In article <[email protected]>,
Daniel Swan <[email protected]> wrote:
>Richard J Green ([email protected]) wrote:
>
>: Perhaps, you’d be willing to share with us who the bigots are and who
>: the nonbigots are.
>
>Well, I don’t see the relevance of this to the point I
>made… and I recognize only one name on that list, although a
>few seem familiar.
>
>: Is Greg Raven a bigot?
>: Is Bradley Smith a bigot?
>: Is Bellinger a bigot?
>: Is Al Baron a bigot?
>: Is Tom Moran a bigot?
>: Is David Irving a bigot?
>: Is Carto a bigot?
>
>: Somehow I doubt that any “revisionist” will be willing to answer
>: these questions.
>
>Are you accusing me of being a revisionist?
No, that’s the first post of yours I ever read, but it struck me as a
bit disingenuous unless you meant to distinguish between denial and
revisionism. It’s also possible that it was ingenuous rather than
disingenuous, which is afterall forgiveable.
BTW- if you really do not recognize any of the names on the list, you
ought to do a bit of reading to be fully armed to participate in this
group.
Best,
Rich Green
From [email protected] Thu Jun 4 12:45:06 EDT 1998
Article: 179807 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.eecs.umich.edu!
enews.sgi.com!news.idt.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!
18.24.4.11!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Why can’t the revisionists tell me
where all the revisionsists who aren’t neo-Nazis or anti-Semites are?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <Etu[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:43:52 GMT
Lines: 42
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:179807
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]
From [email protected] Thu Jun 4 12:45:06 EDT 1998
Article: 180044 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!
cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!denver-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!coop.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Edeikens Address and Telephone Number
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 01:19:26 GMT
Lines: 25
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:180044
The coward who posted Mr. Edeiken’s supposed address.
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
I notice that the coward, Berg, had no comment at the posting of private
information on the newsgroup. Does he condone such activity.
I predict:
The coward Berg
1, will never accept Mr. Edeiken’s offer involving an impartial tribunal
to judge the evidence.
2, will never acknowlege that Luftl was intentionally dishonest.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]
From [email protected] Thu Jun 4 12:45:06 EDT 1998
Article: 180046 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.maxwell.syr.edu!
newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Edeikens Address and Telephone Number
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <199806020057.RAA[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 01:24:41 GMT
Lines: 29
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:180046
In article <[email protected]>,
Richard G. Philllips <[email protected]> wrote:
>none wrote:
>>
[Mr. Edeiken’s supposed address deleted]
>>
>> Reach out and touch someone.
>> Telephone Ad
>
>===========================================
>PHillips
>
>I don’t know who you are but I speak as a friend. Publishing a man’s
>whereabouts without his permission might be a very dangerous business.
One denier is willing to speak out against such behavior. Where are the
others? Mr. McClelland? Mr. Berg? Mr. Moran? Mr. Allen?
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]
From [email protected] Thu Jun 4 12:45:07 EDT 1998
Article: 180053 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!
newsfeed.wli.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Why can’t the revisionists tell me where all the revisionsists
who aren’t neo-Nazis or anti-Semites are?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <MPG.fd95c064e37e7fa989[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 01:51:22 GMT
Lines: 60
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:180053
In article <[email protected]>,
Fergus McClelland <[email protected]> wrote:
>mvanalst@!spam!home.com (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>[email protected] (Fergus McClelland) wrote:
>>
>>> mvanalst@!spam!home.com (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>>>
>>> DAMNATION! Here I am agreeing with Titania again. What is the world
>>> coming to?
>>>
>>> >In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Allan Matthews wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Gee, you’d think that after several weeks of posting this at least one
>>> >> > revisionist who isn’t a neo-Nazi or anti-Semite would have come forward
>>> >> > and said “Here I am!”
>>> >> >
>>> >> > But, no. It appears that there just aren’t any such revisionists around.
>>> >> > The few bozos who have bothered to claim that they aren’t neo-Nazis or
>>> >> > anti-Semites were clearly lying, which, given the general behavior of
>>> >> > revisionists, isn’t surprising in the least.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > However, just in case some revisionist scholars missed it here it is
>>> >> > again:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Where are the revisionists who aren’t neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?
>>> >> =============================================
>>> >> PHillips
>>> >>
>>> >> Oh? Is there something wrong with being either neo-nazi or anti-Semitic?
>>> >
>>> >Yes.
>>> >
>>> >Mark
>>>
>>> Gulp, I have to say it, I agree with Mark.
>>
>>The ZOG mind rays are working, Ficus. Resistance is futile. Soon you will
>>be assimilated.
>
>Sorry old chap, I am a devoted monarchist British citizen, and, as
>such, believe in fair play, parliamentary democracy, which in this
>case is adversarial, and adversarial courts. That being the case, I
>could never support any form of dictatorship, or fail to accord any
>individual a turn at the wicket based on religion, tribe or race. The
>Union Flag protects me from Zogism, Nizism, Communism and Nazi-ism.
What the hell is a wicket anyway?
Sincerely,
Another ignorant Yank.
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]
From [email protected] Thu Jun 4 12:45:07 EDT 1998
Article: 180250 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!
newspeer.monmouth.com!
Supernews60!supernews.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Why can’t the revisionists tell me
where all the revisionsists who aren’t neo-Nazis or anti-Semites are?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 01:50:16 GMT
Lines: 23
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:180250
In article <[email protected]>,
Yale F. Edeiken <[email protected]> wrote:
>> [email protected] (Richard J Green) writes:
>
>> Fergus McClelland <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> What the hell is a wicket anyway?
>
> It’s what a bowler aims at and a batter protects in cricket. If the ball hits
>the wicket and knocks it over (actually knocks the battels off the top of the
>wicket stakes) the batter is out.
So, what’s an over?
Best,
IY
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]
From [email protected] Thu Jun 4 12:45:08 EDT 1998
Article: 180432 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!diablo.cs.uofs.edu!news.missouri.edu!uky.edu!
stdio!Gamma.RU!srcc!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!
18.24.4.11!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Why can’t the revisionists tell me where all the
revisionsists who aren’t neo-Nazis or anti-Semites are?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <357004[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 18:49:08 GMT
Lines: 40
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:180432
In article <[email protected]>,
Daniel Swan <[email protected]> wrote:
>Richard G. Philllips ([email protected]) wrote:
>
>> Where are the revisionists who aren’t neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?
>
>Well, I don’t know much about revisionism itself, however, as a
>military historian, I definitely support it in principle. I
>don’t believe any area of history should be exempted from the
>arena of discussion and criticism.
>
>Of course, this comes down to the crux: Is Holocaust Revisionism
>necessarily bigotry? It definitely can be a tool of bigots, but
>is not always necessarily so.
Perhaps, you’d be willing to share with us who the bigots are and who
the nonbigots are.
Is Greg Raven a bigot?
Is Bradley Smith a bigot?
Is Bellinger a bigot?
Is Al Baron a bigot?
Is Tom Moran a bigot?
