In article <[email protected]>, “Kurt Knoll”
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Kolthoff to bist aus Hamburg gar nicht so schlecht das is besser den
> eine Sau Preuse aus Berlin.
> Aber sei vorsichtig wie du dich benemhst wen du mit mir sprichts.
Kurt, Sie schreiben Deutsch wie ein kompletter Analphabet. Entweder
haben Sie Ihr Deutsch vergessen, oder Sie haben Deutsch nie richtig
schreiben können.
—
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:07 EST 2002
Article: 1287782 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,de.soc.politik.misc,can.politics
Subject: Re: SS Hauptsturmführer Dieter Wisliceny testifies at Nuremberg on the Final Solution
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 11:57:41 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <141220011157419555%[email protected]>
References: <051220011352323725%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <131220010920001496%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <3c191db[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1008323860 28067 128.214.199.213 (14 Dec 2001 09:57:40 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 Dec 2001 09:57:40 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1287782 de.soc.politik.misc:222140 can.politics:616867
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:08 EST 2002
Article: 1288860 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!nntp.abs.net!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!uunet!ash.uu.net!bos.uu.net!ams.uu.net!newsfeed.song.fi!news.cs.hut.fi!newsfeeds.funet.fi!newsfeeds.funet.fi!newsfeed2.funet.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,can.politics,us.politics
Subject: Re: The blatant double standards of Richard Phillips
Supersedes: <171220011029172158%[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:52:44 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 178
Message-ID: <171220011552445375%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <jeffreygbrown-8F3764.15[email protected]> <[email protected]> <jeffreygbrown-856064.1703251[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1008597161 8702 128.214.199.213 (17 Dec 2001 13:52:41 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 Dec 2001 13:52:41 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1288860 can.politics:618049 us.politics:84742
In article <[email protected]>, Richard Phillips
<[email protected]> wrote:
> ==========================================
> Phillips
>
> Your point is not entirely without merit but fails in that it does not take
> proper
> account of the differing circumstances in the two situations.
>
> (1) IF the Nazis HAD determined on the physical extermination of the Jews,
> they would
> have been at no great pains to conceal it.
=====================================================
At first they didn’t. The massacres committed by the Einsatzkommandos
in conjunction with the SP, SD, and local fascist groupings such as the
Arâjs Commando at Babi Yar, Rumbula, Kovno (Kaunas), and Liepaja were
done in full public view, even to the point of being photographed
(e.g. http://www.netbistro.com/electriczen/documents/libau.html) and
filmed by th Nazis for purposes of propagdana and debriefing, between
June 22 and December 31, 1941.
Reasons for developng a more subtle approach included the following:
1. The Nazis found that Eastern Europeans, even if some of them
harbored a virulent anti-Semitic world view, were not into it to such a
degree that they were willing to involve themselves in dedicated
exterminational activity against their neighbors and compatriots. In
Lithuania and, to a far lesser extent in Latvia, for example, the Nazis
were initially able to provoke pogroms directed against Jews in general
as “payback” for the past year those unfortunate countries had spent
under communist rule. It soon became clear, however, that exacting
revenge against the subset of local Jews who had collaborated with,
worked for, or publicly supported the Soviet government was not the
same thing as killing all local Jews, which was what the Nazis were
doing, encouraging the locals to follow their example. All three Baltic
countries had people such as the Lithuanian Jonas Paulavicius, the
Latvian Jan Lipke, and the Estonian Uko Masing who risked their lives
to save Jews from Nazi exterminational policies, see, e.g.
http://www.yad-vashem.org.il/righteous/righteous_table.html );
2. Many Eastern Europeans, particularly Poles, Russians, Belarussians,
Ukrainians, and Latvians, eventually realized that they were not much
higher on the Nazis’ racial hierarchy than Jews or Gypsies. Realizing
that the Nazis were interested in gaining “Lebensraum” by eastward
expanion, they understood that they were likely candidates for the next
round of Nazi ethnic cleansing.
3. Public mass shootings and hangings of Jews during the latter half of
1941, particularly of women, children, and babies, made it difficult
for the Nazis to gain respectable supporters among the populations in
the occupied countries (see
http://www.abc.net.au/quantum/stories/s124137.htm,
http://www.netbistro.com/electriczen/documents/libau2.html ).
> To begin with, up until well
> in1943 they
> were pretty certain they were going to win. Secondly, they had been talking
> about Jews
> as subhuman vermin and suchlike terms of endearment.
But long before that they realized that public mass murders of Jewish
civilians did not generate the enthusiasm they had thought it would,
and that such a policy was only sustainable behind the close doors and
walls of specially built facilities. Indeed, the planning for these
facilities must have dated from the first weeks of the beginning of
ther campaigna against the USSR, since the first dedicated
extermination facility, Chelmno, opened for business on December 6,
1941.
> Eisenhower, on the other hand, most certainly did NOT want it to be public
> knowledge
> that he had allowed himself to be a tool of Jewish vengeance.
Gee, unh, Jewish vengeance for what?
> He had already
> then
> political ambitions and knew this would not do him any good. You have to
> remember that,
> at that time, the ordinary American felt that Jewish power in the Roosevelt
> government
> was much much greater than it had any business to be. That there were
> undertones of
> this in the 1944 presidential campaign could hardly be denied. American
> civilians had
> strong notions about the proper treatment of war prisoners and would not have
> looked at
> all kindly on German prisoners getting anything less.
By 1944 the American public had some idea of what had been going on at
the Nazi concentration camps, and by early 1945 the newsreels and
photographs of stacks of emaciated corpses and of walking skeletons
were widely known. Months before the war was over the public understood
that the Nazis had been waging systematic genocide, and there were
calls for revenge.
> (2) Eisenhower’s orders regarding the feeding or non-feeding of German
> prisoners dd not
> require any enormous diversion of resources for a war effort. The
> extermination of Jews
> most certainly would have.
>
> ==========================================
Your second statement reveals a total lack of understanding of the
economics of the Holocaust.
The extermination of the Jews consisted, roughly, or two phases:
I – June 22, 1941 to January, 1942
Extermination was done publicly and on a massive scale on the Eastern
front, with no regard to the human resources that the Jews represented.
Jews were killed publicly, and their property and assets were
confiscated by the state. Valuables concealed on their person,
including gold teeth and wedding rings, were not considered worth
spending time looking for or seizing.
II – January, 1942 to May, 1945
Dedicated extermination is done behind closed doors at specially built
facilities, mostly in Nazi-occupied Poland. Extermination by work is
done behind closed doors at more than 10,000 facilities all over
Nazi-controlled Europe. This program required an enormous and well
documented diversion of funds and resources from the war effort because
the camps had to be built and maintained, rational train schedules had
to be drawn uop to ensure a steady and manageable stream of victims,
and appropriate rollling stick had to be provided, guarded, cleaned,
and sent on to the next place to be evacuated, and a large bureaucracy,
Division IV at the RSHA, had to coordinate the program which extended
>from Greece to Norway and from the Netherlands to Finland, Denmark,
Hungary, and Romania. Looked at from the short term and in isolation,
the program seems to have been a wasteful and dysfunctional use of
resources, but looked at more carefully, it paid its way and generated
a profit:
1. The dirty work was done behind closed doors, thus improving public
relations.
2. Those Jews who had nothing to contribute were exterminated shortly
after arrival, those who could make an economic contribution to the
German war effort were spared for as long as their output exceeded
their upkeep.
3. The goal of capturing and killing Jews was never abandoned; indeed,
Jews were made to literally work themselves to death manufacturing
armaments and other materiel which would enable Nazi Germany to
capture, kill, and eenslave more Jews.
4. Jews were also put to work in the gas chambers as Sonderkommandos
and other service personnel, translating orders, helping victims to
undress, convincing them in their own language that they were going to
undergo a harmless delousing, and then clearing out the dead bodies and
examining them carefully for gold teeth and hidden valuables.
A rough comparison of the relative profitablity of the two modalities
can be seen by considering the following.
When 24,000 Riga Jews were killed in the Rumbula massacre of November
30, December 8, 1941, the local factories to whom the Jews in the
ghetto had been farmed out lost a valuable source of virtually free
labor just before the onset of winter when they would have been really
needed to produce winter clothing and boots which the Germans had not
thought they would be needing for the Russian campaign. The Latvian
capital also lost most of its physicians, dentists, academics, artists,
and leading businessmen in addition to normal industrial workers. Their
homes were auctioned off, and their clothing and the valuables
collected by the Germans at the killing site were washed, classified,
and sent back to Germany.
The profitability of the revised killing plan made it possible for
Treblinka commander Franz Stengel to exterminate some 700,000 people at
his camp according to a schedule carefully drawn up and implemented by
Eichmann’s Department IV of the RSHA in conjunction with the Deutsche
Reichsbahn, in addition to making deposits in SS bank accounts of
$2,800,000, £400,000, SUR 12,000,000, 145 kilograms of gold, and 4,000
carats of diamonds (See:
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERstangl.htm) stolen by the Nazis
>from the Treblinka victims. Additionally, their clothing, homes, and
other valuables were confiscated by the Nazi state and either sold at
their points of origin or sent to Germany and distributed to the
victims of Allied bombings.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:08 EST 2002
Article: 1288909 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!skynet.be!skynet.be!newsfeeds.funet.fi!newsfeed1.funet.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,can.politics,us.politics
Subject: Re: The blatant double standards of Richard Phillips
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 19:43:29 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <171220011943295425%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <jeffreygbrown-8560[email protected]> <[email protected]> <171220011552445375%[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1008611004 21301 128.214.199.213 (17 Dec 2001 17:43:24 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 Dec 2001 17:43:24 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1288909 can.politics:618111 us.politics:84781
In article <[email protected]>, Werner Knoll
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Kenneth McVay, SOBC the well-known fag in Canada,
> Fag McVay of Vancouver, also a convicted car thief and
> all round molester, convicted of child molesting and car theft
> in California and Oregon, and still unemployed gas pump boy,
> mastermind of the Canadian branch of NAMBLA,
> wants all to know about all his fellow criminals and perverts.
