the start of World War II; some
># Holocaust Revisionist!
>So? Even if someone died 20 years before the war, he still knew
>about the Holocaust as much as any of our “leading revisionists”…
As your constant to inform people about it by your mindless
postings (who was that guy really that you were claiming was
Eichmann?) it is clear that everyone knows about the same thing.
You problem is that you equate your belief with knowledge of if.
If one does not belief as you believe they have not knowledge.
Unfortunately it is knowledge that creates disbelief.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:16 PDT 1996
Article: 39341 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Giwer’s eagle eye strikes again!
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 00:34:47 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 5:35:07 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes:
>[About Eichmann]
># What was his rank?
>SS Major.
># His superior officer was a mere Gruppenfuehrer to whom he
># reported.
>His superior was Chief of the Gestapo.
The person speaking in what was posted reported to was
Gruppenfuehrer Mueller.
Now who the hell was he? Or are you really telling me that the
author of the first book passed this off as the words of Eichmann
and that the second author did not notice and you did not notice
who the speaker reported to? It is right there in what you
quoted.
Are you going to clarify this or are you simply going to leave
out the “reported to” sentence the next time?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:17 PDT 1996
Article: 39342 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: That lovely bomb morgue/bomb shelter
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 00:49:55 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 101
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 7:50:14 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt
>Giwer) wrote:
>> It was a lovely discussion. My protagonist insisting with every
>> fiber of his being that they were really morgues turned gas
>> chambers, never answering a single critical question, and then
>> finally declaring victory because the design changes from II/III
>> to the IV/V design proved his case for gas chambers.
>REALITY CHECK: Giwer, of course, must turn his blind eye to the fact that
>his dogmatic- and unsupported -assertion that the L.Kellers of Kremas II
>and III remain just that- a dogmatic and unsupported assertion -else his
>little fantasy regarding bomb shelters will come crashing down around his
>head.
>As to not answering “a single critical question,” Giwer once more
>demonstrates his capacity for chutzpah, as it has been Giwer who has
>strenously avoided reconciling the historical evidence regarding the
>L.Kelllers being origionally designed as morgues, and then converted ad
>hoc into homicidal gassing chambers, with his claim that there were
>instead bomb shelters!
That’s fine. Answer the question of why a morgue or a gas
chamber needs a more expensive reinforced concrete roof when the
other two buildings have cheaper peaked wooden roofs?
>> But then I had to tell him that at IV, according to Nizkor’s site
>> and sworn to be several of the Gang of Six, that a different
>> building entirely was used for this “gassing” at IV. With that
>> of course, his design improvements and therefore his entire
>> argument collapsed.
>REALITY CHECK: In reality Giwer once again dabbles in obersvational
>selectivity, simply ignoring all evidence that doesn’t support his absurd
>theory regarding the L.Kellers being bomb shelters, else _his_ entire
>argument would collapse! The simple fact remains that Krema IV, which is
>of a entirely different design that that of Kremas II and III, contained
>homicidal gas chambers connected to the Krema building (the split roof
>between the gas chambers on the rest of the Krema gave the _appearance_
>that it might be an outbuilding, while in fact it was part of the Krema)
>and was used for homicidal gassings. All this, of course, has no bearing
>on the fact that L.Keller 1 of Kreams II and III were also homicidal gas
>chambers. That Giwer attempts to divert the discussion from Kremas II and
>III to Krema IV is nothing more than a ruse to draw attention away from
>his absurd, and defunct, theory that the L.Kellers were bomb shelters.
Answer the question of WHY you claimed that LK IV and V design
changed supported your case for gas chambers when and entirely
different building was used at Kremas IV and V?
>> Whatever happened to this boy? Is he still alive? Did he simply
>> forget about it? Does he now agree their most likely secondary
>> function was a bomb shelter? If the boy had been smart he would
>> have taken a different tack entirely.
>REALITY CHECK: Here, again, we see Giwer attempt to “declare victory” by
>simply ignoring the fact that his absurd theory regarding bomb shelters
>have been put to rest.
Answer the questions.
>> But instead he had to go through his silly “ALERT” routine and
>> miss his opportunities. But then, holohuggers and particularly
>> the Gang of Six from Nizkor have no intention of living up to
>> their stated objective of a critical and skeptical awareness of
>> history. Rather they would avoid any discussion of this part of
>> history and bury all non-acceptance in the vilest terms
>> imaginable.
>REALITY CHECK: Giwer, lacking any intellectual or historical foundation
>for his argument, once more must resort to argumentum ad hominem to paper
>over the glaring fact that his continued ipse dixit claim that the
>L.Kellers were bomb shelters amounts to nothing more than beating a dead
>horse.
No alerts this time but even sillier reality checks.
But at no time did I claim they were bomb shelters. I simply
said that they have the characteristics of bomb shelters and that
everything you have identified as a gas chamber feature was also
a bomb shelter feature. In addition I pointed to an additional
bomb shelter feature, the roof, which can not be explained by
your assumptions.
As for dead horses, that is another conference.
But you will for the first time answer the questions will you
not? And please keep in mind that your design improvements
claims have been shot to shit by Nizkor.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:17 PDT 1996
Article: 39348 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Ultimate Extermination System
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 20:23:39 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 192
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <317e33e1.3331[email protected]> <4mkdg3$i[email protected]> <4mlhh7$k[email protected]> <4mn58a$b[email protected]> <4mpa3s$7[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 3:24:01 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>(Matt Giwer) wrote:
>> [email protected] (Miloslav Bilik) wrote:
>>
>> >[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wrote:
>>
>> >>[email protected] (Miloslav Bilik) wrote:
>>
>> >>>Coke is produced since 1815, and on a large scale before the second
>> >>>war. Even in the 40’s, only CO could cause any trouble. The problem is
>> >>>about the HCN rates on the walls of the ‘vergassungkeller’, one floor
>> >>>beneath the furnacies. You should give a look on the composition of
>> >>>the coal oven gasses to know the rate of the HCN in the average coal
>> >>>heating conditions (1000°C-1400°C). The HCN rate is ridiculous low.
>> >>>Nothing to ‘stick’ on the walls.
>>
>> >I have to add that coke was used in the furnaces, no coal.
>>
>> You have lost me completely here. The subject was crematoria not
>> furnaces.
>IGNORANCE ALERT: Giwer, obviously has not done his homework. Again.
>Crematoria have furnaces, be they fired by natural gas, oil, or coke. How
>else does Giwer suppose the muffles, in which the deceased are cremated,
>of the crematoria FURNACES are heated? By Giwer blowing hot air into them?
So in this context you are claiming the home furnaces are also
crematoria? You are very strange.
>> >>But since it is an acid, it has nothing to do with quantity.
>> >>Whatever would react would “stick” as you so quaintly put it.
>>
>> >With a strong acid, certainly. Prussic acid is weaker than CO2.
>>
>> CO2 is not an acid.
>REALITY CHECK: No, CO2 is not an acid itself. It is, however, the acid
>anhydride of carbonic acid: CO2(aq) + H2O(l) <-> H2C03(aq). The
>acid-ionization constant (at 25C) for carbonic acid (H2CO3) is 4.3E-7, as
>compared to that of hydrocyanic acid (HCN) which is 4.9E-10. So
>hydrocyanic acid is less acidic than carbonic acid, which has a pH
>slightly less than that of milk. (_General Chemistry_, ISBN 0-395-43302-9;
>pp.639,645.)
The subject here is CO2 and nothing else. If he wants to talk
about something else he can of course bring that up.
>This, of course, was Mr. Bilik’s point.
I am certain he can speak for himself and does not need your help
in the matter.
>> >The furnaces produced too a lot of CO2, then you have to suppose on the
>> >top that the furnaces were not airtight to release some HCN to the
>> >beneath floor (and there isn’t any HCN produced with coke).