Is David Irving a bigot?
Is Carto a bigot?
Somehow I doubt that any “revisionist” will be willing to answer
these questions.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]
From [email protected] Fri Jun 5 19:39:18 EDT 1998
Article: 180715 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.
monmouth.com!netnews.com!
newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Why can’t the revisionists tell me where all the
revisionsists who aren’t neo-Nazis or anti-Semites are?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <EtyD5n[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:48:20 GMT
Lines: 18
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:180715
In article <[email protected]>,
Fergus McClelland <[email protected]> wrote:
>Three sticks, with two little sticks across the top. You dress in
>white, stick these thin sticks in the ground side by side with two
>smaller sticks, (called bails), bridging the top. Then, a chap stands
>at a crease in the ground in front of them with a larger piece of wood
>called a bat in his hands.
It has to be a chap, does it? Or can a bloke qualify as well?
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]
From [email protected] Fri Jun 5 19:39:18 EDT 1998
Article: 180721 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!
newspeer.monmouth.com!
newshub.northeast.verio.net!news.pn.com!nntp.pn.com!
uunet!in5.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Edeikens Address and Telephone Number
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <EtyBx6[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:54:25 GMT
Lines: 40
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:180721
In article <[email protected]>,
Fergus McClelland <[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] (Richard J Green) wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>Richard G. Philllips <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>none wrote:
>>>>
>>
>>[Mr. Edeiken’s supposed address deleted]
>>
>>>>
>>>> Reach out and touch someone.
>>>> Telephone Ad
>>>
>>>===========================================
>>>PHillips
>>>
>>>I don’t know who you are but I speak as a friend. Publishing a man’s
>>>whereabouts without his permission might be a very dangerous business.
>>
>>One denier is willing to speak out against such behavior. Where are the
>>others? Mr. McClelland? Mr. Berg? Mr. Moran? Mr. Allen?
>
>I have. And I still do. Maybe you will apologise for assuming that I
>would not.
As soon as you demonstrate that I made such an assumption.
Maybe you will apologize for assuming that I made such an assumption.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 02:25:13 EDT 1998
Article: 182442 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!
newspeer.monmouth.com!uunet!
in5.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Zyklon B – Unlikely Agent
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]>
<Eu69FM.1G[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:12:38 GMT
Lines: 27
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:182442
In article <[email protected]>,
Chris Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sun, 7 Jun 1998 08:11:46 GMT, [email protected] (Daniel Keren)
>wrote:
>
>[snip] D. Keren says:
>>The problem of the remaining HCN in the Zyklon-B was easily
>>solved in Kremas II&III by removing it after the victims
>>died (by the same devices used to introduce it),
>Porous pillars?
>
>>and in other gas chambers by supplying the “sonderkommando” with
>>gas masks.
>What about exposed flesh?
Not a particularly big deal. They didn’t have to meet OSHA standards.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 02:25:14 EDT 1998
Article: 182450 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!newsfeed.wli.net!
uunet!in2.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Al Baron: Friend of the Truth? (was: Re: A “Big Lie” for Steve Mock)
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <EuD6[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:22:41 GMT
Lines: 53
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:182450
[snip]
>What best do you wish me ? It’s ridiculous !
I see nothing ridiculous about a bit of decorum.
[snip]
>In the process I quoted Rassinier’s french original. I don’t have the english
>tranlation, and as far as I know this english translation summarizes two or
>three french books so it might be quite different from the original.You seem
>to believe that by quoting Rassinier, I have to assume what he writes and be
>able to give you evidence for what he claimed in the early 60s.
No asked you if your could provide evidence that his claim was true.
Apparently, you cannot. It’s sufficient to state that.
[snip]
>Still, when you asked ” evidence “, I tried to give my guess. You’re not
>pleased with that.
>
>What can I do for you ?
Provide evidence that his statement that a 1951 version was published in
New York is true.
>
>If you genuinely misunderstood my reasons to quote Rassinier, I suppose now
>I’ve been clear and long enough about it.
>
>I don’t owe you anything, as I’ve never asserted ” Nyiszli’s book was
>published in New-York in 1951. “. You’ve tried to bring me on that point,
>and, as I don’t think you are completely dumb, in quite a rude way. Like
>Morris’interpretation of my analogy with nazi behaviour was either dumb or
>rude given the context, unless my english was faulty. Or it may be that you
>think you deserve a kind of respect and care you are not ready to give to
>others ?
No, I simply asked you if you could provide evidence. It is sufficient
to say that you cannot.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 02:25:14 EDT 1998
Article: 182693 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!news.ultranet.com!
newspump.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!
newsfeed.wli.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Al Baron: Friend of the Truth? (was: Re: A “Big Lie” for Steve Mock)
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <EuEz[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 00:39:30 GMT
Lines: 30
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:182693
In article <6lqhlp$2e6[email protected]>, <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Richard J Green) wrote:
>>
>> No asked you if your could provide evidence that his claim was true.
>> Apparently, you cannot. It’s sufficient to state that.
>>
>
>You asked me precisely : ” Please post evidence that a version was published
>in New York in 1951. ”
>
>Doesn’t this wording imply that I should have had some evidence about it ?
It merely asks that you or someone capable of posting such evidence do
so. It is clear that you cannot.
>If not, sorry for misunderstanding, but I don’t believe so.
Apology accepted.
Best Wishes,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 02:25:15 EDT 1998
Article: 182747 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!
uunet!in1.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Zyklon B – Unlikely Agent
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <EuDv1w.6H[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 03:54:55 GMT
Lines: 53
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:182747
In article <[email protected]>,
Chris Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Thu, 11 Jun 1998 10:41:55 GMT, [email protected] (Daniel Keren)
>wrote:
>
>>[email protected] (Chris Carpenter) writes:
>># [email protected] (Daniel Keren) wrote:
>>
>># [snip] D. Keren says:
>>
>>## The problem of the remaining HCN in the Zyklon-B was easily
>>## solved in Kremas II&III by removing it after the victims
>>## died (by the same devices used to introduce it),
>>
>># Porous pillars?
>>
>>More accurately, the wiremesh device which was inside the pillars.
>
>Were these pillars made of concrete or wood?
>
>>## and in other gas chambers by supplying the “sonderkommando” with
>>## gas masks.
>>
>># What about exposed flesh?
>>
>>What about the photographs in Dr. Peters’ book, which show
>>disinfectors placing Zyklon-B, without using any special
>>clothing to protect them against the HCN?
>>-Danny Keren.
>
>I would like to see this picture.
>
>>PS – have you figured out, at last, what is the probability for
>> a fair coin to turn up “heads”, if it came up “heads” in
>> the previous 1,000 tosses?
>>
>Sure. To restate the problem.
>If a fair coin came up heads in 1000 consecutive tosses, the
>probability of getting another head on the 1001st toss would be:
>.5^1001.