> Here is the latest…….
>
> Here are some known NAMBLA members, their addresses, and phone
> numbers from an official NAMBLA membership list.
> Please note that this does not mean that these individuals have
> sexually
> assaulted children…only that they were
> registered as a member of NAMBLA.
I am not a registered memberor associate of NAMBLA or any other
organization. You reveal your swinishness by posting nonsense like this
instead of sticking to the issue at hand. Sie sollen sich schämen.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:08 EST 2002
Article: 1289186 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,can.politics,us.politics
Subject: Re: To Werner Knoll, re Criminal Code of Canada
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 11:25:09 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <181220011125093446%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <171220011552445375%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <r5qT7.6345$NC5.960[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1008667503 7252 128.214.199.213 (18 Dec 2001 09:25:03 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 18 Dec 2001 09:25:03 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1289186 can.politics:618427 us.politics:85013
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
(Kenneth McVay, OBC) wrote:
> I have been advised to publish the following statements:
I will follow your advice and example:
1. I am a heterosexual male.
2. I have never been charged, arrested, or convicted with
respect to _any_ criminal offense in _any_ jurisdiction.
3. I have no association whatsoever with NAMBLA, nor have
I ever had such an association.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:09 EST 2002
Article: 1292819 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,can.politics,us.politics
Subject: Re: Lying Shit Knoll still fact-free
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 20:02:00 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 82
Message-ID: <211220012002001962%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <Xns917CDA416EEABNuku[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1008957710 11615 128.214.199.213 (21 Dec 2001 18:01:50 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 21 Dec 2001 18:01:50 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1292819 can.politics:619968 us.politics:85929
In article <[email protected]>, Richard Phillips
<[email protected]> wrote:
> ==============================================
> Phillips
>
> How Hitler chose to run Germany was the business of Germany and of no one
> else. Like it or don’t like it, his accession to power was completely legal,
> and he brought benefits to the German people that Americans would dearly
> love to have today.
How Hitler chose to run Germany was the business of Germany’s
neighbors, trading partners, and the world community.
Hitler’s rearmament of the Rhineland contituted a direct and pertinent
threat to France and the Low Countries, in addition to which it set a
dangerous precedent with respect to regarded treaties as not worth the
paper they were printed on. Within six years of Hitler’s accession to
power, technically legal, but surrounded by terror, violence, and
threats thereof (see http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch16.htm ), he had
criminalized being Jewish in Germany and cancelled the citizenship of
German Jews, occupied the Rheinland, annexed Austria, absorbed the
Sudetenland, destroyed Czechoslovakia, applied the anti-Jewish
legislation in force in Germany to the Jews, including those who had
left Germany and sought refuge, in Austria and Czechoslovakia, signed a
treaty with the USSR, and invaded Poland. This resulted in France and
the UK declaring war on Germany, an action reciprocated by Germany when
it attacked and occupied the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, part of
France, Norway. and Denmark, once again having the legislation
criminalizing being Jewish applied in those countries to Jewish
refugees and local Jews alike.
The benefits that he brought to the part of the population that he did
not criminalize (Jews, homosexuals, Gypsies, Jehovah’s witnesses,
communists, labor union leaders, dissidents,Š) included higher prices
and less efficient service at the businesses aryanized from the Jews
Viewed in retrospect, any gains that ordinary Germans gained can be
compared to the fattening up of a turkey before the holiday season. An
inordinate number of young German men who might have fared marginally
better as a consequence of certain Hitler policies applied between
January 1933 and September 1939, wound up dying ignominiously at
Stalingrad or elsewhere, victims of Hitler’s megalomania.
> ==============================================
> Phillips
>
> In short, the Nazis gave a damn for the ordinary people
> of their country, something the ruling elitues of our country have long
> since ceased to do.
You are sadly misinformed, Richard. The Nazis were out to do some major
ethnic cleansing on a continent-wide basis, and they had to muster the
support of the man-in-the-street if they were going to get the
necessary carte-blanche. They had no logical difficulty with the idea
that it is acceptable to scapegoat all the Jews within their own
population for a crime committed by a non-German Jew in France.
> ==============================================
> Phillips
>
> They don’t give a damn for anyone other than their
> precious minorities and their big-bucks campaign contributors.
>
Depending on how you construct your analysis, everyone is a minority.
If you look at a demographic analysis of the US population, you will
find that you, a male in your mid-70s, have been a member of a minority
group since early childhood. Biology tells us that slightly more males
than females are born, but that in all societies the difference has
been corrected in favor of a female majority from the age of five or
so.
Minorities have the most to lose if the wrong candidate is elected,
while big-bucks contributors have the most to gain if the right
candidate is.
> =========================================
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:09 EST 2002
Article: 1300199 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,can.politics
Subject: Re: David Irving Vs. Deborah Lipstadt
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:54:43 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <020120021554431707%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <jeffreygbrown-B5E6A3.133[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1009979672 28802 128.214.199.213 (2 Jan 2002 13:54:32 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Jan 2002 13:54:32 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300199 can.politics:624047
In article <[email protected]>, Kanuk
<[email protected]> wrote:
> 2) The Jewish controlled mass media blacked out coverage of the trial when
> Irving was scoring points and spun coverage against him. Judge Gray admitted
> he
> had read some of these stories.
Those who were really interested in the trial followed the transcripts
as they were published. The ones I read were posted at David Irving’s
own http://www.fpp.co.uk, hardly a Jewish controlled source of
information.
Irving didn’t really score any points. He was, in his own words, made
to “eat humble pie” and admit, among other things, that all of the
historical evidence points to the “systematic” use of exterminational
gassings at Chelmno, Auschwitz, and elsewhere.
Irving really couldn’t have scored any points. His was a lost cause
before it started, and he, a person the size of whose ego is inversely
proportionate to his degree of professional competence, made the doubly
hare-brained mistake of taking on the acadermic history establishment
and serving as his own defense lawyer.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:09 EST 2002
Article: 1300202 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Yet another book documents Hitler’s unprecedented stupidity
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 16:08:35 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <020120021608351764%[email protected]>
References: <311220011824213783%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <010120021710523179%[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1009980505 692 128.214.199.213 (2 Jan 2002 14:08:25 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Jan 2002 14:08:25 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300202
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (tom moran) wrote:
> Okay we see the statement is quoted from some book. Now what does the
> book have to show for it’s credibility?
Hitler’s original statement was:
“Wenn die Entlassung jüdischer Wissenschaftler die Vernichtung der
gegenwärtigen deutschen Wissenschaft bedeute, dann müssen wir für
einige Jahre eben ohne Wissenschaft auskommen.”
– Quoted in Jospeh Haberer, _Politics and the Community of Science_,
New York 1969, pg. 131 f.
Translation (EH):
“If the dismissal of Jewish scientists would mean the destruction of
contemporary German science, then we will just have to manage for a few
years without science.”
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:10 EST 2002
Article: 1300230 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Phillips, Holman, and Orac
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 17:11:44 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 295
Message-ID: <020120021711440255%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <010120021935556009%ho[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1009984305 4578 128.214.199.213 (2 Jan 2002 15:11:45 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Jan 2002 15:11:45 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300230
In article <[email protected]>, Richard Phillips
>
> ==========================================
> Phillips
>
> You are going on the theory that HCN penetrates only to a very minute
> extent – what is it? 10 microns?
It is not a theory, but a fact about HCN. According to Dr, James Roth
cyanide gas bonds with materials only only at the very outer surface
of 10 microns. Thus, the destructive nature of the analytical procedure
made any results of quantitative analysis invalid (source:
http://www.adl.org/issue_holocaust/leuchter_film.html).
> ==========================================
> Phillips
>
> I don’t know but I recall reading that it
> is somethinng of that order. IF this is so then I’ll admit that crushing
> the samples would cause the surface material (that might contain HCN
> traces) to be hopelessly diluted by non-surface material (that could not
> contain any). The result would be that we would obtain a concentration
> figure much lower than its true value.
>
> I have a number of problems with that:
>
> (1) The claim about the minute extent of HCN penetration was made by Roth
> AFTER the trial. (which is to say after he realized he had walked into a
> hornet’s nest). It was not what he testified to AT the trial.
You are correct that he made the about the minute extent of the HCN
penetation, but that does not invalidate the facts about the physical
chemistry of cyanide. More importantly, you are incorrect in your
assumption he did not make the statement until he had realized that he
had walked into a hornets’ nest. The historical factuality of
exterminational gassings at Auschwitz, other concentration camps and
extermination centers, and euthanasia centers had been established by
competent forensic examinations and other evidence back in 1945. An
additional examination 44 years after the fact conducted on ruins that
have been exposed to the elements since 1989 would hardly have been
accepted as having more probabtive value than the analysis carried out
when the evidence was still fresh. Dr. Roth’s reason for making the
additional statement about the penetration of HCN was to make it clear
to the public that Leuchter had lied with respect to the source and the
content of his samples. Essentially, Leuchter had told his that the
samples were to be used as evidence in a worker’s compensation case,
and that they should be tested for the presence of cyanide. Evidently,
the implication was that these were chunks of concrete that had come
>from a place where they had, _as entities_, been exposed to cyanide. In
actual fact, they were chunks only one surface of which had been
exposed to cyanide.