>>
>> What are you talking about? The Krema ovens were at ground
>> level. That is what all this talk about raising the bodies back
>> out of the LK is all about.
>REALITY CHECK: Giwer, once more sorely lacking in the homework department,
>fails to realize that in the Kremas the exhaust flues leading from the
>furnaces to the smokestacks _were_ underground. As the coke generators
>drew air _in_, they would not emit exhaust. The only time furnace exhaust
>could have escaped the furnace would have been when the muffle door was
>opened to insert bodies, or when the smaller ash door was opened to remove
>the remains.
You are truly amazing to believe that something can burn with a
supply of oxygen. You are equally amazing to believe that hot
gases would go down and then back up. Remembering of course that
you don’t even have a draft to work with.
But what the hell, the Kremas existed in their own separate
reality in the first place, why not a few more excursions into
the Twilight Zone just for the sake of the stories? Fires burn
without a draft. Hot air goes first down then up.
Is there anything else you would like to add to this list? We
might be able to sell it as an Outer Limits episode. Of course
the special effects will be expensive.
BTW: You just shot the shit out of those stories about the
chimneys belching flames day and night you realize. At least we
now know those stories are lies. Or did you forget that just a
couple months ago we were going over one of those fire belching
stories?
But if I remember correctly you were supporting the fire belching
and ignoring the disaster of a chimney fire at that time.
But then I always did say you folks are just here to try to shut
down talk on revisionism and will do anything you can to do so,
including arguing against your previous position just to try to
make your orthodoxy the only thing that is heard. And now you
even argue that the impossible happened. Amazing.
>> >>And the quaint phrasing indicates you have not the least idea
>> >>what you are talking about but repeating what others have said.
>>
>> >’Quaint’, good. ‘Stick’ came from anothers revisionists posts, that’s
>> >why I quoted this word.
>>
>> If you knew better you should not have done it.
>>
>> >My question remains without reply: you told that incinerators produced
>> >more HCN than the gassings. Do you have any sources, or only **one**
>> >reference case of intoxication with a domestic coke’s heating with HCN
>> >instead of CO ?
>>
>> I said only that they probably did. I am not a “scholar.” I do
>> not need other people to tell me about basic science.
>CHUTZPAH ALERT: Giwer is indeed not a scholar. That is because Giwer has
>no interest in basic science. He much prefers to remain in ignorance and
>instead simply appeal to his pseudo-scientific dogma, while gratuitously
>insulting his betters, when he is shown to be the lying, scientifically
>illiterate, and pompus ass he is.
Your “coke generators” whatever they may be, burn without air not
mine.
>> Coke is simply coal with most of the non-carbon organics burned
>> out of it.
>SUPER DUPER IGNORANCE ALERT: Giwer, spouting more pseudo-scientific
>nonsense, fails to understand that organics, by definition, are “compounds
>that can be thought of as derivatives of compounds of carbon and hydrogen
>(hydrocarbon).” (Ibid. p.50.) The heating of coal subliminates the
>hydrocarbons, and thus turns it into coke, which is mostly carbon, and
>thus burns cleaner.
That is what I said. If your only problem is sublimate vice
“burned out” why did you simply not say so?
>It is also worth remembering that the “H” in HCN stands for hydrogen. Like
>in the hydrogen in hydrocarbons subliminated from coal in the coking
>process.
Was there any point to this digression?
>> There were plenty of organics available in the ovens
>> for a similar reaction to take place.
>EVASION ALERT: Here, we see Giwer once more attempting to evade his
>origional- and STILL UNSUPPORTED -assertions. What other plentiful
>”organics” were available in the “ovens?” Does Giwer mean that “there were
>plenty of organics” still available in the coke? The very same coke with
>”most of the non-carbon organics burned out of it?” Or does Giwer mean
>that “there were plenty of organics available” in the form of bodies in
>the muffles?
>Now, if Giwer is talking about the bodies in the muffles, and NOT coke
>combusted in the furnace- as he was ORIGIONALLY, I would say that Giwer is
>trying to change his claim of HCN production in the furnaces! Could it be
>that Giwer, knowing that his claim of HCN production from coke in the in
>the furnaces is completely bogus, is desperately trying to jump ship and
>claim that he was taling about _bodies combusting in the muffle_?
Excuse me, but you are not making much sense here. Are you
saying there were not bodies burned? Or are you saying bodies
are not organic? Are you saying that 120-160 lbs of human body
is not “plenty”?
Don’t forget a chemist here who holds himself in very high regard
has said that bodies have sufficient btu content to burn
themselves so at least he says that bodies are “combusting” in
the muffle. And in fact all of these 2-3 kg of coke stories
depend upon that happening to be correct.
Or are you saying that those stories are not correct and much
more than 2-3 kg of coke per body was needed?
This is the second entire class of holocaust stories that you
have demolished in the same message. And in the last message you
demolished the “all in ten minutes” story.
Keep on responding like this and you will have singlehandedly
torn down all the fables about your favorite holocaust. And
don’t ever let me slow you down, ever. Together we can at least
get rid of many of the conflicting stories and at least have only
one set of stories to deal with.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:18 PDT 1996
Article: 39354 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Neo/Paleo-Deholocaustolithification
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 02:40:48 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <31[email protected]> <4o[email protected]> <4o63jg$3d[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 7:41:09 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes…
>>[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>>tom moran ([email protected]) whines:
>>
>>> Neo/Paleo-Deholocaustolithification: The result of comparing
>>> older Holocaust accounts that were once written in stone to
>>> newer accounts that are currently written in stone.
>>
>>>Once again, having nothing of substance to contribute, Mr. Moran
>>>resorts to baiting Jews. Mr. Moran is fond of demanding a death
>>>certificate for each victim of the Nazis, but feels free to libel and
>>>slander Jews without so much as a shred of evidence.
>>
>>>Mr. Moran is, to use his own words, corrupt, and insults the
>>>intelligence of the readers of this newsgroup.
>>
>> Hairy Cats, by his own words will not address the clear fact that
>>the story has changed over the years. He may retreat one more
>>time into the “reputable historian” dodge but fail to explain how
>>untrained amateurs with ZERO resources managed to pull out of
>>thin air a number that is essentially correct.
>>
>> But most likely he will simply answer this post with another of
>>his heavily editted responses with a real shit message system and
>>not address the matter in the least.
>>
>> And he will still refuse to answer the basic questions I asked
>>him about rich mixtures even though he comes on as knowing
>>something about what he asserts.
> Some new readers may wonder why Mr. Katz and others do not take much
> time to address all of the points that Giwer makes. They should note:
> Mr. Giwer is, as far as I can determine, a troller whose only interest
> is in causing fights. While he can sound superficially plausible, he
> has lied about what has been said in exchanges (while accusing others
> of lying), refused to document claims, pretended not to see posts which
> contain documented refutation of his claims (even when they have been
> emailed to him), engaged in actual libel, and generally conducted
> himself with such complete lack of intellectual and factual integrity
> that there seems to be no point in taking the time to read and respond.
> For detailed and documented evidence of this, please refer to: URL
> http://www.almanac.bc.ca/cgi-bin/ftp.pl?people/g/giwer.matt
It is good to see you agree with my statements about Hairy Cats.
I should thank you but it would be hollow.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:19 PDT 1996
Article: 39362 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!news.sdsmt.edu!nntp.uac.net!news.tufts.edu!blanket.mitre.org!agate!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Testimonial Fiction
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 18:31:51 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <31a31339.3[email protected]> <4nvnk3$l[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 1:32:06 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Chuck Ferree
>Chuck Ferree writes:
>Taken into perspective, Moran’s opinions or what ever they are, just
>babble along, and don’t ever prove anything. I’d really like to have a
>decent coherent discussion with Moran. But so far it’s been
>impossible, because this man is so bigoted and anti-Semitic, that it
>gets in his way of logic. But just the same, he has the God given
>right to be 100% wrong and totally illogical. It’s too bad that his
>point of view is irrational. But it’s his point of view. Think about
>that when his bullshit is posted an glanced over. It’s pathetic.