Oops! Back to freshman level probability for you.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 02:25:15 EDT 1998
Article: 182749 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.eecs.umich.edu!
newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!denver-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!coop.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Zyklon B – Unlikely Agent
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <EuEzD3.Bp[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 04:05:25 GMT
Lines: 50
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:182749
In article <[email protected]>,
Chris Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:12:38 GMT, [email protected] (Richard J
>Green) wrote:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>Chris Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>On Sun, 7 Jun 1998 08:11:46 GMT, [email protected] (Daniel Keren)
>>>wrote:
>[snip]
>>>What about exposed flesh?
>>
>>Not a particularly big deal. They didn’t have to meet OSHA standards.
>>Rich Green
>
>Are you a self-hating Jew? I consider that statement to be
>anti-semitic. Sonderkommandos did die in the performance of their
>grusome duties. Before I go to sleep tonight, I will pray for the
>souls of those young men who died doing a suck-ass job. You could do
>the same.
>
>Let me repeat my question. What about the exposed flesh?
Let me repeat my answer: the Nazis did not treat the Sonderkommandos
according to OSHA standards.
I quote from DuPont’s “Hydrogen Cyandide: Properties, Usage, Storage,
and Handling”
“… but even severe skin contact [with the liquid! – my note rjg] will
not require treatment if (1) no inhalation or swallowing has occurred
and (2) the cyanide is promptly washed from the skin and the
contaminated and shoes are removed. If skin contact is prolonged,
cyanide poisoning may occur with nausea and uncosciousness; death is
possible if the source of cyanide is not removed and treatment
provided.”
The relevence of your antisemitic remarks about my ethnicity are
irrelevent, Nazi-boy.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 02:25:16 EDT 1998
Article: 182875 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.conspiracy,alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!uunet!in5.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Gas-Chamber Holocaust?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<358153f0.[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 20:04:24 GMT
Lines: 40
Xref: trends.ca talk.politics.misc:630598 alt.
current-events.clinton.whitewater:235520 talk.politics.libertarian:289475 alt.conspiracy:274235 alt.revisionism:182875
In article <[email protected]>,
ASMarques <[email protected]> wrote:
>Mike Curtis wrote:
>>
>> Read this:
>>
>> http://www1.us.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/american/skeptic-magazine/
skeptic-9.html
>>
>> It’s about Ausrotten and Irving both. Will you read it? You ought to
>> if you want to retain any integrity to yur Waco stuff.
>
>Amazing stuff. They are trying to prove the extermination of the Jews by
>examining the semantics of wartime political discourse, and the meaning
>of the word “ausrotten”. It’s as if we were discussing the reality of
>the A-bomb over Hiroshima by inspecting a minute detail of Truman’s
>conferences with his Chiefs of Staff or an Einstein obscure phrase in a
>conversation with Szilard back in 1940.
>
>My dear fellow, Hiroshima is there for all to see. No semantic juggling
>is needed. But the “Holocaust” isn’t there and all the linguistic and
>scholastic subtleties won’t be enough because it simply wasn’t true. If
>it had been true, no teological disputes over the meaning of a word
>would be necessary. It would be in full view and the Jewish population
>of the U.S., Canada, France (700.000 !), Israel, Russia, etc wouldn’t
>be there in such amazing strength. . .
>
>Get it ?
Please post physical evidence that Hiroshima was bombed, when you can
we’ll see who “gets it” Nazi-boy.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 02:25:17 EDT 1998
Article: 182878 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.conspiracy,alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Gas-Chamber Holocaust?&
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
<35811c34.[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 20:14:57 GMT
Lines: 91
Xref: trends.ca talk.politics.misc:630602 alt.
current-events.clinton.whitewater:235525 talk.politics.libertarian:289477 alt.conspiracy:274236 alt.revisionism:182878
In article <[email protected]>,
ASMarques <[email protected]> wrote:
>Mike Curtis wrote:
>>
>> What evidence do you have that Dresden was bombed? We are going to use
>> the same requirements you put on the Holocaust. Ready?
>
>Okay.
>
>1) Documentation:
>
>Dresden – Piles of clear documents in Bomber Command and the USAAF (for
>instance), government documentation, official Allied historians attest
>to it under no compulsion to do so, etc.
Obviously forgeries.
[snip]
>2) Crime weapons:
>
>Dresden – Conventional but cruel weapons such as phosphorous and
>high-explosive bombs to draw a ring of fire around the city, destroy the
>buildings and annihilate by fire the urban population + the refugees
>from the East jampacking its center.
Since when is a firestorm a conventional weapon. You hoaxers cannot
keep your stories straight.
[snip]
>3) Vestigial crime proofs:
>
>Dresden – One completely destroyed city (all the photos you might wish
>for in the German provincial and city archives of Dresden, plans for the
>reconstruction, all the paperwork the said reconstruction implies, etc).
>If you doubt their existence, try visiting the Dresden state archives
>and ask for them.
Where is this supposed archive? Give their e-mail address.
[snip]
>4) Witnesses of the crime:
>
>Dresden – They all tell the same story. The suffocating heath, the
>violent winds, the living incineration (lots of photos of charred
>bodies, though not very common in the media).
Why don’t you post some of these testimonies and we’ll see if they all
tell the same story.
[snip]
>5) The location of the crime:
>
>Dresden – It’s Dresden since 1945.
What is the name of the country in which Dresden resides? It seems to
have changed a couple of times since 1945.
>Dresden – Normal nethods have been used for establishing the number of
>victims, though this is still a politically sensitive issue. Documents
>from the local police indicate something between 200.000 and 250.000 and
>this looks like a reasonable number given the population + refugees. The
>number is not precisely known but it doesn’t need to be revised every
>three months either.
Most accurate estimates (Cf. Gilbert _the Second World War_) put the
victims at about 35, 000. You’ve inflated that figure by a factor of
6-8.
[snip]
>The Dresden fire bombing was a true war crime.
>
>The “Holocaust” was the biggest political hoax of all time.
On the contrary, using “revisionist methodology” it is possible to
disprove any event, Nazi-boy.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 02:25:18 EDT 1998
Article: 182879 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!uunet!
in1.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Al Baron: Friend of the Truth? (was: Re: A “Big Lie” for Steve Mock)
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <EuGs[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 20:18:14 GMT
Lines: 49
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:182879
In article <6lu0v9$84h[email protected]>, <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Richard J Green) wrote:
>
>
>> It merely asks that you or someone capable of posting such evidence do
>> so. It is clear that you cannot.
>>
>> >If not, sorry for misunderstanding, but I don’t believe so.
>>
>> Apology accepted.
>
>Indeed, I cannot apologize strongly enough for reading :
>
>” Please post evidence that a version was published in New York in 1951. ”
>
>when I should obviously have read :
>
>” Could anyone here post evidence about evidence that…”
>
>Hope your elliptic style doesn’t bring you too much trouble in everyday
>life…
>
>By the way, as you look very interested in the subject, I found the english
>version of Rassinier’s text at :
>
>http://www/abbc.com/aaargh
>
>in the English section.