> ==========================================
> Phillips
>
> (2) If the depth of penetration is that minute, then how are we to account
> for the very visible Prussian blue staining seen on the OUTSIDES of the
> walls of the fumigation chamber.
Because large objects such as mattresses that had been fumigated were
aired out by propping them up against the external walls, where they
gave off cyanide. The fact that blue statining is on the outside walls
does not mean that the cyanide has penetrated the walls. Indeed, the
idea of cyanide penetrating the walls of a facility in which it is
being used in concentrations far above lethal levels is an aburdity. On
the other hand, the fact that cyanide dissipates rapidly in fresh air
would mean that residual cyanide compounds would be found on the
external surfaces in the vicinty of the exhaust vents of structures in
which it is being used as well as in the areas against which large
objects which had been fumigated had been proppoed to air them out.
> ==========================================
> Phillips
>
> (3) The principal thrust of Leuchter’s Report was neither the very small
> value for the execution chamber traces nor the very large value for the
> fumigation chamber traces; rather, it was the RELATIONSHIP between them,
> the fact that the second was around 1000 times larger than the first. Now
> if Leuchter’s collecting technique was flawed in the way that you say it
> was, then it could have resulted in either one beng much smaller than it
> should have been. BUT, it could not have affected the RELATIONSHIP between
> the two. Reason: whatever effect it had on the execution chamber traces, it
> would have had the same effect of the fumigation chamber traces.
Nonsense. What you claim above could only hold true if the size of the
samples were controlled. Leuchter’s samples ranged in size from the
size of a finger tip to the size of a fist. His sampling technique
lacked systematicity or a control, not surprising, since he was taking
the samples illegally and had to be satisfied with what he could get
between watchmen’s rounds.
> ==========================================
> Phillips
>
> (4) If, as you imply, a correct sampling technique would have resulted in
> much larger figures for the execution chamber traces, then how is it that
> the Krakow Institute (who I presume did not repeat Leuchter’s “mistake”)
> came up with very much the same values for the execution chamber traces —
> ie around 1 mg/kg.
Wrong again. Leuchter was only looking for Prussian blue, but Prussian
blue is not always formed upon contact with cyanide, in addition to
which the presence of CO2 in the environment when it is interacting
with other materials, as well as the temperature and humidityy of the
ambient air play a role in its formation, thus making a direct
comparison of the concentrstions in the gas chambers and fumigation
chambers meaningless. The Cracow group used analytic techniques which
tested for residual cyanide compounds other than Prussian blue, thus
their figures are cannot be compared meaningfully with Leuchter’s
figures, which are invalid in any case. Here is a brief explanation
expressed more competetently than I could do it.
Source: http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/#v
“The Chemistry of Auschwitz”, by Richard Green
<quote>
The control used in the measurements of Leuchter and Rudolf is biased.
They contain Prussian blue as the major form of cyanide and the
kinetics of Prussian blue formation are far from obvious. Cyanide
residues, not in the form of Prussian blue are far more susceptible to
weathering away. The IFRC researchers experimented with exposing
building materials to HCN and found that the cyanides were easily
removed with exposure to water. (83) The samples that they found
containing cyanides from the Kremas were carefully taken from places in
the chambers that were as sheltered from the elements as possible. (84)
Leuchter and Rudolf, collecting their samples illegally could not
afford that luxury.
The IFRC being aware of the problems using a biased control containing
Prussian blue used a method that discriminated against such compounds
that only measure other cyanides present. The IFRC found traces of
cyanide at levels significantly above background in all 5 Kremas as
well as bunker 11. They also measure concentrations in bath-house B1-A
in Birkenau, which was used for delousing prisoners’ clothing. Samples
>from the bath house did indeed have higher concentrations of cyanides,
but it is not the case that every sample from the bath-house had higher
concentrations than every sample in the Kremas. For example, sample
number 25 from Krema II had measurements of 640,592, and 620 ug/kg.
Sample 46 from Krema V had measurements of 244, 248, and 232 ug/kg. In
contrast sample 53 from the bath-house camp B1-A in Birkenau had
measurements of 24, 20, and 24 ug/kg. Overall concentrations for the
fumigation chambers ranged from 0-900 ug/kg. In the Kremas they ranged
>from 0-640 ug/kg. So it is true that the highest measurements were
higher in fumigation chambers (discriminating against iron blues), but
not by much. There is another important fact. Concentrations in control
samples from dwelling accommodations were 0 +/- 1 ug/kg. In other
words, there is no doubt that the Kremas were exposed to a source of
HCN. If the intent is to prove that the Kremas could not have been
homicidal gas chambers, it has failed. (85)
FOOTNOTES
[35. Markiewicz, Gubala, and Labedz, Z Zagadnien Sqdowych, z. XXX,
1994, 17-27. Available at
https://nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/polish/institute-for-forensic-research/]
83. Markiewicz, op. cit.
84. Ibid.
85. Ibid.
</quote>
>
> =========================================
>
> >
> > > ========================================
> > > Phillips
> > >
> > > Why were the tests incorrect?
> > >
> > > ========================
> >
> > The laboratory was told that it was supposed to check the overall
> > sample for HCN content rather than just the surface. It thus used
> > so-called destructive techniques and ground the sample up, thus
> > combining the compounds which had formed on the one surface which had
> > been the wall with everything else. The correct technique would have
> > involved telling which surface of the incorrectly taken sample was the
> > wall, and focusing the analytic attention on that surface and that
> > surface only.
>
> =======================================
> Phillips
>
> Same criticism; same reply. The Krakow Institute (who I presume that not
> repeat the mistake) came up with the same figures for the execution chamber
> traces.
>
> =======================
Noo they didn’t. Let’s review the conclusions again.
Source: ibid.
<quote>
Overall concentrations for the fumigation chambers ranged from 0-900
ug/kg. In the Kremas they ranged from 0-640 ug/kg. So it is true that
the highest measurements were higher in fumigation chambers
(discriminating against iron blues), but not by much. There is another
important fact. Concentrations in control samples from dwelling
accommodations were 0 +/- 1 ug/kg. In other words, there is no doubt
that the Kremas were exposed to a source of HCN. If the intent is to
prove that the Kremas could not have been homicidal gas chambers, it
has failed.
</quote>
>
> > Leuchter, an ignoramus with no comprehension of forensic
> > science, did not understand these issues and thus had the laboratory
> > perform experiments lacking any scientific validity.
>
> =========================================
> Phillips
>
> That is an opinion. Please cease editorializing.
>
> =====================================
It is not an opinion. It is a fact that Leuchter himself demonstrated
to the court. He offered himself as a gas chamber expert, but did not
even understand the basic properties of cyanide gas, which is used in
American execution gas chambers. When his qualifications were
questioned, he stated that he didn’t have any. He was thus not allowed
to give testimony as an expert witness. On the other hand, Dr. Roth,
was admitted as an expert witness, and he also demonstarted that
Leuchter was incompetent to conduct a forensic analysis of this type.
So I am not editorializing. I am merely repreating what is part of the
public record. Leuchter’s report has never been admitted as evidence by
any court on the planet because it reveals itself to be the work of an
ignormaus who does not understand the issues and thus presents the
results of experiments lacking any scientitific validity.
> > This is why the
> > notorious _Leuchter Report_ has never been accepted by any court on the
> > planet has having even the slightest shred of evidentiary value.
>
> ==============================================
> Phillips
>
> Just exactly how many courts other than the Toronto court ever had the
> decision of accepting or not accepting the Report?
>
> ============================
If it had had any scientific validy, David Irving would have used it as
evidence in his trial against professor Lipstadt and Penguin Books.
> Consequently, even if some of Leuchter’s result appear to be roughly the
> same as those reached by the IFRC in its far more scientific report, this
> is only verisimilitude: the _Leuchter Report_ is
>
> > methodologically so flawed that it has no scientific or evidentiary
> > value whatsoever.
>
> ================================================
> Phillips
>
> I see. The fact that Leuchter got the same numbers as did your Krakow
> Institute was nothing but dumb luck. Well, that’s not the war Science
> evaluates these things. Science evaluates on the basis of the data
> obtained, not on the basis of highly partisan judgements about the method
> used to obtain them.
>
> ========================================
>
1. He did not obtain the same results.
2. They were not even testing for the same thing.
3. In two-valued propositional logic:
X -> Y
—————–
T T T
T F F
F T T
F T F
In other words, a true conclusion based on a false assumption is still
true.
Christopher Columbus assumed that if he had arrived in India, then the
earth had to be round. We now know that his assumption that he had
arrived in India was incorrect, but that does not disprove his
conclusion that the earth had to be round.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:10 EST 2002
Article: 1300262 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,can.politics
Subject: Re: David Irving Vs. Deborah Lipstadt
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 19:16:18 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <020120021916189723%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021554431707%[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1009991777 11935 128.214.199.213 (2 Jan 2002 17:16:17 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Jan 2002 17:16:17 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300262 can.politics:624121
In article <[email protected]>, “Kurt Knoll”
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Get real Holman whatever he scored points or not is not important here. What
> is important to know is part of the
> trial was blacked out.
David Irving himself ensured that the entire transcript of the trial
was posted at his website. What evidence do you have that part of the
trial was, despite his efforts, blacked out?
> The people how hat listened to the proceedings maybe
> have no access to the transcript. And
> if the transcript is not in full no one will ever know what was in it.
David Irving himself posted the transcripts and commented on them
liberally. He never suggested or implied that there would have been
have been foul play.
> As
> for Jewish control of the media you have
> to analyze yourself.