>Chuck
>Not to mention the fact that this is Giwer’s post, which proves to my
>satisfaction, that this turkey hasn’t had an original thought, EVER!!!
The only creative thoughts you have ever had were that you were a
fighter pilot, a multi-engine pilot, a camp liberator, a war
crimes prosecutor, and had a grand tour of all the camps.
How did Ike get all the credit, Mr. Superhero?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:20 PDT 1996
Article: 39365 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Consequences
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 02:01:38 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 7:01:58 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Let us take two extreme cases regarding searching for a credible
truth regarding the holocaust.
1) After a critical analysis everything the Gang of Seven
supports is conceded to be true.
The consequences of this, despite the Nizkorite assumption of the
return of Nazism and the fall of democracy, are absolutely zero,
nada, nothing. No change in anything that exists today.
2) The stories of mass extermination of undocumented people are
found to be false.
People who now presume they have lost entire families can start
searching for them again. Millions (double counting of course)
will mutually discover they still do have relatives they thought
were long dead. Reunions around the world. Much happiness and
joy for people who have been sorrowing for decades. Tons of
material tabloid TV.
=====
So what is the problem with a real critical and skeptical review
of the holocaust stories?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:20 PDT 1996
Article: 39371 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!news.sdsmt.edu!nntp.uac.net!news.tufts.edu!blanket.mitre.org!agate!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!usenet.etri.re.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!bofh.dot!usenet.seri.re.kr!bofh.dot!news.dacom.co.kr!arclight.uoregon.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Ultimate Extermination System
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 19:43:38 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <317e33e1.3[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <4o2va1[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 2:43:55 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Richard J. Green) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer
>>>> But since it is an acid, it has nothing to do with quantity.
>>>>Whatever would react would “stick” as you so quaintly put it.
>>
>>>With a strong acid, certainly. Prussic acid is weaker than CO2.
>>
>> CO2 is not an acid.
>Would Mr. Giwer consider CO2 dissolved in water an acid? Yes or no?
That is not under discussion, deceitful one. The discussion is
CO2, a gas, as you can plainly see.
Take your off topic crap to another conference. There should be
a Mr. Wizard related group some place where you can disolve teeth
in coke.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:21 PDT 1996
Article: 39372 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!news.sdsmt.edu!nntp.uac.net!news.tufts.edu!cam-news-feed5.bbnplanet.com!news.ner.bbnplanet.net!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Diesel exhaust that looks like steam
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 19:40:23 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 2:40:38 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Chuck Ferree
>Chuck Ferree wrote:
>Diesel exhaust looks like diesel exhaust. Steam on the otherhand,
>looks like steam. I ain’t no smart engineer like Gwere claims to be,
>(which he ain’t one either) but I know diesel exhaust when I see it,
>and I know steam when I see steam. Steam is vaporized water, and
>quickly changes back to regular water as it cools, which is very
>quickly. Diesel exhaust can create a stream of black or dark colored
>smoke which can hang in the air for much longer periods than steam.
>Any person, engineer or qualified multi-engine airplane fighter pilot
>can tell the difference immediately. MTW, Gywer, betcha didn’t know
>that the Germans had airplanes with diesel engines. Weren’t worth a
>shit like lots of other stuff they made in their desperate effort to
>win the war. But those suckers sure knew how to use gas to kill
>people. They got that down pat. Bet they wish they hadn’t done it.
At least you agree the two can not be confused and as such the
death by steaming stories are not explained by the fanciful oil
vapor story. You are also saying the explanation is full of shit
because the color is wrong. I can certainly agree with the first
one but as to the second, he claims to have a research paper
supporting him on the color.
You appear to think you are saying I am wrong but in fact you are
supporting my position. That is the second time this week you
have gotten the sides reversed and wound up supporting me. I
really do not need your help, but thanks anyway.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:22 PDT 1996
Article: 39391 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: alt.revisionism
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 21:54:06 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4o[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 2:54:24 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Hilary Ostrov) wrote:
>In <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt
>Giwer) wrote:
>> The purpose of this conference, alt.revisionism, is for the
>>discussion of the revision of the orthodox beliefs about the
>>holocaust. Perhaps that can be expanded to the discussion of the
>>revision of other aspects of history.
>Translation: This isn’t fair. I want a newsgroup all to myself where
>I can indulge my fantasies without being repeatedly exposed as the
>ignorant, ill-informed fool that I am.
It is good to see you agree with the purpose of this conference.
Alstine has come around. He has demolished three classes of
stories in two messages in this run along. Want to try it
yourself?
BTW: You really should get around to learning a bit more HTML.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:23 PDT 1996
Article: 39420 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 05:07:12 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 10:07:32 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>(DvdThomas) wrote:
>[snip]
>> In other words, if the 10 minutes turned out to be 1 hour, that wouldn’t
>> invalidate the patent. But the point is this–a patent is not an
>> engineering test document and it typically contains unproven claims. So a
>> patent claim that Zyklon-B would release the bulk of its HCN in 10 minutes
>> is just a patent claim. It says nothing about whether the material was
>> ever built to do that, or even if it could be. It only says that this was
>> one of the inventor’s intents, and it sounded feasible to the examiner.
>This is a rather specious argument, considering that Dr. Peters
>_confirmed_, in his book, that almost _all_ the HCN in Zyklon B was
>emitted in 10 minutes.
You folks who are completely and totally ignorant of patents and
how they are written (claim the world in the broadest possible
terms) are awfully quick to latch on to the one thing that
supports your spurious claim WITHOUT the slightest mention of the
carrier or the temperature to which the statement applies.
Do you or do you not recognize that the carrier media and the
temperature will affect the release time?
That is a very simple question. Please answer it.
Here is another simple question. What temperature and carrier
media does that time apply to? Please answer it.
And just who in the hell is Dr. Peters? Does he have a doctorate
in theology? chemistry, letters, honorary? in what?
If you would like to read some of the quotes from Dr. Gish, read
talk.origins for a while.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:24 PDT 1996
Article: 39423 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.voicenet.com!news2.noc.netcom.net!noc.netcom.net!ixnews1.ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 04:30:19 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 148
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 9:30:41 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Kimberley Ahlf
>[Previous text deleted for brevity]
>Matt,
>OK, from the previous posting I understand that it is NOT your intention
>to communicate your postions and criticisms to a mass audience (of which I
>am representative), that you in fact do not believe a member of the mass
>audience is even qualified to examine your arguments.
>When I tell you that I am willing to accept your positions as
>scientifically arrived at you say, “I do not care if you do or do not.”
>That is fine; ‘pure science’ is an honorable pursuit.
>Then you write:
>> As to what you presume my goal to be, you are wrong. I have not
>>the slightest interest in any fixed, immutable, eternal,
>>damn-those-who-question truth about anything in history including
>>the holocaust.
>So you are not re-examining the holocaust record to correct any historical
>errors and thereby revise the history? Your goal is to criticize to no
>end? If that is true then it comes perilously close to confirming the
>assertions of your detractors.
Not in the least. I am interested in seeing what purports to be
evidence rejected and take a look at what is left. I am
interested in seeing realistic calculations and descriptions made
and with open discussion by those qualified to contribute without
the low life engaging in deliberate character assassination.
I am interested in a lot of things but when there is absolutely
no give even on the most fanciful and outlandish claims by the
holohuggers it may seem like that to you. But then you claim not
to have been here that long so you are unaware of what is going
on with the Gang of Seven and their amen corner.