>
>As I read again the beginning of the text, I found that Rassinier gives
>details about the publishing in N.Y. He says it was ” presented to American
>public opinion by M. Richard Seaver, with a preface by Pr Bruno Bettelheim. ”
>
>As I guessed, it was just an extract of about 58 pages ( that’s the french
>version’s amount ). The whole text was published in the States in 1960, I
>think
That’s not 1951 as he claims in the French text you posted.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 02:25:19 EDT 1998
Article: 182880 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!WCG!news.idt.net!netnews.com!
newspeer.monmouth.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Al Baron: Friend of the Truth? (was: Re: A “Big Lie” for Steve Mock)
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<6lj2[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 20:19:14 GMT
Lines: 28
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:182880
In article <[email protected]>,
Richard J Green <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Any proof ? I prooved at least, that you were not very acurate about him. I
>>quote Rassinier ” Ensuite, les recherches auxquelles je continue a proceder
>>relativement a ce singulier temoin m’ont valu, de New-York ou le livre a ete
>>publie en 1951 une information selon laquelle le Dr Nyiszli etait mort bien
>>avant que son temoignage ne fut publie pour la premiere fois. ” ( Le drame des
>>juifs europeens, p. 57 ).
>
>Please post evidence that a version was published in New York in 1951.
>
>Best,
>
>Rich Green
>–
>————————————————————————-
>Richard J. Green The Holocaust History Project
>[email protected] http://www.holocaust-history.org
>http://world.std.com/~rjg [email protected]
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 02:25:20 EDT 1998
Article: 182954 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.nswpp,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!europa.clark.net!
4.1.16.34!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!denver-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!coop.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Noted ary*n “hero” said he wanted to join the Jews!
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <slrn6nufb4.cg8.i[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 01:30:59 GMT
Lines: 39
Xref: trends.ca alt.conspiracy:274311 alt.nswpp:13931
alt.politics.white-power:129363 alt.politics.nationalism.white:99738
alt.revisionism:182954
In article <[email protected]>,
Ian P. McKinney <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 11 Jun 1998 02:13:56 GMT, [email protected] (ZOG) wrote:
>
>>Toward the end of his trial, Julie Streicher he announced to several
>>other Nazis that he was now ready to fight on behalf of the Jews! News
>>of rioting in Palestine had convinced him that Jews had a fighing spirit
>>after all.
>>
>>Streicher stated in no uncertain terms:
>>
>> “Absolutely! I am not joking! And do you know why?
>> Because the democratic world is too weak and isn’t fit
>> to exist. I warned them for 25 years, but now I see
>> that the Jews have determination and spunk. They will
>> still dominate the world, mark my word! And I would be
>> glad to help them to victory because they are strong
>> and tenacious, and I know Jewry. I have spunk too!
>> And I can stick to my guns! And if the Jews would be
>> willing to accept me as one of them, I would fight
>> for them, because when I believe in a thing, I know
>> how to fight!”
>> — Jules Streicher, speaking to fellow
>> nazis at his trial.
>
>A statement doubtless made after torture and brainwashing. Worthless,
>totally worthless.
And the evidence for this claim is…
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 02:25:20 EDT 1998
Article: 182956 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!tor-nx1.netcom.ca!chippy.visi.com!
news-out.visi.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!denver-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!coop.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Gas-Chamber Holocaust?&
Message-ID: <EuIpuI.8×[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 01:37:29 GMT
Lines: 115
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:182956
In article <[email protected]>,
Anonymous <[email protected]> wrote:
>mvanalst@!spam!home.com (Mark Van Alstine) wrote:
>
>
><snip>
>
>>> > Charles Sigsmund Bendel, sworn and examined by Colonel Backhouse
>>> > concerning the Auschwitz camp (pp. 130-133):
>>> >
>
><snip>
>
>>> > Russians and Poles, were led one by one to the graves and they were
>>> > shot. Two days later, when I was attached to the day group, I saw a
>>> > gas chamber in action. On that occasion it was the ghetto at Lodz —
>>> > 80,000 people were gassed.
>>> >
>>> > Would you describe just what happened that day?
>>> >
>>> > — I came at seven o’clock in the morning with the others and saw
>>> > white smoke still rising from the trenches, which indicated that a
>>> > whole transport had been liquidated or finished off during the night.
>>> > In Crematorium No. 4 the result which was achieved by burning was
>>> > apparently not sufficient. The work was not going on quickly enough,
>>> > so behind the crematorium they dug three large trenches 12 metres long
>>> > and 6 metres wide. After a bit it was found that the results achieved
>>> > even in these three big trenches were not quick enough, so in the
>>> > middle of these big trenches they built two canals through which the
>>> > human fat or grease should seep so that work could be continued in a
>>> > quicker way. The capacity of these trenches was almost fantastic.
>>> > Crematorium No. 4 was able to burn 1000 people during the day, but
>>> > this system of trenches was able to deal with the same number in one
>>> > hour.
>
> The trenches were thirty six feet long and eighteen feet wide, each
>containing over three hundred bodies. We are not told how deep they were
>supposed to be, but it makes no difference: the bodies would fill the
>holes. There would be no room for air to reach the wood supposedly
>stacked on the bottom–no air, no fire. Yet they were able to burn this
>imaginary pile of flesh in one hour. Even if they piled the bodies in
>the middle, as soon as the fire would heat up, the warm currents would
>keep fresh air from reaching the fire–no air, no fire. Boy scouts
>know you can’t build a campfire in a hole in the ground. You can’t burn
>bodies in a hole in the ground.
>
>>> >
>>> > Will you describe the day’s work?
>>> >
>>> > — At eleven o’clock in the morning the chief of the Political
>>> > Department arrived on his motor cycle to tell us, as always, that a
>>> > new transport had arrived. The trenches which I described before had
>>> > to be prepared. They had to be cleaned out. Wood had to be put in and
>
> The trenches had to be cleaned out? Are we to believe that the
>bodies were burned in holes in the ground and then dug out? Then more
>wood is placed at the bottom of the hole.
>
>
>>> > petrol sprayed over so that it would burn quicker. About twelve
>>> > o’clock the new transport arrived, consisting of some 800 to 1000
>>> > people. These people had to undress themselves in the court of the
>>> > crematorium and were promised a bath and hot coffee afterwards. They
>>> > were given orders to put their things on one side and all the
>>> > valuables on the other. Then they entered a big all and were told to
>>> > wait until the gas arrived. Five or ten minutes later the gas arrived,
>>> > and the strongest insult to a doctor and to the idea of the Red Cross
>>> > was that it came in a Red Cross ambulance. Then the door was opened
>>> > and the people were crowded into the gas chambers which gave the
>>> > impression that the roof was falling on their heads, as it was so low.
