In article ,
Michael A. Hoffman II wrote:
>I’ve gone the obligatory first round for this season and here’s the
>knockout punch:
>
>Mr. Stein writes: “Mr. Hoffman is invited to produce one scrap of evidence
>that I have ever denied Morgen’s testimony.”
>
>Stein constantly has denied that Morgen wrote that “all of these offenses”
>(brutality and a license to kill) were committed by “personnel of the
>SS…commandants of…Krakau-Plaszow” (Amon Goeth).
This is so heavily and deceptively edited as to constitute a lie all
by itself.
>But Morgen did write it!
>
>Mr. Stein:
>
>”Then is Mr. Hoffman saying that EVERY SINGLE PERSON arrested by Morgen
>and his team was arrested for _murder_? _EVERY SINGLE ONE_ of them? AND
>corruption? AND brutality? SIMULTANEOUSLY, EVERY SINGLE ONE?”
>
>No, I am not saying it, Rabbi Stein, SS Judge Morgen said it in his
>Affidavit, got it? I mean, are your bottle cap spectacles adjusted
>properly or perhaps kosher eyeglasses read print upside down?
>
>Stein again:
>
> “All I have denied is that the affidavit shows what Goeth
>_personally_ was charged with by the SS.”
>
>Well, Mr. Stein, here’s the affidavit:
>
> “all of these offenses” (brutality and a license to kill) were committed
>by “personnel of the SS…commandants of…Krakau-Plaszow” (Amon Goeth).
Nice job of deceptive editing. How many missing words are represented
by those ellipses? (Since I was the one who provided Mr. Hoffman with the
translation he’s using, I have an easy time finding the answer.)
>Looks like you stand convicted as a denier, a liar and a rather dumb one
>at that.
>
>This is just too easy!
Very well. Since “revisionists” have been putting up challenges like
this for some time, I see no reason why I shouldn’t get into the act. A
wager: $5,000 that a college English professor selected at random will
agree with me that the text is ambiguous as to which individuals were
accused of which crimes, and that no such definite conclusion can be
reached based on this affidavit alone. Money to be escrowed in advance.
Since you have such great confidence in your reading of the text, I
trust you will have no problem accepting this wager with confidence.
Talk is cheap. It is time to put your money where your lying mouth
is.
Posted/emailed.
—
Mike Stein The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420 Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA 22210 position of my employer.
Path: news2.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: [email protected] (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Time for Hoffman to put his money where his lying mouth is
Date: 3 Jun 1997 02:03:41 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
Reply-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Host: access2.digex.net
Xref: news2.digex.net alt.revisionism:168851
Path: news2.digex.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.nidlink.com!pm1-21.nidlink.com!user
From: [email protected] (Michael A. Hoffman II)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.movies.spielberg,soc.history
Subject: Stein offers $5000 to buy his way out of his dilemma.
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 09:41:08 -0800
Organization: The Campaign for Radical Truth in History
Lines: 162
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pm1-21.nidlink.com
Xref: news2.digex.net alt.revisionism:168972 alt.movies.spielberg:9698 soc.history:89277
Stein Offers $5,000 to buy his way out of his dilemma
by Michael A. Hoffman II. Copyright ©1997.
The Campaign for Radical Truth in History
=============================================================================
Visit our News Bureau and Archives at http://www.hoffman-info.com
Poor, poisecuted Mike Stein. He stands like a Lower East Side
rag-peddler, hurling imprecations, threats and $5,000 in Jewish gold.
He’s even dropped his cultivated pose of effete one-upmanship, wherein he
formerly imagined himself a cultural fixture above the fray. Now he spews
invective –along with a $5,000 reward for the rehabilitation of his
reputation.
Ah, but all the holohoax gold extorted from all the Gentiles of the world
cannot achieve that end.
The problem Khazars like Stein exhibit is that they come out of a milieu
of Jewish supremacy.
The media tells them that the smartest man in the world is Kasparov, the
Russian Jewish chess hack. “Oy vei! That computer beat the smartest man in
the world” (and it just defeated the second-smartest man in the
world–Natan Scharansky–another Russian Jewish “refugee” posted to the
Middle East to chase the Palestinian “Indians” off their land in East
Jerusalem).
Of course the greatest chess player in the world is Bobby Fisher, who is
not a Jew and who used to hand out this writer’s Institute for Historical
Review (IHR) pamphlets in downtown Los Angeles. Of course Fisher, the true
genius, is hunted and hounded by the U.S. government and under interdict.
Fisher has his own computer programs too, but this cannot be mentioned in
our Jewish-controlled media, so second-raters like Kasparov and
megalomaniacs like Scharansky become planet earth’s representatives in the
battle against the cyborgs (rather like the script from that Hollywood
film, “Independence Day” where the universe is saved by Jeff Goldbum,
powered by the Talmudic invocations of his kipa-wearing Patriarch, Judd
Hirsch).