>You have expressly rejected the goals of contributing to either the public
>record or the scholarly record. You do this entirely for your own
>edification?
Excuse me. I have only rejected the “thus spake zarathusta” form
of false scholarship and have interjected analytic scientific
thought into the discussion. And as I have pointed out, not one
of the holohuggers here has any claim to any form of scholarship
but rather only to the rote regurgitation of the opinions of
others.
Rule one of scholarship, do your own research from original
materials. It is not like a term paper or a thesis. Thus the
holohuggers are presenting absolutely nothing original of their
own.
So you see, I and the holohuggers are, in this regard, upon
exactly equal grounds.
What I am doing differently is applying decades of an omniverous
interest in science, fringe science and counter science to this
subject. And as I have often pointed out, I had no problem with
holocaust orthodoxy in the least until I learned more about it,
specifically that Zyklon-B was in fact cyanide. Despite that
being proposed as the central feature of gassing, it is in fact
its most vulnerable point.
Learning more is what got me started in this. I will now of
course pursue it to its conclusion. I have pursued much in this
and I find that the support of claims are quite as bad as the
designation of cyanide as the means of gassing. The more I learn
the less credible become the stories. That I can not change.
Either I have to abandon a broad range of scientific knowledge
that has served me well for decades in every area or I have to
reject these stories. The answer is quite clear to me despite
the people who admit to no scientific background claiming I am
wrong in my science. Why would I or anyone listen to them?
>One more note, since the subject of my character still seems to be at
>least implicitely at question in your postings to me, would you please
>consider the following:
>You have drawn attention to my presumptions, rightfully, and levelled fair
>criticism at them. You indicate, often correctly, that my presumptions
>betray certain biases that I possess- biases that I freely admit to and
>consider to be entirely justified as a manifestation of ‘healthy
>skepticism’ and critical ability (traits you seem to consider properly
>used only when applied to’orthodox’ view and not to ‘revisionist’ view.)
>Let me draw attention to a presumption you have made about a statement of
>mine:
>I wrote:
>>>I wish you all the best and that you may someday come to know the truth.
>You presumed:
>> Again, your bias is towards the orthodox view that has NEVER been
>>critically or skeptically examined yet that is what you view as
>>the truth. You certainly have never questioned it.
>You have presumed that by imploring you to seek ‘truth’ I am imploring you
>to accept the orthodox view. What word in that statement was
>representative of the orthodox view when you construed it to reveal bias
>toward orthodoxy?
Excuse me but in your first post to me I identified that you were
biased and you admitted it in your first response. The actual
kicker in your statement is “come to KNOW the truth” rather than
“come to FIND the truth.” You obviously had in mind something
that I would come to know rather than find. It is a religious
form of expession. And of course you have agreed that I was
correct.
Is this really so hard for you to see?
>Despite your assumption, I have in fact confronted the orthodox view with
>a skeptical eye. That is why I sought this conference. The Goldhagen
>controversy has indeed inspired me to re-examine orthodox notions of
>holocaust scholarship and I came to this NG expecting to find lively and
>informed debate.
Goldhagen is hardly a controvery outside of this conference and
then it only goes to his attempt at a blanket indictment. So far
as I am aware, in this country there has been exactly one airing
but the claim was to it being on the McNeal Newshour that I have
watched at least the first half hour of for the last three months
without missing a show and have never heard a mention of it much
less see the interview.
Where did you hear of a “controversy”?
>I will no longer implore you to seek the truth if you consider it to be an
>unreasonable request.
You never did. You said KNOW the truth. And you admitted I was
correct.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:24 PDT 1996
Article: 39425 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Apology to Mike Curtis
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 05:25:34 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 12:25:53 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Su Majewski) wrote:
>Alec Grynspan
>>I see that my message from my other server seems to not have made it.
>>I did not call Mike Curtis a child molester. I had no reason to.
>Only if he picks on Rite and Matt, correct?
>
Curtis is an amen corner type. Never had an original thought in
his life but loves the “pile on” concept from football.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:25 PDT 1996
Article: 39427 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Pellets, shower, porous pillars…
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 06:18:42 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <4nha[email protected]> <4njbuo$1[email protected]> <4nl7mc$q[email protected]> <4nnrj0$l[email protected]> <4np02[email protected]> <4nu5d[email protected]> <4nu[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 11:19:03 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Richard Schultz) wrote:
>Prince Myshkin ([email protected]) wrote:
>: Listen up, oh member of the clean up staff in the chem lab. No
>: rational scientist posts any equations without the constants
>: filled in and the justification for the constants given. That
>: was not done. Now get back to your mop.
>So when are you going to post a source (or, I suppose a set of “P Chem
>equations”) for your claim that HCN is a byproduct of coke combustion
>or a retraction of that claim in light of the evidence to the contrary
>posted here?
It has already been posted. Where have you been? Flu gases from
coke are one of the commercial sources of it as you should have
read. But I would never expect a distinguished chemist such as
yourself do know such mundane thing as a commerical source.
>And when do you plan to post your translation of that Hitler quote?
Which quote are you talking about?
>—–
>Richard Schultz [email protected]
>Department of Chemistry tel: 972-3-531-8065
>Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel fax: 972-3-535-1250
>—–
>”It would have been like discussing sundials with a bat.”
Such a chemist.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:26 PDT 1996
Article: 39428 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.bonehead.matt-giwer
Subject: Re: My Complaint About Matt Giwer
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 06:19:35 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nqu9j$2b[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <4o[email protected]> <4[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 11:19:55 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:39428 alt.bonehead.matt-giwer:12
[email protected] (Gord McFee) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (william
>c anderson) said:
>>
>>Matt Giwer ([email protected]) wrote:
>>: [email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>>: >For Mr. Giwer, it has never been a matter of how many survived, but
>>: >how much attention he could get from insulting the memory of the dead.
>>:
>>: Find a holocaust conference. The subject of this one is
>>: revisionism.
>>This latest tactic by the Giwer Troll–pretending that, since the topic of
>>this newsgroup is revisionism, arguing against revisionism is not
>>allowed–is neither original nor terribly interesting. It looks to me as
>>if our trollish buddy is running out of steam…
>Interesting. We all remember the Giwer-troll posting that he was here to
>hone his debating skills for the Presidential race this year, and now he is
>trying to kick everyone out of the group who doesn’t kiss his butt. Guess
>he isn’t such an almighty great debater after all, but just typical bully
>Nazi wanabee rubbish. One thing is sure…..
Actually I have never asked you to kiss anything nor can I
imagine you ever have.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:26 PDT 1996
Article: 39431 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Cyanide Traces at Auschwitz Today
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 07:16:26 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <316a7397.68[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <4n[email protected]> <4no[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 12:16:47 AM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Richard Schultz) wrote:
>Michael P. Stein ([email protected]) wrote:
>: It is now Mr. Giwer who is dishonestly pretending the original topic
>: was whether bones burn in the scientific sense. I guess he thinks if he
>: repeats his lie often enough it will become true. (Another charge he
>: makes against other people.) However, DejaNews has a long memory.
>And don’t forget, it was Prince Myshkin who originally claimed that the
>crematory ovens would produce more HCN
As I have previously corrected you, I said “probably” would
produce more. Now that you are clearly in the camp of the liars
about me I see no reason to consider you any more intellectually
honest than your colleague in California. You may of course
correct this with a restatement, no need for a retraction.
You are simply adding yourself to the group of deliberate tribal
liars if you do not.
than the gas chambers because
>(according to him) HCN is a byproduct of coke combustion. When it was
>pointed out to him that in fact HCN is a byproduct of coke *production*
>(i.e. coal distillation in the *absence* of oxygen),
In Israel, do we have a chemist!
Another idiot who believes that fire can be maintained in the
absense of oxygen. It must be a real shit ass university.
suddenly all of
>the chemists (i.e. people who actually know what they are talking about)
>are liars. What a surprise.