That English sentence is ambiguous:
1. Sie müssen sich selbst analysieren (als wäre ich selbst ein
Massenmedien kontrollierender Jude).
2. Sie müssen die Frage, ob die Massenmedien von den Juden kontrolliert
werden, selbst analysieren.
Welchen Vorschlag, mein guter Herr Knoll, haben Sie gemacht?
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:10 EST 2002
Article: 1300266 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Yet another book documents Hitler’s unprecedented stupidity
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 19:36:43 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <020120021936433413%[email protected]>
References: <311220011824213783%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <010120021710523179%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021608351764%[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1009993003 13187 128.214.199.213 (2 Jan 2002 17:36:43 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Jan 2002 17:36:43 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300266
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (tom moran) wrote:
> As to Holman’s citing a book Moran said:
> >> Okay we see the statement is quoted from some book. Now what does the
> >> book have to show for it’s credibility?
>
> Holman returns to do nothing more than cite a book:
Hey, I also translated Hitler’s words, without even charging my normal
fee – I am a licensed and certified translator into English from
German, Russian, Swedish, Finnish, and Estonian – for such services.
> >Hitler’s original statement was:
> >”Wenn die Entlassung jüdischer Wissenschaftler die Vernichtung der
> >gegenwärtigen deutschen Wissenschaft bedeute, dann müssen wir für
> >einige Jahre eben ohne Wissenschaft auskommen.”
> >- Quoted in Jospeh Haberer, _Politics and the Community of Science_,
> >New York 1969, pg. 131 f.
> >
> >Translation (EH):
> >
> >”If the dismissal of Jewish scientists would mean the destruction of
> >contemporary German science, then we will just have to manage for a few
> >years without science.”
>
Not just any old book, but rather one published by a reputable
publisher and written by a competent scholar. Any reference to Hitler’s
statement, the concrete consequences of which are known to anyone with
an inkling of intelligence, are well known to everyone familiar with
the history of the German-Jewish scientific diaspora in the US and
elsewhere. I have had the pleasure of personally knowing and discussing
some of these problems with both Hans Bethe and Hannah Arendt, both
German-Jewish scholars who were expelled from Germany and who wound up
at my Alma Mater, Cornell University.
> When it comes to science, the Germans and other goyim were there
> first, before any Jews ever got involved. It more or less started with
> the Greeks and then up to the 20th Century. Twenty five hundred (2500)
> years of goyim science before any Jews showed up on the scene.
Not quite true. Ever heard of Moise Maimonedes (1135-1204). He played
an important role in both the practical and the philosophical study of
science, particularly medicine, physics, and scientific thought. But
since it is only by reading books that I have this information, I
assume that you accord it zero credibility.
Anti-Semitic policies in both Germany and Imperial Russia drove the
Jews to the cities and into teaching and research, some of the few
areas not closed to them. In both countries Jews wound up dominating
science by the early 20th century, since urban society left them with
few other options. Hitler would have liked domiannce in science to be
based on racial criteria, for which reason he was willing to dismiss
the most competent scientific minds associated with German universities
in order to ensure that German science would be the monopoly of
Aryan-pure super-duper men.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:11 EST 2002
Article: 1300270 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!HSNX.atgi.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,can.politics
Subject: Re: David Irving Vs. Deborah Lipstadt
Supersedes: <020120021945033491%[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 19:46:06 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <020120021946067290%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021554431707%[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1009993566 13669 128.214.199.213 (2 Jan 2002 17:46:06 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Jan 2002 17:46:06 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300270 can.politics:624136
In article <[email protected]>, Kanuk
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I believe it was
> at the Zundel trial, specifically the Leuchter report – showing no evidence of
> cyanide residue in the Auschwitz “gas chamber” but lots in the de-lousing
> chamber – that caused Irving to see the Auschwitz “gas chamber” tale as a hoax.
Except that you are dead wrong. There was ample evidence of cyanide
residue in the ruins of the gas chambers, but Irving was ignorant
enough of the manner in which cyanide works to claim, counterfactually,
that it takes “colossally higher” concentrations of cyanide to kill
people than it does to kill lice.
As to the relative amounts of the cyanide compounds found in the gas
chambers and delousing facilities, I leave you to consider the
following results from a competently implemented analysis:
Source: http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/#v
<quote>
The IFRC found traces of cyanide at levels significantly above
background in all 5 Kremas as well as bunker 11. They also measure
concentrations in bath-house B1-A in Birkenau, which was used for
delousing prisoners’ clothing. Samples from the bath house did indeed
have higher concentrations of cyanides, but it is not the case that
every sample from the bath-house had higher concentrations than every
sample in the Kremas. For example, sample number 25 from Krema II had
measurements of 640, 592, and 620 ug/kg. Sample 46 from Krema V had
measurements of 244, 248, and 232 ug/kg. In contrast sample 53 from the
bath-house camp B1-A in Birkenau had measurements of 24, 20, and 24
ug/kg. Overall concentrations for the fumigation chambers ranged from
0-900 ug/kg. In the Kremas they ranged from 0-640 ug/kg. So it is true
that the highest measurements were higher in fumigation chambers
(discriminating against iron blues), but not by much. There is another
important fact. Concentrations in control samples from dwelling
accommodations were 0 +/- 1 ug/kg. In other words, there is no doubt
that the Kremas were exposed to a source of HCN. If the intent is to
prove that the Kremas could not have been homicidal gas chambers, it
has failed.
</quote>
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:11 EST 2002
Article: 1300283 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,can.politics
Subject: Re: David Irving Vs. Deborah Lipstadt
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 20:33:43 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <020120022033439097%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021554431707%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021916189723%[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1009996422 16035 128.214.199.213 (2 Jan 2002 18:33:42 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Jan 2002 18:33:42 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300283 can.politics:624147
In article <[email protected]>, “Kurt Knoll”
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Now you are spin doctoring again what relevance does Irving’s web site have
> to people that have no computer.
Internet cafés and internet-equipped public – and genearlly free –
computers in libraries and at shopping malls are available for
everytone.
> But wanted to se the whole thing from the news media. And why should he
> comment about foul play when
> he dam well knows he will be taken to court.
David Irving runs how own website, and he has never complained of foul
play.
> The public knows when you guys
> have your smeary fingers
> in some where. It is you guys who have to convince them how sincere you
> really are and not me.
What do you mean by “you guys”? I am not a Jew, nor do I have any
control over the media. I have posted my interpretation of the
significance of crtain aspects of the David Irving vs. Deborah
Lipstadt/Penguin Books trial, you are free to post yours. Or do you
think that the Jews control the Internet as well and will send someone
to shoe-bomb you if you deviate from the “party line”?
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:11 EST 2002
Article: 1300302 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Phillips, Holman, and Orac
Supersedes: <020120022128497915%[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 22:01:42 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 145
Message-ID: <020120022201426563%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <010120021935556009%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021711440255%ho[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010001702 21766 128.214.199.213 (2 Jan 2002 20:01:42 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Jan 2002 20:01:42 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300302
In article <[email protected]>, Richard Phillips
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Eugene Holman wrote:
<deletions>
> ============================================
> Phillips
>
> As a technically-trained individual, I most insist on the primacy of
> experimental
> fact over sophisticated conjecture.
You have a clear attitude problem.
The information produced by experimental data is evidence, just as are
the testimonies of Sonderkommando members, the deportation schedules
and other records in the archives of Adolf Eichmann’s RSHA Abteil IV,
and the memoirs of Rudolf Höß. The result of experiments indicate that
the walls of certain parts of the ruins of gas chambers at
Auschwitz-Stammlager, Auschwitz-Birkenau, and Majdanek were exposed to
lethal concentrations of cyanide gas, nothing else. Other evidence has
to be used to determine how, why, and when they were exposed.
So-called physical evidence has no primacy over other evidence. All
evidence has to be evaluated within the framework of a wider context,
and this context is provided primarily by the analysis of the verbal
evidence provided by people who were at the scene of the events being
analyzed.
That’s the way historiography works, that’s the way legal systems work.
> ============================================
> Phillips
>
> You insist that correct sampling technique
> (which
> i presume was used by the Krakow people) would have resulted in significantly
> higher traces for the execution chamber. That is your theory but experimental
> fact does not support it.
>
> THus, as matters stand at this moment, there is no evidence to support your
> theory.
>
> Tell you what you might do. Send a team there to repeat Leuchter’s
> experiments as
> closely as you can but this time using what you believe to be correct
> technique.
> And we’ll see what they come up with.
>
> Pending that I have to insist on the primacy of experimental fact over
> conjecture.
>
> ===============================
Experimental fact is nothing without the information provided by the
testimony of people who were present, and other sources of evidence
that were generated, when the experimental facts were being produced.
That’s how both historiography and legal systems work.
Sorry about that.
<deletions>
> > >
> > > ========================================
> > >
> >
> > 1. He did not obtain the same results.
> > 2. They were not even testing for the same thing.
>
> ==================================
> Phillips
>
> Of course they were. They were testing for traces of HCN.
>
> ========================
Wrong. Leuchter was fixated on Prussian blue, one of the many compounds
of cyanide that are formed when it interacts with other substances.
Unfortunately, factors such as the presence of CO – necessarily present
in the final exhalations of the victims of cyanide poisoning inhibit
the formation of Prussian blue. The Cracow group decided to block
testing for Prussian blue and concentrate on testing for the presence
of other, more predictable cynanide compounds.
>
> >
> > 3. In two-valued propositional logic:
> >
> > X -> Y
> > —————–
> > T T T
> > T F F
> > F T T
> > F T F
> >
> > In other words, a true conclusion based on a false assumption is still
> > true.