>>> > With blows from different kinds of sticks they were forced to go in
>>> > and stay there, because when they realized that they were going to
>>> > their death they tried to come out again. Finally, they succeeded in
>>> > locking the doors. One heard cries and shouts and they started to
>>> > fight against each other, knocking on the walls. This went on for two
>>> > minutes and then there was complete silence. Five minutes later the
>>> > doors were opened, but it was quite impossible to go in for another
>>> > twenty minutes. Then the Special Kommandos started work. When the
>>> > doors were opened the bodies fell out because they were compressed so
>>> > much. They were quite contracted, and it was almost impossible to
>>> > separate one from the other. One got the impression that they fought
>>> > terribly against death. Anybody who has ever seen a gas chamber filled
>>> > to the height of one and a half metres with corpses will never forget
>>> > it. At this moment the proper work of the Sonderkommandos starts.
>>
>
> Deadly HCN is supposed to have been administered (or is this one of
>those deadly diesel gas chambers) HCN is a fumigant, especially designed
>to release the gas slowly over a period of time, more than an hour. It
>stays in the air and is trapped in the nooks and crannys and in the folds
>of clothes. The manufacturer recommended ten hours of ventilation before
>entering a building that had been fumigated. In this outrageous story,
>the men walked in and started working twenty-five minutes later.
HCN is was not designed. You do not appear to know the difference
between HCN and Zyklon B; yet you presume to know better than everyone
who has studied this topic.
Kremas II and III had forced ventilation systems. Kremas IV and V were
built above ground.
> Like every one of the tales of the Holocaust, this story is
>impossible and cannot be true. There was no Holocaust.
So you say.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 21:22:41 EDT 1998
Article: 183238 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!newsfeed.wli.net!uunet!in5.uu.net!
world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Al Baron: Friend of the Truth? (was: Re: A “Big Lie” for Steve Mock)
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <EuIB[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 23:03:57 GMT
Lines: 44
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:183238
In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Richard J Green) wrote:
>>
>> In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >(… ) The whole text was published in the States in 1960, I
>> >think
>>
>> That’s not 1951 as he claims in the French text you posted.
>
>This time YOU HAVE to give evidence that Rassinier refers to the COMPLETE
>edition ( published in 1960 ) in pages 52 to 57 of ” Le drame des juifs
>europeens ” from which I extracted my quote.
>
>Then we’ll have two choices on this matter that is of no interest to anybody
>but you :
>
>- There was a misprint on the date in the second mention of an american
>version.
>
>- Rassinier is such a compulsive liar that he can’t avoid lies, even when
>they are of no interest to him, but on the contrary can help his ennemies by
>being so blatant.
>
>But this will be after YOU can prove that he refers to another version than
>the one he tells was presented by R. Seaver in 1951 or end of 1950, but in
>any case before March 1951, when it was published in France by Les Temps
>Modernes.
He states clearly that it was published in New York in 1951. Unless you
can show that such a book exists, the clear answer is that Rassinier is
a compulsive liar.
I’m not surprised that you do not find that interesting.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 21:22:42 EDT 1998
Article: 183239 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!newsfeed.wli.net!uunet!
in1.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Zyklon B – Unlikely Agent
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <EuH211.CL[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 23:07:22 GMT
Lines: 43
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:183239
In article <[email protected]>,
Chris Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sat, 13 Jun 1998 04:05:25 GMT, [email protected] (Richard J
>Green) wrote:
>
>[snip]
>>>Let me repeat my question. What about the exposed flesh?
>>
>>Let me repeat my answer: the Nazis did not treat the Sonderkommandos
>>according to OSHA standards.
>>
>>I quote from DuPont’s “Hydrogen Cyandide: Properties, Usage, Storage,
>>and Handling”
>>
>>”… but even severe skin contact [with the liquid! – my note rjg] will
>>not require treatment if (1) no inhalation or swallowing has occurred
>>and (2) the cyanide is promptly washed from the skin and the
>>contaminated and shoes are removed. If skin contact is prolonged,
>>cyanide poisoning may occur with nausea and uncosciousness; death is
>>possible if the source of cyanide is not removed and treatment
>>provided.”
>>
>>The relevence of your antisemitic remarks about my ethnicity are
>>irrelevent, Nazi-boy.
>>Best,
>>Rich Green
>Always need to take a shot, don’t you.
I call them as I see them. You are a despicable Nazi. Clear enough?
I note also that it was you who insisted on using antisemitic slurs,
Nazi-boy.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 21:22:44 EDT 1998
Article: 183271 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.conspiracy,alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.eecs.umich.edu!enews.sgi.com!coop.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Gas-Chamber Holocaust?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <Eu[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 23:52:28 GMT
Lines: 332
Xref: trends.ca talk.politics.misc:631360 alt.
current-events.clinton.whitewater:236052 talk.politics.libertarian:289886 alt.conspiracy:274694 alt.revisionism:183271
In article <[email protected]>,
ASMarques <[email protected]> wrote:
>Richard J Green wrote:
>>
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> ASMarques <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >Mike Curtis wrote:
>> >>
>> >> What evidence do you have that Dresden was bombed? We are going to use
>> >> the same requirements you put on the Holocaust. Ready?
>> >
>> >Okay.
>> >
>> >1) Documentation:
>> >
>> >Dresden – Piles of clear documents in Bomber Command and the USAAF (for
>> >instance), government documentation, official Allied historians attest
>> >to it under no compulsion to do so, etc.
>>
>> Obviously forgeries.
>
>Not at all. Let’s try to make this understandable to you. I’ll try to
>speak slowly.
>
>Scientific inquiry and the systematic doubt that should always be
>present do *not* require doubting every possible fact in an *equal way*.
>Judgement must be exercised at all times. This is the golden rule of
>rationality, without which you cannot reason or maintain a coherent
>discourse.
>
>For instance, Dresden forgeries are indeed possible (maybe the civil
>defence documents are indeed forgeries). However, if so then the
>forgeries would have been made on all sides. This is a powerful
>difference.
In other words, you cannot prove the documents are not forgeries.
>The equivalent would have to be piles of both Allied and
>German documents on all levels detailing everything about the
>”Holocaust”. This is not the case. The Allies are supposed to have
>ignored all the gas chambering, and the Germans are supposed to have
>hidden it by avoiding any paper trails, etc.
I am not interested in your lies about the Holocaust I want to see your
proof that Dresden was bombed at a level that can withstand the
“revisionist method.”
>
>The difference is documentation exists in overwhelming profusion on
>Dresden, and in extremely small ammounts, conspicuosly suspect, on the
>”Holocaust”. These include, for instance, the “confessions” at odds with
>all possible facts writen under Alllied custody like the Hoess one by
>people who shortly after that met their deaths in prison in obscure ways
>(Ziereis, Gerstein, etc).
Post this supposed documentation so that we can examine it.
>
>> [snip]
>
>I noticed, thank you.
>
>> >2) Crime weapons:
>> >
>> >Dresden – Conventional but cruel weapons such as phosphorous and
>> >high-explosive bombs to draw a ring of fire around the city, destroy the
>> >buildings and annihilate by fire the urban population + the refugees
>> >from the East jampacking its center.
>>
>> Since when is a firestorm a conventional weapon.