What would an academic know about the real world? It is not a
job requriement.
>—–
>Richard Schultz [email protected]
>Department of Chemistry tel: 972-3-531-8065
>Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel fax: 972-3-535-1250
>—–
>”French bread makes very good skis”
It appears integrity is not a requirement of your university.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 12:25:27 PDT 1996
Article: 39434 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another revision of alt.revision based thoughts
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 06:23:09 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <4o1di[email protected]> <4o1pt5$[email protected]> <4o7i3o$[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 11:23:31 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>>(Matt Giwer) said:
>>
>>>This conference is for the discussion of the revision of the orthodox
>>>holocaust stories. Discussion of the orthodox holocaust is off topic.
> By all means go complain to my sys admin that I am writing “12 million
> people died during the Holocaust, many of them in gas chambers” in the
> *revisionism* group. He hasn’t had a good laugh for a while.
I would never complain. You folks provide so much revisionist
material without the need for the slightest additional effort it
is like having a dozen free research assistants.
You folks really do not appear to realize what you are doing to
yourselves.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 15:35:59 PDT 1996
Article: 53273 of alt.conspiracy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!serv.hinet.net!news.cc.nctu.edu.tw!nctuccca.edu.tw!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!sun4nl!xs4all!mail
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.flame,alt.conspiracy,alt.politics.correct,alt.syntax.tactical,alt.gothic,alt.discrimination,ba.israelis,alt.usenet.kooks
Subject: Re: ‘Jews who are not fit for work can be eliminated without qualms’
Followup-To: alt.flame,alt.smokers,alt.revisionism,alt.conspiracy,alt.politics.correct,alt.syntax.tactical,alt.gothic,alt.discrimination,ba.israelis,alt.usenet.kooks
Date: 25 May 1996 12:10:40 +0200
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 25
Sender: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: basement.replay.com
X-XS4ALL-Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 12:10:43 MET DST
X-To: [email protected]
Remailed-By: The NEXUS-Berkeley Remailer
Complaints-To: remailer-owner
Errors-To: [email protected]
X-Message-ID: <[email protected]>
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-17.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 17 6:35:23 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
X-Mail2News-Errors-To: [email protected]
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.flame:12560 alt.conspiracy:53273 alt.politics.correct:103307 alt.syntax.tactical:1685 alt.gothic:94052 alt.discrimination:47550 alt.usenet.kooks:24333
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>Letter from Dr. Erhard Wetzel to Reichskommissar Lohse, October 25, 1941
>[Hitler and the Final Solution – G. Fleming, University of California
>Press, 1984, p. 70]
Invoking the Gentile rule…
>————————————————————————
>With regard to my letter of 18 October 1941, please be informed that
>Oberdiensleiter [Chief Executive Officer] Brack from the Fuehrer’s
>Chancellory
Do you know this Brack? Can you prove he ever existed? Do you
have any evidence he is telling the truth? Have you even seen
the original of this letter? How do you know it is authentic?
How did you verify it?
Another imaginary Nazi made up the holohuggers.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:41 PDT 1996
Article: 39439 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Auschwitz: A revisionist FAQ (1)
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 05:54:47 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 12:55:06 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (tom moran) wrote:
>Jean-Francois Beaulieu
> To any new comers to alt.revisionism.
>The methods of this post are the way things should be done when trying
>to determine a truth or a fiction. Read this post and take note of the
>directness of it all and then compare it with the responses that may
>follow.
This is not a response to his but yours and I agree completely.
Get the facts and address the issue.
Mindlessly quoting someone who may never have existed is neither
addressing the issue or getting the facts.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:42 PDT 1996
Article: 39447 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 19:13:39 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 90
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4o3hng$[email protected]> <4o4hnk$a15@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <[email protected]> <25MAY19961[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-24.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 2:14:06 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Kimberley Ahlf
>[snip]
>>>Rethink your view of this fact so that you can see my initial demeanor
>>>as not one of an intellectual ‘trojan horse,’ but as a newly arrived
>>>skeptic.
>> I have no idea what you thought you were doing but I read you,
>>and not correctly, in the first message. How did I do that if you were
>>as you say? You had already heard one side of the story. You were not
>>about to make the personal effort to deal with the other side of the
>>story.
>(I’m assuming you meant to write _IN_correctly up above)
>You have not been hearing me. OF COURSE I had already heard one side
>of the story- that is the accepted historical record- the “orthodox
>view.” The reason why I looked into alt.revisionism was to see what the
>debate is about.
>When I read your revisionist position I treated it with
>the skepticism one must filter all new information through. Here’s the
>clincher- and I think this may be where your mistrust of me begins- the
>orthodox view has already passed through the filter of my skepticism (in
>pieces) and I have not yet found sufficient evidence to alter that view.
>Simply because I am predisposed to believe in the present that which I
>have believed in the past does not make me closed-minded or even hostile
>toward ideas that threaten to alter my view.
>You may in fact have criticisms with the potential to alter my view.
>BUT- here’s why you are having difficulty altering my view:
>- You have stated that you don’t CARE whether you alter my view
Why would I care about any individual? I call them as I see
them. Why would you want special attention?
>- You have stated that I am not equipped to possess a valid view
of the scientific issues I am raising.
And that is what you are not prepared to expend the effort to
gain the basis for judgment.
>- You have stated that your revisionism is not based on scholarly research
> (I’m inclined to believe this is just a semantic error and that you
> truly are performing a form of independent scholarship.)
Science is quite different from scholarship but you do not appear
to grasp the magnitude of the difference.
>- You seem to be focussed more on questioning my character than addressing
> my questions.
Hardly. I simply found motivation as the first thing in your
first message to me.
>Are these factors true of all people with whom you converse, or have you
>singled me out as particularly unworthy of your respect?
There you go again, dropping in “unworthy of your respect” as a
follow up to unrelated questions. Do you expect respect for your
scientific knowledge? Do you expect me to politely remain silent
about it when you say you are not convinced by what I say in that
regard?
>Are you only interested in conversing with people who already concur with
>your revisionist positions?
I do not. Unlike the orthodox here, so far as I am aware there
are no email consultations and conspiracies as have been openly
mentioned in this conference, for example the one that started
the use of the mantra.
>If so, why should revisionist history be imune to the same critical
>skepticism which you complain is sorely lacking from orthodox history?
It is not and should not be but there has been none here. That
would be interesting. Unfortunately what we get in response are
far out of context quotations, deliberate deception and claims of
the impossible.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:43 PDT 1996
Article: 39449 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Seeking the first time
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 19:41:27 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <31a461b3.2590[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-24.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 2:41:54 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (tom moran) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wrote:
>>
>> _The American Hebrew_, October 31, 1919, page 582:
>>
>> THE CRUCIFIXION OF JEWS MUST STOP!
>> By MARTIN H. GLYNN
>> (Former Governor of the State of N.Y.)
>>
>>
> Giwer, whats the story with the date, “1919”?
What story? That is the publication date. This has been around
for quite some time. No one has claimed it is a forgery or
anything like that.
The worst claim about it has been that it is out of context.
However no one has explained the coincidence of the name and
number being the same as for the consequences of the next big war
to come along.
Perhaps it is just one of those, the more things change the more
they remain the same.
Myself, I do not believe in coincidence.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:43 PDT 1996
Article: 39452 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Crematorium Rates
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 19:51:15 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <31[email protected]> <4o[email protected]> <31a[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-24.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 2:51:41 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Mike Curtis) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wrote:
>>>> Maybe you should expand on what relevance collecting ashes for
>>>>relatives has to do with the gross differnce in cremation times.
>>>Because laws dictate certain prosedures be carried out.
>> No laws of man dictate cremation times.