>
> ============================================
> Phillips
>
> ????????
>
> =============
>
> >
> >
> > Christopher Columbus assumed that if he had arrived in India, then the
> > earth had to be round. We now know that his assumption that he had
> > arrived in India was incorrect, but that does not disprove his
> > conclusion that the earth had to be round.
>
> ============================================
> Phillips
>
> THe notion that the earth is a sphere did not begin with Columbus. Many educated
> men had known it for quite some time.
>
> ==================================
That does not contradict the fact that logically true conclusions can
result from false premises. We are dealing here with scientific rather
than logical truth, but the two are, of course, interrelated.
Leuchter’s results, based on false premises as well as on a
scientifically invalid analytical technique, are consistent with the
structures he studied having been exposed to concentrations of cyanide
high enough for them to have been used as mass extermination gas
chambers. Due to his scientific incompetence, which included ignorance
of both the fact that forensic analyses had been carried out on the
structures he studied back in 1945 and of the fact that the
Auschwitz-Birkenau structures known as Kremas II – V were not taken
into use until a year after the early 1942 typhus epidemic, and the
totally unwarranted assumption that Nazi gas chambers had to be
structurally and functionally analogous to American gas chambers, as
well as his complete lack of understanding that Zyklon-B is far more
lethal to humans than it is to lice, Fred Leuchter, a scientifically
and historically ignorant charlatan, misrepresenting himself to be an
engineer with gas chamber expertise and into this way beyond his depth,
did/could not comprehend this, even though everyone with a modicum of
scientific literacy would have.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:12 EST 2002
Article: 1300553 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!falcon.america.net!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!wesley.videotron.net!peer1-sjc1.usenetserver.com!usenetserver.com!hub1.nntpserver.com!nntp-relay.ihug.net!ihug.co.nz!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,can.politics
Subject: Re: David Irving Vs. Deborah Lipstadt
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 14:35:06 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 202
Message-ID: <030120021435060978%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021554431707%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021945033491%[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010061306 18509 128.214.199.213 (3 Jan 2002 12:35:06 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 Jan 2002 12:35:06 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300553 can.politics:624579
In article <[email protected]>, Kanuk
<[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <020120021945033491%[email protected]>, Eugene says…
> >
> >In article <[email protected]>, Kanuk
> ><[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> I believe it was
> >>at the Zundel trial, specifically the Leuchter report – showing no evidence
> >>of
> >> cyanide residue in the Auschwitz “gas chamber” but lots in the de-lousing
> >>chamber – that caused Irving to see the Auschwitz “gas chamber” tale as a
> >>hoax.
> >
> >Except that you are dead wrong. There was ample evidence of cyanide
> >residue in the ruins of the gas chambers, but Irving was ignorant
> >enough of the manner in which cyanide works to claim, counterfactually,
> >that it takes “colossally higher” concentrations of cyanide to kill
> >people than it does to kill lice.
> >
> >As to the relative amounts of the cyanide compounds found in the gas
> >chambers and delausing facilities, I leave you to consider the
> >following results from a competently implemented analysis:
> >
> >Source: http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/#v
> >
> ><quote>
> >The IFRC found traces of cyanide at levels significantly above
> >background in all 5 Kremas as well as bunker 11. They also measure
> >concentrations in bath-house B1-A in Birkenau, which was used for
> >delousing prisoners’ clothing. Samples from the bath house did indeed
> >have higher concentrations of cyanides, but it is not the case that
> >every sample from the bath-house had higher concentrations than every
> >sample in the Kremas. For example, sample number 25 from Krema II had
> >measurements of 640, 592, and 620 ug/kg. Sample 46 from Krema V had
> >measurements of 244, 248, and 232 ug/kg. In contrast sample 53 from the
> >bath-house camp B1-A in Birkenau had measurements of 24, 20, and 24
> >ug/kg. Overall concentrations for the fumigation chambers ranged from
> >0-900 ug/kg. In the Kremas they ranged from 0-640 ug/kg. So it is true
> >that the highest measurements were higher in fumigation chambers
> >(discriminating against iron blues), but not by much. There is another
> >important fact. Concentrations in control samples from dwelling
> >accommodations were 0 +/- 1 ug/kg. In other words, there is no doubt
> >that the Kremas were exposed to a source of HCN. If the intent is to
> >prove that the Kremas could not have been homicidal gas chambers, it
> >has failed.
>
> Fun and games with numbers is what I recognize above. For example, quoting the
> highest and lowest concentrations in the samples. More meaningful is the mean
> or
> median or better yet, a graph showing the distribution of all the results to
> see
> where most of them fell. In fact, it is a good statistical practice to
> eliminate
> the extremes of the highest and lowest.
Actually, that problem was dealt with by taking three sets of
measurements. Since only parts of the buildings housed gas chambers,
taking three measurements for each sample rather than disregarding the
samples that receive the highest and lowest scores is the statistically
more valid procedure in this case. In any case, these are the
statistics for the gas chambers:
Source:
https://nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/orgs/polish/institute-for-forensic-researc
h/post-leuchter.report
<quote>
TABLE III. CONCENTRATIONS OF CYANIDE IONS IN SAMPLES TAKEN
FROM THE CREMATORIUM CHAMBERS (OR THEIR RUINS)
IN WHICH THE VICTIMS WERE GASSED.
A – Sample No;
B – Concentration of CN~ (ug/kg).
Crematorium I
————————————————————
A 17 17 18 19 20 21 22
————————————————————
B 28 76 0 0 288 0 80
28 80 0 0 292 0 80
26 80 0 0 288 0 80
————————————————————
Crematorium II
————————————————————
A 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
————————————————————
B 640 28 0 8 20 168 296
592 28 0 8 16 156 288
620 28 0 8 16 168 292
————————————————————
Crematorium III
————————————————————
A 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
————————————————————
B 68 12 12 16 12 16 56
68 8 12 12 8 16 52
68 8 8 16 8 16 56
————————————————————
Crematorium IV
————————————————————
A 39 40 41 42 43 – –
————————————————————
B 40 36 500 trace 16
44 32 496 0 12
44 36 496 0 12
————————————————————
Crematorium V
————————————————————
A 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
————————————————————
B 244 36 92 12 116 56 0
248 28 96 12 120 60 0
232 32 96 12 116 60 0
————————————————————
————————————————————
Notes:
Crematorium I at Auschwitz – building preserved but
reconstructed several times
Crematorium II-V[*] at Birkenau – ruins. ONly the ceiling of the
chamber of Crematorium[*] II is in part fairly well preserved.
* Transcription Note: My copy of this document has two
corrections made, in ballpoint pen, concerning the crematorium
numbers. The first instance could have read “II-IV” in the
original, and the second could have read “III” on the
original, but the ink obscures the original text. knm.
</quote>
And these are the ones for the fumigation chambers:
Spurce: ibid.
<quote>
TABLE IV. CONCENTRATIONS OF CYANIDE IONS IN SAMPLES COLLECTED
IN THE FACILITIES FOR THE FUMIGATION OF PRISONERS’
CLOTHES
————————————————————
Site Place Sample No Concentration of
CN~ in ug/kg
————————————————————
Auschwitz Block No.1 (1)
1 4,4,4
2 0
3, iron hook 0
4, piece of 0
wood from a door
Block No.3 (2)
5 0
6 900,840,880
7 0
8 16,12,16
Two series of
determinations I. 70,30,74,142,422
were made in II. 118,52,80,60,214
block No 3 in 1990
————————————————————
Birkenau Bath-house
Camp B1-A
53 (3) 24, 20, 24
53a (3) 224, 248, 228
54 (3) 36, 28, 32
55 (3) 736, 740 ,640
56 (4) 4, 0, 0
57 (5) 840, 792, 840
58 (5) 348, 324, 348
59 (6) 28, 28, 28
————————————————————
Notes:
(1) Dwelling quarters next to cobbler workshop and
disinfection chambers.
(2) Disinfection facilities
(3) Materials taken from the outer side of the building
wall
(4) Mortar taken from the outer side of the building wall
(5) Plaster taken from dark-blue stains on the inner side
of the building wall
(6) Plaster from white walls inside the building
</quote>
Significant concentrations of residual cyanide compounds were found in
all of the facilities which other, independent evidence indicates had
once functioned as gas chambers. Not even Leuchter denied the presence
of detectable residues of cyanide compounds in them, although he tried
to explain away the presence of such compounds by assuming, with no
evidence to back up his assumption, that the places had been fumigated
during the 1942 typhus epidemic. This would have been impossible, since
the construction of Kremas I to V at Auschwitz-Birkernau did not begin
until early 1943. In any case, Leuchter’s claim that the places were
fumigated amounts to an admission that they were capable of dealing
with concentrations of cyanide gas far in excess of what is needed to
kill human beings.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:12 EST 2002
Article: 1300556 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Phillips, Holman, and Orac
Supersedes: <030120021506123190%[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 16:03:26 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 107
Message-ID: <030120021603269704%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <010120021935556009%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021711440255%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120022201426563%ho[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010066605 24547 128.214.199.213 (3 Jan 2002 14:03:25 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 Jan 2002 14:03:25 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300556
>
> =======================================================
> Phillips
>
> I have a certain amount of patience with snow jobs but I’ve now come to the
> end of it.
Where is there a snow job?
>
> THe situation is really very simple. You’ve been telling us and telling us
> and telling
> us that Leuchter’s results are meaningless because his technique was
> hopelessly
> flawed.
Any person who has had a few university-level courses in chemistry,
something that Leuchter lacked, will tell you the same thing.