>
>True and an excellent point if I had claimed a firestorm is a
>conventional weapon, but — alas — I didn’t, sorry about that.
>
>The firestorm (your choice of words) is the *result* of the conventional
>weapons for whose existence and efficiency there is excellent evidence.
Post the evidence that a firestorm can be caused by conventional
weapons. Obviously, there would not be enough oxygen left and such a
thing could never happen.
>See the difference ? The killing is by phosphorous bombs (not an unusual
>way of mass murder in modern warfare) instead of the unique historical
>killing devices known as commercial pesticide pellets, water
>electrocution chambers, Diesel fumes, “salts” and “white powders”. It’s
>a little less odd, I’m sure you’ll agree, and the required proof
>standards ought to be maybe a trifle less rigorous. Your scientific
>background as a chemist will no doubt help you understand this.
No, sorry. It is just as easy to imagine that cyanide can kill as that
a firestorm could be caused by conventional weapons. You have no
physical evidence. Your claims cannot withstand “revisionist
methodology.”
>
>> You hoaxers cannot
>> keep your stories straight.
>
>My compliments. Again an excellent point if indeed you would be able to
>show the Dresden firebombing story was a skewed one. Let’s wait till you
>do. Would be wonderful if I was saying Dresden was bombed with pianos or
>quicklime, for instance. That would be the equivalent of the Zyklon B
>and water electrocution mass slaughterhouses and the magic crematories.
>Would be very odd indeed. But no, they just droped bombs. It was as if
>the “Holocaust” had been as all other holocausts: shoot, dump, shoot,
>dump. It was just “bombs away” with no more ado in Dresden.
Sometimes it is said that Dresden was firebombed, other times that it
was phosphorous bombed. Was it white phosphorous, red phosphorous?
How is that possible? My estimate is that it would take 6 trillion tons
of white phosphorous to create such a firestorm, but of course, since
oxygen is heavier than air, your phosphorous won’t burn until it gets
down to where all the oxygen is.
>
>> [snip]
>
>I noticed, thank you.
>
>> >3) Vestigial crime proofs:
>> >
>> >Dresden – One completely destroyed city (all the photos you might wish
>> >for in the German provincial and city archives of Dresden, plans for the
>> >reconstruction, all the paperwork the said reconstruction implies, etc).
>> >If you doubt their existence, try visiting the Dresden state archives
>> >and ask for them.
>>
>> Where is this supposed archive? Give their e-mail address.
>
>I didn’t put it in the singular, you did. But sorry, I’m not the
>Internet yellow pages. They will inform you at the Dresden City Hall or
>indeed at any one of the German historical archives. Would you say they
>would show me a *single photo* of a mass water electrocution or Zyklon
>gassing at, say, the Yad Vashem ? That would be great !
In other words, you can post no physical evidence that Dresden
occurred!
>
>> [snip]
>
>I noticed, thank you.
>
>> >4) Witnesses of the crime:
>> >
>> >Dresden – They all tell the same story. The suffocating heath, the
>> >violent winds, the living incineration (lots of photos of charred
>> >bodies, though not very common in the media).
>>
>> Why don’t you post some of these testimonies and we’ll see if they all
>> tell the same story.
>
>Because it wouldn’t prove a thing. I might be chosing similar
>testimonies, don’t you agree ? More to the point, this is something you
>must discover for yourself if you’re interested in becoming a Dresden
>firebombing doubter. Certainly you’ll have a long and difficult task
>ahead of you. Me, I chose the easy way: I became a “Holocaust”
>revisionist denier even if I didn’t ask for any “isms” ! It’s really
>easy, the whole holo-contraption is falling apart. . .
Ah, so we should take your word for these testimonies? What are you
hiding?
[snip]
>> >5) The location of the crime:
>> >
>> >Dresden – It’s Dresden since 1945.
>>
>> What is the name of the country in which Dresden resides? It seems to
>> have changed a couple of times since 1945.
>
>What’s the relevance ? Are you implying the only reason the gas chambers
>have been constantly jumping around is because the names of the
>countries changed ?
Ah, so you admit that the name of the countries changes from year to
year. You hoaxers keep changing the name of the game. What country was
Dresden in when it was bombed? What country was it in in 1980? What
country is it in now? Do you claim that this supposed city can move
>from country to country? I doubt such a city even exists.
>
>What I’m asking is why do the gas chambers constantly change their
>*physical* location, not why do any fixed locations change their
>national or administrative residence. See the difference ? Try again
>with a little effort.
No I don’t see. When did Krema II change locations?
Anyway it’s irrelevent, your Dresden hoax is falling apart. You are
tryiong to distract from the fact that you can present no evidence.
>
>It was gas chambers in Dachau and Belsen at first, then it was only in
>the big six camps in Poland, then the enormous Auschwitz monstruosity
>almost alone, then suddenly the big six again plus a host of “small”
>amateurish gas chambers in the West, then several of the six began
>vanishing and the Maly Trostinets and Riga “extermination” camps took
>their place, then a little here and a little there all over the place.
>See what I mean ?
No. History works that way. Yes, there is a gas chmber in Dacchau, no
it was not used for mass murder. Those facts were uncovered by the
normal historical process, not by you lying Nazi scumbags.
>
>It’s not “Hey, they said Auschwitz was in Germany, and now they say
>Oscwiezim is in Poland”. Do try a little more sophistication, please.
It is exactly as if they said such a thing. In fact deniers often make
use of the fact that the Germans considered Auschwitz to be within the
Reich.
>
>6) The number of victims:
>> >
>> >Dresden – Normal nethods have been used for establishing the number of
>> >victims, though this is still a politically sensitive issue. Documents
>> >from the local police indicate something between 200.000 and 250.000 and
>> >this looks like a reasonable number given the population + refugees. The
>> >number is not precisely known but it doesn’t need to be revised every
>> >three months either.
>>
>> Most accurate estimates (Cf. Gilbert _the Second World War_) put the
>> victims at about 35, 000. You’ve inflated that figure by a factor of
>> 6-8.
>
>Well, it’s quite possible I did inflate, but why would Gilbert’s be the
>most accurate estimate ? Have you studied his methods ? Did it come to
>him in a dream ? This is indeed where the discussion ought to begin. I
>explicitly stated “this looks like a reasonable number given the
>population + refugees. The number is not precisely known but it doesn’t
>need to be revised every three months either”.
On the contrary. I’ve read the incorrect 135,00 figure in the
newspapers before.
The Holocaust on the otherhand remains constant over the years.
Hilberg’s estimate in 1961 matches his estimate in 1985. Different
people have slightly higher or lower estimates (4.8 million-5.7 million
for the most part) that’s natural.
What I meant was the
>*way* one reaches any conclusion or indeed revises any previous
>conclusion, is the normal one. It’s not necessary to ask any priesthood
>of the 6 million oracle. It’s the *method*, not the *number*, see ?
Try reading Hilberg’s book where his method is explained, Nazi-boy.
>
>I readily agree with you no magic 6 million number exists for Dresden.