>Really. It is dictated to the degree that the end result MUST be a
>certain way. I’ve read that Canada requires the large bones be reduced
>to a fine white ash. This will dictate a from of cremation the Germans
>didn’t need to concern themselves over. This also suggests a
>difference in technique between modern requirements and WW2 German
>extermination camp requirements. If you have the laws available please
>present them. It might be worth going to the library and getting those
>Canadian and American laws concerning the funeral service and posting
>them. This will go a long way twoard your presenting a better argument
>than your foes.
Good sir, from the “eyewitness” statements, the reduction of
bones to ash was exactly the objective of the Kremas AND at only
800 degrees. There is no essential difference in times save that
the Kremas would have taken considerably longer to achieve that
end at this lower temperature. How much longer is another
question but the relationship is not linear.
Even if they objective was not a “fine white ash” the lower
temperature would keep the time at least in the same league.
And if you have been reading what has been posted about
cremation, in 20-30 minutes there is still most of the flesh left
even at the much higher temperatures.
You also know if you have been reading that the time is a direct
function of body weight and that multiple bodies simply take
longer.
No matter what laws are passed by man, the above can not be
changed.
>>>> I don’t know if cremation procedures require the bodies be in
>>>>coffins or not. Neverheless I saw this offered before where I pointed
>>>>out the wood would increase the rates since it is combustiable. Or are
>>>>you saying asbestos coffins are used?
>>>Sometimes cardboard is used, I understand. But it is still one body at
>>>a time at modern crematoria.
>> Three bodies take longer than one just as the fat take longer
>>than the thin.
>Not if one doesn’t care about the end result and remember the furnaces
>are quite hot.
They are four hundred or more degrees cooler than the ovens of
today which can NOT achieve the same results in the required time
period. That is a fact.
The story is not going to wash no matter how you look at it.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:44 PDT 1996
Article: 39463 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Ultimate Extermination System
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 06:56:43 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <317e33e1.3331[email protected]> <4mkdg3$i[email protected]> <4mlhh7$k[email protected]> <4mn58a$b[email protected]> <4mpa3s$7[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 1:57:04 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Richard Schultz) wrote:
>Prince Myshkin ([email protected]) wrote:
>: I mentioned simply that the chimneys would PROBABLY have put out
>: more HCN than was used in any gassing.
>Do you have any plans to post a reference for your claim that HCN is
>a byproduct of coke combustion, or a retraction of that claim in light
>of the descriptions recently posted of its being a byproduct of coke
>*production*?
It has already been given as a commercial source of of HCN. I
would never expect an academic to know anything about the real
world.
>—–
>Richard Schultz [email protected]
>Department of Chemistry tel: 972-3-531-8065
>Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel fax: 972-3-535-1250
>—–
>”Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system
>of government.”
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:45 PDT 1996
Article: 39465 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ‘The Bodies Were Dragged Out Of the Gas Chambers’
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 07:02:50 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 2:03:11 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Richard J. Green) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Matt Giwer
>> But of course in either case a more complete work up or pathology
>>needs be done. And again I note references to color are rather
>>rare. And it was striking the first place we find the right
>>indication for cyanide it is in a camp that used CO where if
>>there was any mention of color it should have been of pink.
>Does Mr. Giwer disagree with OSHA on cyanosis being a symptom of CO
>poisoning?
You are of course a willfully deceitful, character assassinating,
atheist Jew. Now I have no idea what game you are trying to play
at this point in the message but I have said nothing about OSHA
so why do you not post it first? Or so you disagree with the
NAVSEA manual on turbine exhaust poisoning? But of course, YOU
FIRST! I made up mine. you deal with yours first.
>> But as a bottom line we really should not make too much of the
>>color. It was simply striking by its rarity and being in the
>>wrong place.
>Translation: Mr. Giwer recognizes he was wrong, but as usual will not
>admit it.
A better translation is
You are of course a willfully deceitful, character assassinating,
atheist Jew.
But if this is not clear enough I can and have gone further in
noting that all the Jews in this conference have condoned your
behavior by their silence and are no better than you. And that
includes all of them and yes, that means you.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:46 PDT 1996
Article: 39466 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Diesel exhaust that looks like steam
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 06:45:27 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 1:45:48 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Chuck Ferree
>Chuck Ferree wrote:
>You are kidding me, and stop it.
>I never had any intention of supporting you, and I have never read a
>book or document which claims the Nazis steamed anyone to death. This
>statement doesn’t say it didn’t happen, but the only place I have
>personally seen such accusations is right here on alt. rev.
>Matt Giwer wrote:
>>
>> Chuck Ferree
>>
>> >Chuck Ferree wrote:
>>
>> >Diesel exhaust looks like diesel exhaust. Steam on the otherhand,
>> You appear to think you are saying I am wrong but in fact you are
>> supporting my position. That is the second time this week you
>> have gotten the sides reversed and wound up supporting me. I
>> really do not need your help, but thanks anyway.
>You mean I’ve blown it twice in one week, boy I better change to
>better class of wine too. What was the other time? And just for the
>record, IF anything I’ve said supports anything you’ve said, I deserve
>30 lashes from Mc Vay.
>Or even the baron can whip me, he likes weird stuff.
You really should change your wine. Consider you missed the
first time I posted what supported me and said so in response to
a post of yours.
You should have started being more careful after that. Really,
you should get the help you so obviously need. This is nothing
personal but even the holohuggers should have told you by now
were they not so happy using you to attack me, that you are doing
more to destroy their cause than to help it.
I am serious in this. I have no interest in pursuing this in
public but this is my established venue on this subject. Now if
you do not want to, that is your business.
But seriously, every time you talk about what you did in the war
you add something new and unrelated. First you claimed to have
liberated a camp, a ground trooper. Then you claimed to be a
fighter pilot and a fighter pilot would not claim to have
liberated a camp. Then you claimed to have flown the brass to
Poland. You suddenly became a retrained multi-engine personnel
transport pilot. Finally you claimed to have brough war
criminals to justice.
You may have forgotten some of these but you did in fact make
these claims. If the holohuggers can get over using you, they
might be willing to confirm what I have said and try to help you
also.
You will not believe it but this is a sincere statement and any
honest holohugger will confirm what I have said and try to help
you.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:46 PDT 1996
Article: 39467 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The shy, retiring Giwer-troll
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 06:48:40 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 1:49:02 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Gord McFee) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt
>Giwer) said:
>>> While I can’t say that there is anyone on usenet I despise more than
>>> Giwer (though I can think of a couple of contenders), I consider the
>>> line of insinuation taken by Mr. Mazal above to be inappropriate.
>>> While I greatly respect Mr. Mazal, I don’t quite understand why he is
>>> choosing to pursue such issues.
>>> Giwer may be guilty of ad homimems and innuendo; and is clearly guilty
>>> – despite his denials – of antisemitism, but that does not justify
>>> anyone else playing the same game with him.
>> And I am supposed to ignore it? Have you posted a public message
>>admonishing him?
>Deny it then, you gutless Giwer-troll. If it is incorrect (is it??), then
>sue the shit out of Mr. Mazal. And sue me while you’re at it. But you
>won’t, will you?
Do you really expect me to respond in kind to such a childish
post? If you do you are stupider than I thought you were.
BTW: I am still await the warrant service from your lawsuit.
When is it going to arrive? You have certainly filed by now.
Can you not get service? Offer me the service fee and I will go
down and pick it up.
This is not a sewer service state.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:47 PDT 1996
Article: 39468 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Diesel exhaust that looks like steam
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 20:44:52 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-24.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 1:45:19 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>The ratios which resulted in white fumes were 0.0121 and 0.033,
>according to the Pattle et. al. paper.
And what was the NORMAL ratio? You do realize that these have to
be compared to the normal ratio, do you not? I did say my memory
was probably wrong and probably much too low.
So lets have the numbers for comparison.