> And what do we find? THat your precious Krakow Institute, using techniques
> wholly
> approved by yourself, comes up with very much the same numbers for the HCN
> concentrations on the walls of the alleged execution chamber.
I am neither a forensic not an industrial chemist, but I have some
experience with university-level chemistry as well as work experience
in a hospital laboratory doing chemical analysis. There is an
established procedure for testing walls for cyanide residues: the
Krakow Instirute for Forensic research followed it, Leuchter did not.
The results produced by the Krakow Institute would be regarded as
acceptable expert evidence by any court, Leuchter’s results would not.
In any case, both Leuchter’s scientifically invalid analysis as well as
the scientifically valid one performed by the Krakow group, established
that the walls of certain parts of structures all other evidence,
including forensic examinations performed in 1945, indicate were Nazi
mass-execution gas chmabers, were indeed exposed to lethal
concentrations of cyanide.
> > Now it is not beyond possibility that you may be right. Your problem is that,
> as
> matters stand at this moment, there is not one scrap of experimental evidence
> to
> support your claim.
Of course there is. The undeniable presence of cyanide compounds on the
walls and other structures constituting the ruins of facilities all
other historical evidence indicates were used as mass-execution gas
chambers.
> And I again remind you that, as a technically-trained person, I insist on
> the primacy
> of experimental evidence over any amount of sophisticated theorizing.
The experimental evidence showed in 1945, 1988, and 1994 that the walls
and structures of the gas chamber ruins had been exposed to lethal
concentrations of cyanide, this experimental evidence being fully
consistent with all of the other extant evidence indicating that the
structures in question were used as mass-execution gas chambers.
Experimental evidence might be your proverbial ‘icing on the cake’, but
it does not necessarily take precedence over every other type of
evidence. The Nazi officials put on trial never denied that the
facilities in question were, nor did the surviving Sonderkommando
workers. Photographs of people being run into the buildings, of freshly
gassed corpses being burned outside of them, various correspondence
containing both code words such as ‘Sonderbehandlung’ and ‘Material für
jüdische Umsiedlung’, occasional Freudian slips in which the so-called
‘Leichekammer’ are referred to as ‘Gaskammer’ or Vergasungskammer’ in
camp correspondence, as well as the detailed records of hundreds of
thousands of people being shipped to Auschwitz by Eichmann’s RSHA
Abteil IV by the Deutsche Reichsbahn and never seen or heard from again
all attest to the same ugly fact: the Nazis were engaged in the
systematic extermination of human beings using various poison gasses as
one of several alternative methodologies.
> I decline to enter into any further discussions of this question.
>
> ==================================
That’s because you realize that you have nothing more to add to it, nor
are you able to refute it.
All of the evidence we have discussed is consistent with the structures
at Auschwitz that were forensically examined by the 1945 IFRC
team working under Dr. Jan Z. Robel, the 1945 Institute for Judicial
Expertise in Krawkow, Leuchter’s 1988 report, the IFRC pilot report in
1989, as well as the IFRC report of 1994 conducted by Dr. Jan
Markiewicz and his group having been exposed to concentrations of
cyanide that would be lethal to anyone trapped in the facility. The
issue of whether the ocean-proof glass and numerous engineering
features Leuchter assumes are necessary attributes of an execution gas
chamber is an irrelevant red herring: the results of all experiments
conducted on the gas chamber ruins indicate that they were exposed to,
and thus were able to contain, lethal concentrations of cyanide gas.
Add to this the fact that extant evidence indicates that this cyanide
gas was generated by Zyklon-B, a pesticide designed specifically to
enable concentrations of cyanide far higher than those needed to kill
people to be used in ordinary rooms by people trained in its proper
utilization, then we see that there is no plausible alternative
conclusion other than that the structures in question were indeed used
as homicidal gas chambers, as is indicated by all of the evidence from
a wide range of independent sources indicates.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:12 EST 2002
Article: 1300877 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Phillips, Holman, and Orac
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 13:12:35 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 73
Message-ID: <040120021312357730%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <010120021935556009%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021711440255%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120022201426563%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <030120021603269704%ho[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010142755 7624 128.214.199.213 (4 Jan 2002 11:12:35 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 4 Jan 2002 11:12:35 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300877
In article <[email protected]>, Richard Phillips
<[email protected]> wrote:
> ========================================
> Phillips
>
> If Leuchter’s analysis –flawed though you claim it to be– helped to
> establish that
> what was claimed to be an execution chamber was in fact just that — then why
> in the
> name of sweet reason did the upholders of the Holocaust go to the most
> bizarre legths
> to destroy not only the report but the man who wrote it. If what you tell me
> is true,
> they should have regarded Leuchter as an ally.
> ==============================================
As I mentioned before, in classical two-valued propositional logic
p -> q
F T T
In other words, a statement is logically true, but not necessarily
scientifically valid, if it has a true conclusion that is the
consequence of a false premise. Leuchter’s sampling technique and the
methodological assumption underlying it were incorrect, nevertheless,
they produced readings indicating that some of the structures he
investigated had been subjected to lethal concentrations of cyanide.
Analysis of the methodology used to obtain these readings shows that
they violate the principles of analytical chemistry thus, the positive
readings are scientifically invalid despite the fact that they are
consistent with the results of a properly conducted experiment.
Leuchter was easily shown to be both a charlatan and an ignoramus.
Nobody needs such allies. Indeed, it was by associating with people
such as Ernst Zündel, who evidently still regards Leuchter as qualified
to make scientifically valid statements about matters he clearly does
not understand and lacks the competence to investigate properly, that
David Irving eventually destroyed any credibility and status he once
enjoyed as an historian.
You talk about going to “bizarre lengths” to destroy both the report
and the man who wrote it. That Leuchter’s report was a travesty was
obvious to anyone with scientific, legal, or historical training who
read even the first chapter: Leuchter’s working assumption that Nazi
gas chambers should have been analogous in form and function to
American execution gas chambers is as unjustified as it is absurd.
Anybody with any sense of responsibility to science and justice would
have done everything possible to demonstrate that the report was a sham
>from start to finish, “scientific garbage”, as Robert Jan ven Pelt has
characterized it, going to considerable lengths to identify and
ostracize the person with the brazen audacity to present such a
document to a court as expert testimony. When it turned out that
Leuchter was so unqualified and so stupid – this is not editorializing,
both the report, his behavior in court, and subsequent information
about all reveal stupidity of monumental proportions – that he had
actually written it in good faith and was incapable of understanding
that it was worthless, in addition to thinking that no special
scientific qualifications were needed to draw up forensic reports, and
that he, a self-proclaimed gas chamber expert, did not understand that
higher concentstions of cyanide are needed to kill lice than to kill
people, it is obvious that honest and responsible people wanted to make
sure that he was never able to offer his “services” as an engineer
again.
The fact that this was Holocaust-related is incidental. Anyone as
unqualified as Leuchter trying to submit documents as garbageous as the
Leuchter Report as evidence to be used by a court in determining a
legal decision deserves the fate that befell Leuchter.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:12 EST 2002
Article: 1300899 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!skynet.be!skynet.be!newsfeeds.funet.fi!newsfeed1.funet.fi!130.230.10.15.MISMATCH!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Phillips, Holman, and Orac
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 13:56:15 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <040120021356155321%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <010120021935556009%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021711440255%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120022201426563%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <030120021603269704%ho[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010145375 10435 128.214.199.213 (4 Jan 2002 11:56:15 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 4 Jan 2002 11:56:15 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300899
In article <[email protected]>, Richard Phillips
<[email protected]> wrote:
> ===================================
> Phillips
>
> I see. Now you tell me that the Nazis who covered their tracks by demolishing
> the
> structures, were sufficiently perverse to have made photographic records of
> their
> crimes.
>
> =================
1. The Nazis did indeed make photographic records of their crimes. The
massacre of Jews at Liepâja in Latvia (e.g.
http://www.pgonline.com/electriczen/doceuments/libau.html), for
example, was photographed by an entire film crew, as was the
destruction of Lidice in Czechoslovakia (e.g.
http://www.lidice-memorial.cz/index_uk.htm). For various reasons,
official Nazi photographers documented some of the activities going on
at Auschwitz for purposes of debriefing and documentation.
2. The Nazis made photographs and films of the effects of lethal
affects of various poison gasses within the framework of the Euthanasia
program. Some of these were even used for propaganda purposes to create
an atmosphere conducive to euthanasia (for details see
http://www.ushmm.org/research/doctors).
3. Some members of the Sonderkommando risked their lives to
clandestinely document photographically what was going on around them (
http://shamash.org/holocaust/photos/images/Pit.jpg).
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:13 EST 2002
Article: 1300914 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Phillips, Holman, and Orac
Supersedes: <040120021333373639%[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 15:54:29 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <040120021554292529%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <010120021935556009%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021711440255%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120022201426563%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <030120021603269704%ho[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010152469 17227 128.214.199.213 (4 Jan 2002 13:54:29 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 4 Jan 2002 13:54:29 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300914
In article <[email protected]>, Richard Phillips
<[email protected]> wrote:
> > Experimental evidence might be your proverbial ‘icing on the cake’, but
> > it does not necessarily take precedence over every other type of
> > evidence.
>
> ============================================
> Phillips
>
> I’m sorry but it does exactly that.
>
> ===========================
The fact that we are having this discussion proves that it doesn’t.