Imbibing fantasies like that all day and Khazars like Mike Stein imagine
that a little back alley shrewdness and word manipulation will win the day
for them again and again here in alt.revisionism
But Stein’s polemical modus operandi is the essence of obscurantism and
Talmudism. For years Stein could not concede that this writer presented a
series of historic discoveries here in alt. revisionism regarding SS
prosecution of concentration camp personnel.
Most of the movie-going public who have seen Spielberg’s “Schindler’s
List” would be astonished to learn that the SS had arrested Amon Goeth and
regarded him as a criminal and unworthy to administer the KRAKAU-PLASZOW
labor camp. But not dull Stein and his witless Nizkor entourage.
There was never a shred of admission to the effect that, “Wow,
astonishing, this SS, portrayed by Spielberg and others as the paradigm of
inhumanity and homicide, were actually, in the midst of a war, arresting
and prosecuting KZ Kommandants for “brutality” and a “license to kill.”
Nah, the orthodox upholders of Jewish and Allied propaganda could never
concede any such thing because they are not debating, they are
propagandizing. Propaganda, unlike debate, involves damage control and
that is the endeavor upon which Mike “Slippery” Stein is engaged.
Stein’s obfuscation is just Talmud under another name. To understand how
Mr. Stein “argues” one needs to read Jewess Evelyn Kaye, in her
magisterial work, “The Hole in the Sheet,” (Lyle Stuart, 1987).
Referring to the studies of rabbinical students, Kaye states:
“The discussions are totally pointless, rooted in unreality…They know
how to divert attention from the issue at hand. And they have no
understanding at all of logical thinking…Their minds are successfully
fogged up in an eternal wandering miasma.” (Kaye, pp. 75-76).
Let’s examine Mr. Stein in this regard, concerning how he “knows how to
divert attention from the issue at hand.”
Here was his proapganda line until recently:
Slippery Stein, alt.revisionism, March 2, 1997:
“Mr. Hoffman repeats his story about Amon Goeth being arrested not
merely for corruption, but for the murder of inmates supposedly based on
Keneally, Ainsztein, and the affidavits of Morgen and Mittelstadt… The
two affidavits were far too ambiguous – they gave a list of people
arrested, and a separate list of charges which were laid, but nothing
linked any specific charge to any specific person on the first list.
“…Mr. Hoffman was told all this over two years ago. Thus his repetition
at the very least is a wilful lie by omission, not just an error.”
Hoffman replies: Yes, Mr. Stein you’ve been calling me a “proven liar” on
the basis of the preceding for years now. Your Big Lie Technique has
qualified you as a (drum roll), official “Nizkor Contributor” (!) with
whom WWII revisionists clash “to their sorrow.”
But Stein’s house of cards is based on the credulity of religious fanatics
who demonize any and all doubts about the Six Million fairy tales.
Stein refers to Morgen’s affidavit and says, “nothing linked any specific
charge to any specific person.”
But here’s Morgen’s affidavit: “all of these offenses” (brutality and a
license to kill) were committed by “personnel of the SS…commandants
of…Krakau-Plaszow” (Amon Goeth).
–From Affidavit SS-65 by SS Judge Konrad Morgen, IMT Vol. 42, p. 556.
Now presumably Stein can read. There’s nothing “ambiguous” about what
Morgen wrote–Morgen says that ALL the offenses cited were committed by
the commandants cited and he specifically cites, among these, the
commandant of Krakau-Plaszow, and this was Amon Goeth.
Stein has no credible answer to this. And it’s not kosher for him to
apologize and admit his lying.
Hence he’s reached a cul-de-sac: no spiffy sleight of hand, no
circumlocutions. All of these at this juncture–when I have my rapier at
his throat and his back against the wall–would be transparent sophistry.
So, in a gesture of futility that is the last resort of his kind, he has
to reach into his pocket and wave some loot around:
“$5,000 that a college English professor selected at random will agree
with me that the text is ambiguous as to which individuals were accused of
which crimes, and that no such definite conclusion can be reached based on
this affidavit alone. Money to be escrowed in advance…It is time to put
your money where your lying mouth is.” (Mike Stein, June 3, 1997).
Note Stein’s addition of a new criterion:
“…based on this affidavit ALONE” (emphasis supplied).
A sneaky little interpolation, but that’s how Mr. Stein operates.
I wonder what has happened to my original framework: “Keneally, Ainsztein,
and the affidavits of Morgen and Mittelstadt” ?
Gone, vanished with a wave of a magic Jewish wand. I don’t term him
“Slippery” for nothing!
I also like the part about a college English professor “selected at
random.” Can one imagine what one of that faculty turkey flock will do
when he observes that the text at issue is part of an exchange between a
Jewish saint and martyr of the cosmos (Mr. Mike P. Stein) and a vicious
denier of the verities of the Church of the Six Million (that no-goodnik
Hoffman)?
I don’t need remedial English lessons “arbitrated” by some professor or
labyrinthe Talmudic responses to clear-cut cases of fraud.
But Stein does need a lesson in ethics.
Thou shalt not bear false witness, Mr. Stein.
And an addendum: Thou shalt tame thy Jewish arrogance and not assume too
much when crossing swords with krauts.