>I’ll let our 163 IQ’ed former engineer, B.Sc, figure out for
>himself which part was air and which fuel. After all, he used
>to claim that everybody in this newsgroup is mentally retarded
>when compared to him. He must be able to figure it out.
>Tell me, Giwer: do you realize what a living joke you are?
Good sir, you either agree those ratios are not enough air to
burn the oil or you have burnt oil which is black. It is really
that simple. A properly running engine has colorless exhaust.
After that you have a choice of colors, black and white.
Partially burned you get black, unburned you get white.
Partially burned you can not explain a confusion with steam thus
indicating the reports of steaming people were a fabrication.
You were getting some where until you decided you were going to
fall back to supporting the death by CO poisoning.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:48 PDT 1996
Article: 39472 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!news.sover.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Giwer’s eagle eye strikes again!
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 05:48:44 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 12:49:05 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Gord McFee) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>(Matt Giwer) said:
>[About Eichmann]
>>># So why was he hung when he was clearly an underling and had no
>>># part in ordering what was happening?
>>>Of course he had such a part.
>> What was his rank?
>He was an SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer (Lt-Col) and was head of the office that
>supervised the transportation of the Jews to the death camps (Amt IV b 4).
>>># You holohuggers need to get a grip.
>>>You need to stop being so stupid. You present reasoning powers
>>>of a not-so-bright five year old. Because Eichmann was shaken
>>>when we witnessed the gassings, you assume he was innocent.
>> His superior officer was a mere Gruppenfuehrer to whom he
>>reported.
>A “mere” Gruppenfuehrer is roughly the equivalent of a Lt-General.
>A great student of the war such as the Giwer-troll should have known this,
>so one is left with the impression that….
Give it up, boy. It has already been sworn to that he only
reported to the head of the Gestapo. The head of the Gestapo was
not named Mueller.
Take your idiocy some place else.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:49 PDT 1996
Article: 39473 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!fury.berkshire.net!news.albany.net!news.sover.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Another Time For A Showdown
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 06:28:39 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 11:29:02 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Yale F. Edeiken) wrote:
>> [email protected] (tom moran) writes:
>>
>>
>> Mr. Edeiken was putting the “KKKK” in quote marks, but after
>> numerous times asking Mr.Edeiken exactly where did he see Moran type
>> the words “KKKK” and his follow up with the same he has backed off on
>> putting the “KKKK” in quote marks.
> That’s a filthy fucking lie and you are a filthy fucking liar. And you know
>it.
Lie? Are you not the person who said that the testimony of a
witness was “The EVIDENCE I am about to give shall be the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth”?
Are you still maintaining the Pennsylvania is the strange state
that uses the word evidence instead of testimony?
As I have previously noted and demonstrated you folks will lie
and slander to preserve your precious little holocaust all to
yourselves. You are disgusting.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:50 PDT 1996
Article: 39475 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,edm.general,ab.general,can.general,tor.general,van.general,calgary.general
Subject: Re: Guns and Liberty
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 21:29:16 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-24.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 4:29:43 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:39475 ab.general:9764 can.general:78633 van.general:8763
[email protected] (Scott Marsden) wrote:
>[email protected] (Matt Giwer) wrote:
>> All I observed is the obvious. That Canadians would be just like
>>Americans if they had similar access to guns. Or are you saying
>>there is something inherently different about Canadians?
>Ah, but you are ignoring some important, and little-used (and know)
>statistics. Few Canadians are aware that the murder rate in Alberta
>higher than murder rate in the northwestern states of Idaho, Montana,
>and Wyoming — the three states combined have a population about the
>same as Alberta’s. The difference is not in the gun laws, but in the
>population of each region’s urban centers. Out of the three states,
>only the city of Boise, Idaho exceeds a population 100,000 people
>(around 150,000). Of course, as well all know, both Calgary and
>Edmonton’s populations exceed 600,000, and they also have a much
>higher murder rate than anywhere in the 3 states mentioned.
>Truth be told, a person is safer from being shot with a gun in rural
>America than they are in urban Canada. If gun laws make all the
>difference, why is this so?
The simple minded, gun fearing people are fixated upon the means
rather than the causes.
I may be able to dig up the file if you are interested but from
memory it was some time 1960s that handguns became the weapon of
choice used in the majority of murders. There was no particular
change in the murder rate nor did the increase in the murder rate
track the increasing use of handguns.
Also this is far from the highest rate of murders per capita nor
was it in the Prohibition days but back in the 1890s. So far as
I am aware no one has come up with an explanation for that. Also
the lowest murder rate was during the Depression which certainly
eliminates poverty as a factor.
Taking a godlike guess without evidence it would appear that the
crime rate is a long term variable in society just like men
wearing hats or women’s hemlines.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:50 PDT 1996
Article: 39479 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: alt.revisionism
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 21:47:23 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4o66b7$c7i@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-24.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 4:47:50 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Karl Kluge) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes:
> Lets see if you holohuggers can deal with this for the first
> time.
> The purpose of this conference, alt.revisionism, is for the
> discussion of the revision of the orthodox beliefs about the
> holocaust. Perhaps that can be expanded to the discussion of the
> revision of other aspects of history.
> It is not the place for the mindless repetition of orthodox
> holocaustry. It is not the place to support orthodoxy. It is
> not the place to achieve the objectives of Nizkor, to call anyone
> who revises orthodoxy antisemitic, neo-nazi or anti-democratic.
>1) It would be a rather one-sided “discussion of the revision of the orthodox
>beliefs about the holocaust” if it were not permitted to “support orthodoxy.”
>2) This is simply wrong. The purpose of this conference is ideally to confine
>all discussions of the topic of Holocaust revisionism to this forum, in
>exactly the same way that the purpose of talk.abortion is ideally to confine
>all abortion discussion there, and the purpose of talk.origins is ideally to
>confine all discussions of evolution vs. creationism.
By your analogy with abortion it would pro or con abortion then
pro or con revision. That would be done by requiring a defense
of what is being revised. A discussion of atheism would be the
discussion of the fault with the position that there is no
evidence of a god.
However, in all three examples we find a group of participants
who preach. In the abortion and the atheist cases they tend to
preach from the bible. Here they preach from their equivalent of
the bible, books written about people who claimed they were
eyewitnesses.
And beyond that we here have an organized effort by at least six
of them to continue this preaching and not to discuss revisions
where so many of them are so obviously needed. For example,
there needs be a better explanation than charred ash to white ash
to explain the 25 fold decrease in cremation time at a 400 degree
lower temperature. I would think any reasonable person would
admit that but then preachers are not reasonable people.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:51 PDT 1996
Article: 39480 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!news.ironhorse.com!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Neo/Paleo-Deholocaustolithification
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 06:29:24 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 11:29:46 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Yale F. Edeiken) wrote:
>> [email protected] (tom moran) writes:
>>
>> Hilary, why don’t you post sonmething like ‘The Best of Moran’
>> like I do to list your capacities? Go for it, Hilary.
> The “Best of Moran” would be a blank page.
Because it would not require you to expend the effort to create
lies to support your precious little holocaust.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:52 PDT 1996
Article: 39483 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Declaration Of Deficiency
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 22:48:55 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-24.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 5:49:24 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (tom moran) wrote:
>
> They who refuse to debate, oppose debate or stifle debate,
>declare they don’t have the will, the substance or the guts to meet
>the challenge. It is a sign of cowardice.
> It is tacit declaration they know they would lose, that they
>don’t have faith in their position, that they know deep down inside or
>are conciously aware their own position sucks.
> This applies to any of those persons and groups that oppose free
>open discussion on the Holocaust.