Experimental evidence is just another form of evidence, and the
information derived from it has to be related to the information
derived from other evidence. As it is, we have documental, historical,
architectural, and testimonial evidence from independent sources all
supporting the factuality of the claim, also made independently by
numerous individuals who could not have known one another, that certain
parts of certain structures at Auschwitz-Birkenau and other detention
facilities run by the Nazis were gas chambers used for the
mass-extermination of human beings, most of them Jews shipped in from
the countries Nazi Germany invaded, occupied, and was ethnically
cleansing, in the name of a “Final Solution” to the Jewish problem in
Europe. The information yielded by experimental evidence that the
structures in question were exposed to lethal concentrations of cyanide
lends further but not decisive support to this claim. Enough
information is available from other sources to lend support that the
claim that the facilities were used for gassing can be proven beyond
reasonable doubt, while the presence of cyanide compounds on the walls
is insufficient by itself to prove beyond reasonable doubt that
gassings took place in the facilities tested.
You and Leuchter, in turn, evidently accept that the the information
yielded by experimental evidence indicates that the walls were
subjected to lethal concentrations of cyanide, but you do not see this,
taken with all the other evidence, as a demonstration beyond reasonable
doubt that the structures were used as mass execution gas chambers.
You, as far as I remember, have never been able to satisfactorily
explain how or why the cyanide traces came to be on the walls, and you
dismiss the other evidence as lies, the result of torture, document
forgery, blood-curdling rhetoric, or the unjustified interpretation of
widely-used code words such as “Sonderbehandlung”. You have never been
able to account for the fact that some 1.5 million people were sent to
Auschwitz, never to have been heard of since. You have called for
longitudinal experiments to trace the manner in which cyanide compounds
build up and are retained by various structural materials under various
conditions, experiments which, by the way, have been conducted by the
IFRC and the results of which are included in their report. Leuchter,
in turn, has written that no matter what concentrations of cyanide he
would have found he would still have refused to accept that the
structures in question were gas chambers because he insists that gas
chambers as he understands the concept must have certain attributes,
including engineering safety features, ocean-proof glass windows, gas
detectors, special sealing, gasketed doors, etc. Finding no evidence of
such features in the ruins – note ruins – that he examined, he was
ready to conclude that his knowledge of American execution gas chambers
and their attributes would have taken precedence over any experimental
results showing that the structures had indeed been exposed to lethal
concentrations of cyanide.
So much for your primacy of experimental results.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:13 EST 2002
Article: 1300923 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Phillips, Holman, and Orac
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 16:28:22 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <040120021628224778%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <010120021935556009%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021711440255%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120022201426563%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <030120021603269704%ho[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010154501 19929 128.214.199.213 (4 Jan 2002 14:28:21 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 4 Jan 2002 14:28:21 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300923
In article <[email protected]>, Richard Phillips
<[email protected]> wrote:
> > various correspondence
> > containing both code words such as ‘Sonderbehandlung’ and ‘Material für
> > jüdische Umsiedlung’,
>
> ======================================
> Phillips
>
> Oh, my poor, long-suffering Aunt Nelly. Here comes that code-language again.
>
> ==============================================
People more competent in these matters than you or I have made
extensive studies of the the special euphemisms and code-words used by
the Nazis in their internal discourse (see, e.g.
http://www.b-treude.de/euphemismen.htm,
http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/0.1518.117995,00.html ).
It is indicative that my unabridged German-German dictionary, the
authoritative _Duden. Deutsches Univeralwörterbuch_, gives the
following definition for Sonderbehandlung within the context of Nazi
discourse:
Sonderbehandlung,…2. (ns. verhüll.) Liquidierung (3b).
Liquidierung in sense 3b is “(bes. aus politischen o. ä. Gründen)
töten, hinrichten, umbringen [lassen]: Gefangene l.”
Translation (EH):
special treatment,Š2. (National Socialist, covert) liquidation (3b).
LiquidationŠ 3b. “(particularly for political or similar reasons) to
kill, execute, kill [or have killed]: to liquidate prisoners.”
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:13 EST 2002
Article: 1300948 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!fr.clara.net!heighliner.fr.clara.net!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Phillips, Holman, and Orac
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 19:26:03 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <040120021926035945%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <010120021935556009%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021711440255%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120022201426563%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <030120021603269704%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <040120021312357730%[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010165162 95 128.214.199.213 (4 Jan 2002 17:26:02 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 4 Jan 2002 17:26:02 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300948
In article <[email protected]>, “Kurt Knoll”
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Your opinion about Leucher is typical the Jewish way I think you believe in
> hate for profit.
Would you want to be on trial and have a person with the credentials,
qualifications, and track-record of Fred Leuchter submitting expert
witness testimony against you? If you had legal difficulties which
might result in your losing several million dollars, would you accept
under any circumstances as legitimate evience the results of a forensic
analysis performed by non-engineer, non-forensic scientist Fred
Leuchter?
I have nothing against Fred Leuchter, and insofar as I have any
feelings for him at all, they are of pity, not hate. He had a nice
little outfit and associated shake-down operation going, but he lost it
all by going into something far above his depth. Some of the things he
did – stealing samples, vandalizing museums, misrepresenting himself,
running a small-scale scam operation – are criminal by any standard,
but they are the criminality of the smallest fry. Leuchter’s main
problem was his stupidity: you don’t testify in a court as a gas
chamber expert if you have not done your homework the night before and
learned something about the properties of the gas you are testifying
about. A real con-man would have at least understood that he had to
create the impression of being what he claimed to be. As it was,
Leuchter made himself a laughing stock in the court and his
mind-boggling ignorance rather than his lack of formal qualifications
became the issue.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:14 EST 2002
Article: 1300950 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Phillips, Holman, and Orac
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 19:33:38 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <040120021933383308%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <010120021935556009%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120021711440255%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <020120022201426563%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <030120021603269704%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <040120021333373639%[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010165617 95 128.214.199.213 (4 Jan 2002 17:33:37 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 4 Jan 2002 17:33:37 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1300950
In article <[email protected]>, “Kurt Knoll”
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Leuchter could have been the top notch Mann on this planet and you guys will
> still find a way to discredit him.
> You guys don’t know what honesty is you guys are just as crooked as you
> ancestors the last 2000 Years.
Neither you nor Richard seem to understand the issue. The results of
Leuchter’s analysis are not, superficially observed, in conflict with
other evidence that the facilities he examined were indeed gas
chambers, and a dishonest person would, as Richard suggested, accept
him as an ally. The issue is that Leuchter’s analysis does not come up
to the standards of science one expects of an expert whose testimony
will determine the outcome of a trial, nor did he have the credentials,
experience, or knowledge of the field he claimed to be an expert in to
allow him to function as an expert witness in court. No legal system
can accept such an expert witness or such evidence. That, not the
numbers, is the issue at stake. The person who really lost was Ernst
Zündel, who paid Leuchter more than $30,000 for a piece of “scientific
garbage” that no court on earth would accept as evidence of anything
else but the dishonesty and incompetence of the person who submitted
it.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:14 EST 2002
Article: 1303278 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!nntp-relay.ihug.net!ihug.co.nz!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Phillips vs Holman II
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 01:23:32 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 573
Message-ID: <070120020123323709%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eh-ibook.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010359412 281 128.214.77.45 (6 Jan 2002 23:23:32 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 6 Jan 2002 23:23:32 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1303278
In article <[email protected]>, Richard Phillips
<[email protected]> wrote:
> ==============================================================
> Phillips
>
> When I anounced that I intended no further participation in this thread,
> I did so
> in the belief that you had said all that you had to say, that you had
> nothing further to add.
Just because you announce that you are withdrawing does not mean that
specious claims you have made should be left unanswered. You are not
the only participant in the thread.
> ==============================================================
> Phillips
>
> I did so on the further assumption that you were a man of sufficient
> integrity that,
> having “shot your bolt,” you would not be reduced to reposting the very
> claims we had been over and over and over. Yet this is precisely what
> you have done. It would appear I under-estimated how desperate you are
> to “keep your show on the road.”
You keep repesating the same nonsense and showing the same inability to
understand basic facts. I don’t allow an easily refuted claim or
obvious example of ignorance left hanging.
> ==============================================================
> Phillips
>
> This is perfectly understandable and not in the least uncommon; it
> becomes, however, very tiresome to
> have to keep on dealing with. I suppose I encourage you by my own
> weakness in being very loath to be seen “deserting the field of honour.”
>
> Your most basic shaft aimed at Leuchter is based on the theory that HCN
> penetrates only to a very minute depth; consequently, by crushing his
> samples, he caused the surface material (which might have contained HCN)
> to be hopelessly diluted by non-surface material which couldn’t have
> contained any. The result must necessarily have been coming up with
> concentration figures much smaller than their true value. THere are
> several objections to this which you have yet to address convincingly.
>
> (1) Who is our authority for that depth-of-penetration claim. TRue, Roth
> claimed that AFTER the trial but it is not exactly what he said on the
> stand. I instinctively distrust people who change their stories.
Dr. Roth would hardly put his professional reputation on the line by
making an incorrect claim about so fundamental and easily verified an
issue. On the other hand, the IFRC demonstrated that the ability of
cyanide gas to form compounds is more a function of the construction
material and the presence of other reagents. The issue of depth is thus
relevant with repect to Leuchter’s sampling technique and the
appropriateness of the analytical technique used on them, but there are
other factors which are even more relevant with respect to detecting,
measuring, and interpreting traces of residual cyanide compounds on
walls exposed to cyanide under not immediately comparable conditions.
> ==============================================================
> Phillips
>
> (2) By whatever extent Leuchter’s (claimed) “faulty technique” degraded
> the execution chamber traces, they must have –to a similar extent–
> degraded his control, the fumigation chamber traces.
We’ve been through this before. Leuchter’s samples were of different
sizes and shapes, ranging from the size of a fingertip to the size of a
fist. Your notion of degradation of all samples to a similar extent is
thus untenable.