>My choice of the 200.000-250.000 number is by no means definitive. It’s
>based on the “Tagesbefehel nr. 47″ document dated Dresden 22.3.45 from
>”Der hoehere Polizei-und SS-fuehrer, Der Befehlshaber der
>Ordnungspolizei”, which I didn’t see contested yet. It reports the
>number of dead so far (one month after the bombing) as 202.040 and puts
>final expectations as 250.000. Is it a document open to inquiry and
>investigation ? Of course it is ! Indeed it may well be false. No dogmas
>exist when it comes to the number of Dresden victims…
Because there was no Dresden. Otherwise, why would the number keep
changing. First it’s 200,000, then it’s 135,000, then it’s 35,000,
next perhaps it will be 0.
>
>> [snip]
>
>I noticed, thank you. Here you forgot the following (tell me whether you
>agree or not):
> 😉
>
>7) The investigation of the crime:
>
>Dresden – If you have any doubts about the fire bombing of Dresden you
>will be considered simply as an inoffensive eccentric. Nobody is
>extracting money via the miserable wartime episode, no political or
>religious causes depend on it, no special laws are needed to avoid
>”Dresden denial”. Truth does not require special laws in order to
>prevail.
No, if you denied Dresden, you would be called anti-German. It’s just
that the allies are honest and the Nazis are not.
That’s why I should state clearly, for example, that I do not really
deny that Dresden occurred.
>
>Holocaust – If you have any doubts about the amazing gas behemots you
>will be considered public ennemy number one and at least a son of Satan
>himself. In most countries of the European Union “Holocaust” denial
>censorship exists (it’s being put in place in the remaining ones). A lot
>of *powerful* people and organizations (and not only old innocent
>”survivors”) exploit the “Shoa-business”. Political and religious causes
>depend on it for survival. More and more special laws will be needed to
>avoid “Holocaust” denial because lies cannot stand on their own feet.
I am opposed to such laws. I think one of the reasons they exist is
that it is easier to tell a lie than to refute a lie. If I claim that
there is not enough white phosphorous to bomb Dresden, it will take
you quite a bit of groundwork to expose the misleading parts of that
statement. Personally, I believe that you have the right to tell your
lies. I do not deny that others do not agree with me. The fact that
some would prevent you from lying, however, does not magically turn your
lies into truth.
The truth is that you are a lying Nazi scumbag.
>
>8) Conclusion:
>
>> >The Dresden fire bombing was a true war crime.
>> >
>> >The “Holocaust” was the biggest political hoax of all time.
>>
>> On the contrary, using “revisionist methodology” it is possible to
>> disprove any event, Nazi-boy.
>
>Hmmm. Let me give you a piece of advice. The silly “nazi-boy” thing is
>entirely counter-productive. It doesn’t help your case, it doesn’t make
>you look bold or brave (quite on the contrary, since we are not even
>within eyesight of each other), and it does tend to show your lack of
>intellectual amunition, even though you don’t sound really stupid (must
>be the “Holocaust” lost cause, not you, I guess).
Whatever you say, Nazi-boy.
[snip]
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Sun Jun 14 21:22:48 EDT 1998
Article: 183275 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,
talk.politics.libertarian,
alt.conspiracy,alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.eecs.umich.edu!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!newsfeed.wli.net!
uunet!in2.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Gas-Chamber Holocaust?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <Eu[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 00:00:43 GMT
Lines: 73
Xref: trends.ca talk.politics.misc:631365 alt.
current-events.clinton.whitewater:236055 talk.politics.libertarian:289891 alt.conspiracy:274697 alt.revisionism:183275
In article <[email protected]>,
ASMarques <[email protected]> wrote:
>Richard J Green wrote:
>>
>> Please post physical evidence that Hiroshima was bombed, when you can
>> we’ll see who “gets it” Nazi-boy.
>
>The Japanese did, but it doesn’t count and they are not entitled to any
>reparations since they are not God’s elected people.
Reparations do not bear on the topic. An atom is an indivisible
particle. Therefore atoms cannot be split. You people keep changing
what you mean by atoms.
You cannot post physical evidence.
>
>But okay then. Listen to this: the material evidence is *the ruins of
>Hiroshima*: they didn’t vanish.
So you say, prove it.
>How do you beat that ? Will you show me
>a couple of human soap bars like they do in museums and cemeteries ?
https://nizkor.org/features/techniques-of-denial/soap-01.html
>Maybe some lampshades and a bathtubload of human legs like they do at
>Nizkor…
https://nizkor.org/features/techniques-of-denial/clay-koch.html
>
>Surely you’ll be able to grasp a slight difference of weight in your and
>my evidence.
Yes, you’ve just engaged in a typical denier tactic that’s been exposed
for all to see. You simply ignore the process of history, what real
historians say, adn hope that no one will notice.
>
>Please note that even though you believe vaporising corpses by burning
>them by the thousands in oxygenless pits full of water in Birkenau makes
>them completely vanish, a *nuclear* explosion over a populated city in
>Japan does not completely vaporize all the ruins and remains…
Please post physical evidence of these ruins. Where are the bodies?
How come you cannot tell us where the bodies are?
>
>If only the Americans had thought of this they would have secretly
>dumped the whole city of Hiroshima in one of the Birkenau pits and no
>one would have known. All the Hiroshima victims could well have been
>vanishing into mud pit number 3 behind the big oak near crematory number
>4, since 100.000 Japanese are no fatter than 100.000 Jews.
OK, so where are the bodies since the Americans did not do this?
No historical fact can survive “revisionist methodology.”
>
>> Best,
>
>Always a pleasure, nazoid, and my apologies for having wrongly posted
>another reply message to yours.
Whatever you say, Nazi-boy.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Fri Jun 19 13:50:40 EDT 1998
Article: 183432 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!l
ogbridge.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!coop.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Zyklon B – Unlikely Agent
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <EuH1JJ.14[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 05:06:23 GMT
Lines: 23
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:183432
In article <[email protected]>,
Chris Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sat, 13 Jun 1998 03:54:55 GMT, [email protected] (Richard J
>Green) wrote:
>
>[snip]
>>Oops! Back to freshman level probability for you.
>>Best,
>>Rich Green
>This is sure to give a good laugh at work. Thanks.
>Chris
If you enjoy being laughed at by your coworkers, that’s your problem,
Nazi-boy.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Fri Jun 19 13:50:40 EDT 1998
Article: 183732 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.conspiracy,alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!newsfeed.wli.net!
uunet!in2.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Gas-Chamber Holocaust?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Followup-To: alt.revisionism, misc.test
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <EuKG18.1nG@world.std.com> <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 03:19:55 GMT
Lines: 55
Xref: trends.ca talk.politics.misc:632620 alt.
current-events.clinton.whitewater:236864 talk.politics.libertarian:290519 alt.conspiracy:275267 alt.revisionism:183732
In article <[email protected]>,
Mike Curtis <[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] (Jim Kenndy) wrote:
>
>Rich can’t respond if you hide from him, Matt. Alt.revisionism put
>back in. Bug Matt Giwer to no end!