I prefer to view it as a deepseated belief that they would be
going over to the side of evil were they to engage in such a
discussion.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:52 PDT 1996
Article: 39494 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!cancer.vividnet.com!news.sojourn.com!newsfeed.concentric.net!cdc2.cdc.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The shy, retiring Giwer-troll
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 06:53:13 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 1:53:34 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Gord McFee) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>(Danny) said:
>> Giwer may be guilty of ad homimems and innuendo; and is clearly guilty
>> – despite his denials – of antisemitism, but that does not justify
>> anyone else playing the same game with him.
>So the Giwer-troll can libel people, disparage people’s backgrounds, make
>ethnic and racist slurs, call people every name in the book, use the word
>”cunt” in what is supposed to be at least semi-civil conversation, but we
>shouldn’t touch a single hair on his chinny-chin-chin? Sorry, I don’t buy
>that. As long as the Giwer-troll continues to act like a piece of dreck, he
>can expect to be treated like one.
>If Mr. Giwer-troll is so insulted, perhaps he would like to sue Mr. Mazal?
Hey, McFly, is anyone in there? I am waiting for the service of
your lawsuit. It has been a long time. I so miss the
opportunity to post the claims here before I tear it up.
So please, do not keep me waiting. Sue ME!
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:53 PDT 1996
Article: 39495 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!cancer.vividnet.com!news.sojourn.com!newsfeed.concentric.net!cdc2.cdc.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!EU.net!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Am I sued yet?
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 06:51:08 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 1:51:28 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
A certain Gord McFee has been making an ass of the entire
holohugger community by claiming he is going to sue me.
I am still waiting for the service.
When are these holohuggers going to learn how they discredit
themselves with such “threats”?
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Sun May 26 17:34:54 PDT 1996
Article: 39496 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!bofh.dot!news.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!bofh.dot!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Diesel exhaust that looks like steam
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 06:30:57 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <4nlrc2$agn@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 11:31:18 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Gord McFee) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>(Matt Giwer) said:
>>
>>Alec Grynspan
>>>Harry W. Mazal OBE wrote:
>>>> Dr. Keren is wasting his breath and energy trying to convince Mr.
>>>> Giwer with documented proof. Mr. Giwer is a professional (and thus a
>>>> sad and hopeless) chain-puller. No proof will ever convince Mr. Giwer
>>>> except that which is posted on a label as “90 Proof.”
>>>6 months from now, in another Newsgroup or even net, Matt Giwer will be
>>>able to say:
>>>”Because they refused to face the question, they came up with the story
>>>that I was a boozer.”
>> I can say that right now. It has been going on for months. This is not
>>the first.
>> If I remember correctly it was Danny Keren who first posted such a thing.
>>Whoever it was, I pointed out the consequences of
>>starting a rumor and it took whoever it was at least a week to withdraw
>>it. Now, as you see, the rumor stands.
>The Giwer-troll never gets it right. It wasn’t Dr. Keren. It was someone
>who knows. Might have been Marduk.
Dear Dumbshit,
You forgot the mantra.
Respectfully,
You betters
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Mon May 27 12:17:56 PDT 1996
Article: 39503 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The Holocaust Plea
Date: Mon, 27 May 1996 00:17:35 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl5-24.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sun May 26 5:18:05 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes…
>>[email protected] (Danny) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Matt Giwer) writes…
>>>>Kimberley Ahlf
>>
>>>[snip]
>>
>>>>>Despite your assumption, I have in fact confronted the orthodox view with
>>>>>a skeptical eye. That is why I sought this conference. The Goldhagen
>>>>>controversy has indeed inspired me to re-examine orthodox notions of
>>>>>holocaust scholarship and I came to this NG expecting to find lively and
>>>>>informed debate.
>>>>
>>>> Goldhagen is hardly a controvery outside of this conference and
>>>>then it only goes to his attempt at a blanket indictment. So far
>>>>as I am aware, in this country there has been exactly one airing
>>>>but the claim was to it being on the McNeal Newshour that I have
>>>>watched at least the first half hour of for the last three months
>>>>without missing a show and have never heard a mention of it much
>>>>less see the interview.
>>>>
>>>> Where did you hear of a “controversy”?
>>
>>> I had lunch last weekend with a friend who is a Professor of
>>> Comparative Politics and was a Humbolt Scholar in Berlin four years
>>> ago. (You, no doubt, are aware the the Humbolt Scholarship program was
>>> established about a decade ago as a German program modeled after the
>>> Rhodes Scholar program at Oxford. It is, of course, not nearly as
>>> prestigeous as the Rhodes program but aspires to be similar.) She was
>>> at a meeting of Humbolt Alums in Washington DC last month and said that
>>> the Goldhagen book was the center of conversation for them. it stirred
>>> up emotions and there were strong arguments made within this group to
>>> several points in Goldhagen’s thesis.
>>
>>> I see this as controversy. Of course it is an academic controversy –
>>> and you may not function very well at that strata.
>>
>> That is cute but not productive. As you know the discussion here
>>is not about any academic controversy. It is someone claiming no
>>particular prior interest in this subject hearing of this
>>particular controversy.
> Good point (and you so rarely make them.) Well, then I direct you to
> the stories in Time and Newsweek about the book. And the stories in
> the New York Times (both in the news section and in the book review
> section). And the stories picked up by the AP wire about the reception
> Goldhagen has received at verious talks he has given. And the newswire
> stories about how the book is being perceived in Germany even though it
> has not yet been published there.
> I suspect that there have been electronic journalism stories as well,
> but I don’t follow much electronic journalism so I have no personal
> information about that.
The point, that the question is not for you to answer but for her
to answer. There may be such “controversy” reported some place.
But the specific question is where did she hear about it.
—–
It is not a question of how many died without gassing rather
the miracle that so many survived with gassing.
From [email protected] Mon May 27 12:17:57 PDT 1996
Article: 39505 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!bofh.dot!en.com!news.dgsys.com!news.sprintlink.net!new-news.sprintlink.net!realtime.net!news.mindspring.com!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!netcom.net.uk!ix.netcom.com!news
From: [email protected] (Matt Giwer)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Crematorium Rates
Date: Sun, 26 May 1996 05:10:01 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <31[email protected]> <4o[email protected]> <3[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tam-fl10-59.ix.netcom.com
X-NETCOM-Date: Sat May 25 10:10:22 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
[email protected] (Mike Curtis) wrote:
>[email protected] (tom moran) wrote:
>>[email protected] (Harry Katz) wrote:
>>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>>tom moran ([email protected]) whines:
>>>
>>> Even though modern day cremation facilities take two and half
>>> hours to cremate one body, the cremation ovens at Auschwitz,
>>> barely the size of a regrigerator, could cremate up to three
>>> bodies in twenty minutes, as the Holocaust story has it.
>>>
>>>The Nazis did not have to collect the ashes for the victims’ survivng
>>>relatives, nor did the bodies have to be burned inside of coffins.
>>>This has been explained to Mr. Moran before, but he has never, ever let
>>>facts stand in the way of his favorite pastime, Jew-bashing!
>> Maybe you should expand on what relevance collecting ashes for
>>relatives has to do with the gross differnce in cremation times.
>Because laws dictate certain prosedures be carried out.
No laws of man dictate cremation times.
>> I don’t know if cremation procedures require the bodies be in
>>coffins or not. Neverheless I saw this offered before where I pointed
>>out the wood would increase the rates since it is combustiable. Or are
>>you saying asbestos coffins are used?
>Sometimes cardboard is used, I understand. But it is still one body at
>a time at modern crematoria.
Three bodies take longer than one just as the fat take longer
than the thin.
>> We are talking up 25 bodies being cremated in a 2 1/2 hour period
>>in the 1944 cremation ovens as opposed to 1 body in modern ovens
>>aren’t we?
>Without the coffin there was room for more than one at a time in
>1944(you picked the date).
Which only means it takes longer as any scientifically literate
person would see in an instant.
You are not. Therefore you believe fantasy.