–Michael A. Hoffman II
http://www.hoffman-info.com
Path: news2.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: [email protected] (Michael P. Stein)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.movies.spielberg,soc.history,alt.usenet.kooks
Subject: Hoffman runs in terror fror challenge
Followup-To: alt.usenet.kooks
Date: 3 Jun 1997 13:29:27 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Lines: 127
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References:
Reply-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Host: access5.digex.net
Xref: news2.digex.net alt.revisionism:168982 alt.movies.spielberg:9701 soc.history:89280 alt.usenet.kooks:60138
In article ,
Michael A. Hoffman II wrote:
>Stein Offers $5,000 to buy his way out of his dilemma
No, Stein simply shows Hoffman up for the fraud he is.
[dozens of lines of weaseling and evasion snipped]
>Stein refers to Morgen’s affidavit and says, “nothing linked any specific
>charge to any specific person.”
>
>But here’s Morgen’s affidavit: “all of these offenses” (brutality and a
>license to kill) were committed by “personnel of the SS…commandants
>of…Krakau-Plaszow” (Amon Goeth).
>
>–From Affidavit SS-65 by SS Judge Konrad Morgen, IMT Vol. 42, p. 556.
>
>Now presumably Stein can read.
Presumably everyone else can see the same sneaky ellipsis dots as I
can. They’re the same ellipsis dots that turn the movie reviewer’s “This
film was a great disappointment” into the advertising page’s “This film
was … great.”
>There’s nothing “ambiguous” about what
>Morgen wrote–Morgen says that ALL the offenses cited were committed by
>the commandants cited and he specifically cites, among these, the
>commandant of Krakau-Plaszow, and this was Amon Goeth.
You can assert that all you like. Reality will not be impressed. You
have been offered a chance to have this dispute judged by a neutral
referee. You are running away. All your bluster cannot conceal the fact
that I am willing to submit our dispute to a neutral party, but you will
only debate when you can judge yourself the winner.
>Stein has no credible answer to this.
Again, I will happily debate you on this point in front of a neutral
arbiter.
>And it’s not kosher for him to apologize and admit his lying.
Usenet contains a number of examples of public apologies for my
errors, which are relatively few. When you find an example of my lying,
do let everyone know.
>Hence he’s reached a cul-de-sac: no spiffy sleight of hand, no
>circumlocutions. All of these at this juncture–when I have my rapier at
>his throat and his back against the wall–would be transparent sophistry.
>
>So, in a gesture of futility that is the last resort of his kind, he has
>to reach into his pocket and wave some loot around:
>
>”$5,000 that a college English professor selected at random will agree
>with me that the text is ambiguous as to which individuals were accused of
>which crimes, and that no such definite conclusion can be reached based on
>this affidavit alone. Money to be escrowed in advance…It is time to put
>your money where your lying mouth is.” (Mike Stein, June 3, 1997).
I’ll do it for free, if you’re too cowardly to risk your money. The
only stakes are that the loser must post a public apology to the winner.
Are you game now?
>Note Stein’s addition of a new criterion:
>
> “…based on this affidavit ALONE” (emphasis supplied).
>
>A sneaky little interpolation, but that’s how Mr. Stein operates.
>
>I wonder what has happened to my original framework: “Keneally, Ainsztein,
>and the affidavits of Morgen and Mittelstadt” ?
>Gone, vanished with a wave of a magic Jewish wand. I don’t term him
>”Slippery” for nothing!
You dropped them from your own list. But sure, I’ll happily add them
back in. The text from the Mittelstadt affidavit which you posted two
years ago had the same defect of ambiguity as the Morgen affidavit.
If that was your only objection, it is now removed. Shall we proceed
to settling this matter once and for all?
>I also like the part about a college English professor “selected at
>random.” Can one imagine what one of that faculty turkey flock will do
>when he observes that the text at issue is part of an exchange between a
>Jewish saint and martyr of the cosmos (Mr. Mike P. Stein) and a vicious
>denier of the verities of the Church of the Six Million (that no-goodnik
>Hoffman)?
We can stipulate that a neutral party will choose the professor.
There are methods of doing it where each of us supplies one half of the
selection criteria in a way that neither of us can influence the outcome,
or even know what the outcome is until the neutral party receives the
verdict, and yet the result of the selection can be verified. We can also
agree on the exact text of the instructions to the judge.
Another objection disposed of. Shall we proceed?
>I don’t need remedial English lessons “arbitrated” by some professor or
>labyrinthe Talmudic responses to clear-cut cases of fraud.
In other words, you cannot debate in a forum where you are not also
the judge. I understand perfectly.
>But Stein does need a lesson in ethics.
>
>Thou shalt not bear false witness, Mr. Stein.
>
>And an addendum: Thou shalt tame thy Jewish arrogance and not assume too
>much when crossing swords with krauts.
I never assumed you had any integrity. I was just demonstrating that
fact in a way that would be transparent to all. You have not exceeded my
expectations.
Posted/emailed.
—
Mike Stein The above represents the Absolute Truth.
POB 10420 Therefore it cannot possibly be the official
Arlington, VA 22210 position of my employer.