Matt Giwer? Does he still exist (killfiles are wonderful things). Is he
still the pompous antisemite who thinks he knows something about science
because he got a C in an undergrad course? What would Charlen Kyle say,
if she knew he was still embarassing himself?
Followups,set.
Best,
Rich Green
>
>
>
>>On Mon, 15 Jun 1998 00:00:43 GMT, [email protected] (Richard J
>>Green) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>>ASMarques <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>Richard J Green wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Please post physical evidence that Hiroshima was bombed, when you can
>>>>> we’ll see who “gets it” Nazi-boy.
>>>>
>>>>The Japanese did, but it doesn’t count and they are not entitled to any
>>>>reparations since they are not God’s elected people.
>>>
>>>Reparations do not bear on the topic. An atom is an indivisible
>>>particle. Therefore atoms cannot be split. You people keep changing
>>>what you mean by atoms.
>>
>> You nuclear physics is as strange as your holocaust physics and
>>about a primitive and magical.
>>
>>=-=-=
>>The fraud of the holocaust is not claiming there were gas chambers.
>>The fraud is in claiming there is no doubt.
>
>Mike Curtis
>
>
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Fri Jun 19 13:50:41 EDT 1998
Article: 183997 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!newspeer.monmouth.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Al Baron: Friend of the Truth? (was: Re: A “Big Lie” for Steve Mock)
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <EuKD[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 01:31:56 GMT
Lines: 32
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:183997
In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Richard J Green) wrote:
>>
>
>>
>> He states clearly that it was published in New York in 1951. Unless you
>> can show that such a book exists, the clear answer is that Rassinier is
>> a compulsive liar.
>
>Please give evidence that he refers to the complete version.
>
>There is clear evidence that he refers to an abstract of about 60 pages.
>
>I’m waiting for your evidence. You apparently cannot give it.
Please demonstrate that any 1951 version, abstracted or not, was
published in New York. If you can show that an abstracted versions was
published in New York in 1951, I will be very interested.
Apparently, you cannot, but feel compelled to throw up a smoekscreen for
that inabability.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Fri Jun 19 13:50:41 EDT 1998
Article: 184350 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!news.maxwell.syr.edu!
news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-backup-west.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!199.125.85.9!
news.mv.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Al Baron: Friend of the Truth? (was: Re: A “Big Lie” for Steve Mock)
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]>
<358773[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 04:15:10 GMT
Lines: 19
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:184350
In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:
>But still, as M. Green accuses Rassinier, it should be his responsability to
>give evidence that nothing was published in 1951. ( which is a tough job, I
>agree ).
I clearly used a conditional in my accusation. I merely asked whether
you (or anyone else) could provide any evidence that such a book exists.
You cannot, but are not interested.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Fri Jun 19 13:50:42 EDT 1998
Article: 184356 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.conspiracy,alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!newsfeed.direct.ca!newsfeed.wli.net!
uunet!in4.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Gas-Chamber Holocaust?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 04:33:48 GMT
Lines: 35
Xref: trends.ca talk.politics.misc:634525 alt.current-events.clinton.
whitewater:238380 talk.politics.libertarian:291606 alt.conspiracy:276113 alt.revisionism:184356
In article <[email protected]>,
mi[email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Richard J Green) wrote:
>>
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> ASMarques <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >Richard J Green wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Please post physical evidence that Hiroshima was bombed, when you can
>> >> we’ll see who “gets it” Nazi-boy.
>> >
>> >The Japanese did, but it doesn’t count and they are not entitled to any
>> >reparations since they are not God’s elected people.
>>
>> Reparations do not bear on the topic. An atom is an indivisible
>> particle. Therefore atoms cannot be split. You people keep changing
>> what you mean by atoms.
>
>God, you claim to be a PhD chemist and you post a lie like that. I was told
>you would lie to support the holocaust myth. Now I have seen you do it. You
>are clearly a liar for the holocaust. There is no way you can absolve
>yourself from being a liar after this one.
Here’s someone not very quick on the uptake :-).
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green
[email protected]
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Wed Jun 24 14:19:05 EDT 1998
Article: 186085 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!uunet!in4.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Al Baron: Friend of the Truth? (was: Re: A “Big Lie” for Steve Mock)
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <EuqB[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 04:22:06 GMT
Lines: 50
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:186085
In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Richard J Green) wrote:
>>
>> In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >But still, as M. Green accuses Rassinier, it should be his responsability to
>> >give evidence that nothing was published in 1951. ( which is a tough job, I
>> >agree ).
>>
>> I clearly used a conditional in my accusation. I merely asked whether
>> you (or anyone else) could provide any evidence that such a book exists.
>> You cannot, but are not interested.
>
>On june 13 1998, answering to one of my post telling ” The WHOLE EDITION was
>published in the States in 1960, I think, you wrote :
>
>” That’s not 1951 as he claims in the french text you posted. ”
>
>There is no conditional there.
I find your out of context quote to be dishonest.
You posted a reference to a book. The reference you posted was not the
one claimed by Rassinier to be published in 1951.
The conditional refers to the fact that I clearly stated that _if_ no
such version exists, my preffered interpretation is that Rassinier is a
compulsive liar.
>
>I asked you to give evidence that Rassinier refers to a COMPLETE version of
>Nyiszli’s testimony, that is to prove that he is wrong in writing that some
>pages, most probably the same as the one published in Les Temps Modernes in
>1951, had already been presented by R. Seaver in New-York, just before the
>french edition was published.
I never claimed that he referred to a complete version. Learn how to
read, friend. I’ll settle for evidence of _any_ version published in NY
in 1951.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green Exposing Denial
[email protected] http://world.std.com/~rjg/exposing-denial.html
http://world.std.com/~rjg
From [email protected] Wed Jun 24 14:19:05 EDT 1998
Article: 186313 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: trends.ca!hub.org!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!news.Stanford.EDU!su-news-feed2.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!
cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!
newshub.northeast.verio.net!newspeer.monmouth.com!
uunet!in2.uu.net!world!see_sig
From: [email protected] (Richard J Green)
Subject: Re: Al Baron: Friend of the Truth? (was: Re: A “Big Lie” for Steve Mock)
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Organization: The Holocaust History Project
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <EuzL[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 02:51:44 GMT
Lines: 25
Xref: trends.ca alt.revisionism:186313
In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Richard J Green) wrote:
>
>> I find your out of context quote to be dishonest.
>
>Indeed, go back to the beginning, then.
Yes, do. The statement that you quoted is not under serious debate.
We both agree that the reference you posted is not a 1951 version
published in New York. What is under debate is whether Rassinier is a
liar (or more generously a poor scholar). My claim that he is such was
based on the condition that no such book exists.
I believe your out of context quote was willfully dishonest.
Best,
Rich Green
—
————————————————————————-
Richard J. Green Exposing Denial
[email protected] http://world.std.com/~rjg/exposing-denial.html
http://world.std.com/~rjg