The samples taken from a fumigation chamber are also not a proper
control. A proper control would have been a place never subjected to
cyanide, such as a lampost, or a place known to have been subjected to
cyanide only once, such as a bunk fumigated during the 1942 typhus
epidemic or Block eleven, the site of a single gassing of Soviet POWs
in the fall of 1941, the first known lethal use of cyanide generated by
Zyklon B at Auschwitz. This is because we want to analyze for both the
presence or the absence of cyanide compounds, as well as to see the
difference between a place known to have been exposed to a lethal
concentration only once, as opposed to places known to have been
exposed repeatedly to lethal concentrations.
> ==============================================================
> Phillips
>
> It is unlikely and
> against common sense that it would have accounted for the enormous RATIO
> between the two: 1000:1 which was the main thing Leuchter crowed about.
1. His samples had been hopelessly diluted, as you yourself concede,
for which reason the numbers are meaningless. The only significance his
results have is that traces of cyanide compounds were present.
2. Leuchter also only tested for Prussian blue, one of the many
compounds that cyanide forms. The IFRC tested for the presence of
cyanide ions, not specifically for Prussian blue alone.
3. The IFRC study showed that certain samples from both the gas
chambers and the fumigation rooms had values as high as 60 times higher
than the readings for Block 11. This, despite the fact that the ruins
of the gas chambers from which the samples have been exposed to the
elements since 1944, while the disinfection facilities and Block 11
have remained intact and been protected from the elements.
4. The IFRC study also emphasized that the disinfection facilities and
the gas chambers are not directly comparable. The experiments that they
ran demonstrated that factors such as the water vapor and CO2 in the
exhaled breath of gas chambers, the hosing down of the walls which had
to be done after each gassing, and the regular whitewashing of the gas
chamber walls all have an effect on the formation of cyanide compounds.
The fumigation chambers were not subjected to CO2, water vapor, streams
of water ejetced from hoses under pressure, whitewash, or 45 years of
exposure to the elements, thus the idea of drawing strong conclusions
about cyanide use by comparing the results of a search for a single
cyanide compound in the two types of environment is misguided.
> ==============================================================
> Phillips
>
> If you feel more data are necessary to prove the case one way or
> another, then stop complaining and send in a team to prove it.
As has been said many times here, the IFRC report addresses the
methodological flaws and mistaken assumptions in Leuchter’s report and
ran various tests to determine the presence and concentration of
cyanide ions in places exposed only once as opposed to repeatedly to
cyanide. The readings for places exposed only once ranged from zero to
approximately 30 ug/kg, the readings from various sites in the gas
chamber ruins ranged from 0 to approximately 600 ug/kg, while those
>from the fumigation facilities ranged from 0 to approximately 900
ug/kg. The Krakow team also ran separate experiments showing the effect
of the presence of water and CO2 on cyanide compound formation, as well
as of long-term exposure to water on its retention.
The IFRC report addresses all of the methodological and analytical
issues for which the Leuchter Report was criticized. Both the gas
chamber ruins and the disinfection facilities show residual traces of
cyanide ions consistent with their having been exposed *repeatedly to
lethal concentrations of cyanide gas*, as also indicated by other,
non-experimental evidence from a variety of independent sources.
> ==============================================================
> Phillips
>
> (3) IF this depth-of-penetration claim is true, then how are we to
> account for the very visible blue staining seen on the OUTSIDES of the
> walls of the fumigation chamber. You claim that fumigated mattresses etc
> were laid against those walls. You’ll have to furnish proof from a
> source I can trust; until you’ve done so, I’ll have to dismiss the claim
> as damage control.
The important issue is not the fumigated mattresses being aired out, it
is that the blue staining has not penetrated the walls. As I have
written before, the idea of a structure with porous walls in which
concentration of cyanide as high as 15,000 ppm were being used is an
absurdity. As Danny Karen and others have pointed out, there are blue
stains on certain parts of the internal and external walls of the
former fumigation facilities, they are not the result of penetration,
but rather of a source of cyanide gas having made contact with the
walls in question.
Rather than continue this, let it be said that Prussian blue is only
one of many compounds that cyanide forms, and the dynamics of its
formation are complex and not completely understood. As the IFRC
experiment showed, Prussian blue is only formed when the conditions are
right, the absence of Prussian blue does not mean that a place has not
been exposed to cyanide, even though this is another of the erroneous
assumptions that Leuchter was working on: he was only testing for
Prussian blue, when he should have been testing for the presence of
cyanide ions in general.
> ==============================================================
> Phillips
>
> (4) The most damning, the most crushingly conclusive refutation of the
> claim is this: Since the Krakow Inst used a technque you approve of,
Not one that *I* approve of, but rather one which the international
community of forensic scientists regards as a legitimate way to
approach the problem. Leuchter’s work was a methodological and
analytical travesty from start to finish.
> ==============================================================
> Phillips
>
> we
> would expect that they would have gotten much larger figures for the
> execution chamber wall traces – yes? Unfortunately for yourelf (and for
> Holocaustia, generally, they did not. The figures are pretty much the
> same in both cases.
No, you are incorrect. Some of the figures for the gas chamber ruins
and the fumigation facilities are in excess of 600 ug/kg, while the
readings for Block eleven, where only one poorly ventilated pilot
gassing took place are no higher than 30 ug/kg, and those for a bunk
that was fumigated during the 1942 typhus epidemic were consistently 0.
More importantly, Leuchter was only testing for Prussian blue, which is
one of several compounds that cyanide forms, while the IFRC was testing
for cyanide ions, something present in every cyanide compound. The
figures are incommensurable. The only piece of true data that we get
>from Leuchter’s analysis is that the samples from the gas chamber ruins
as well as from the fumigation facilities indicate a history of having
been exposed to lethal concentrations of cyanide. Leuchter’s figures
and his interpretation of them were produced using improper analytic
techniques in addition to being based on several clearly erroneous
assumptions, such as his idea that it takes higher concentrations of
cyanide to kill people than it does to kill lice. They are thus
scientifically invalid.
> ==============================================================
> Phillips
>
> So, you people can blow your gobs about Leuchter’s “flawed technique”
> til it snows in Uganda. There is not one scrap of experimental evidence
> that supports it.
>
> ====================================
If you had any training in analytical chemistry you would understand
that Leuchter’s work is a travesty of a type that no competent forensic
scientist would ever submit.
> nevertheless,
> they produced readings indicating that some of the structures he
> investigated had been subjected to lethal concentrations of cyanide.
>
> =============================================================
> Phillips
>
> They indicated no such thing.
>
> They indicated exposure to HCN, period. Whether the amount of the traces
> (order of 1 mg/kg) are what we would expect to find for a chamber that
> had been subjected to an exposure sufficient to have killed several
> hundred thousand people is something we cannot know until further
> experiments confirm it.
People die when exposed to concentrations of cyanide as low as 150 ppm
for 30 minutes. They die within 5 to 10 minutes when exposed to 300
ppm, and after a few breaths when the concentrations exceeds 1000 ppm.
Even Leuchter admitted that the gas chamber ruins showed indications
that they had bene exposed to lethal concentrations of cyanide,
although his incompetence prevented him from understanding what he had
claimed. Leuchter attributed the undeniable presence of cyanide traces
found in the gas chamber ruins to a fumigation “once, long ago”. A
fumigation involves exposures of 15,000 ppm maintained for fifteen to
twenty hours, far in excess of the 150 ppm maintained for 30 minutes or
300 ppm maintained for 5 to 10 minutes needed to kill people. His
ignorance of the manner in which cyanide affects human beings as
opposed to vermin prevented him from comprehending the implications of
what he was claiming. A structure that can withstand a fumigation,
whether equipped with engineering safety features or not, can withstand
the far lower concentrations of cyanide needed to kill people.
Unfortunately, the self-proclaimed gas chamber expert did not
understand that it takes colossally higher concentrations of cyanide to
kill lice than are needed to kill people.
> =============================================================
> Phillips
>
> Whether the amount of the traces
> (order of 1 mg/kg) are what we would expect to find for a chamber that
> had been subjected to an exposure sufficient to have killed several
> hundred thousand people is something we cannot know until further
> experiments confirm it.
> ============================================================================
Incorrect. The physical chemistry, including the dynamics and speed of
formation of cyanide compounds, is pretty well known. You are not going
to have such high concentrations, up to 600 ug/kg in the gas chambers,
up to 900 in the funigation facilities, unless the cyanide had been
used repeatedly in lethal concentrations. This is precisely the type of
information yielded by the IFRC analysis.
>
> Analysis of the methodology used to obtain these readings shows that
> they violate the principles of analytical chemistry thus, the positive
> readings are scientifically invalid despite the fact that they are
> consistent with the results of a properly conducted experiment.
>
> =======================================================
> Phillips
>
> I see. Leuchter’s technique was hopelessly flawed whereas Krakow’s was
> correct. THe fact that both yielded the same results was nothing but
> pure dumb luck.
They didn’t yield the same results in any other sense except that they
indicated that some samples from both the ruins of the gas chambers and
the intact fumigation facilities indicate a history of repeated
exposure to lethal concentrations of cyanide. Places exposed only once
to a lethal concentration of cyanide yield maximum readings on the
order of 1/20 to 1/30 of the highest readings obtained for the gas
chambers and the disinfection facilities.
> =======================================================
> Phillips
>
> Sorry but I have to insist on the primacy of experimental data over
> unsupported theorizing. Your claim is unproven.
>
> ==============================================
My claim is proven by the reswults obtianed by the IFRC: samples taken
>from gas chamber ruins and fumigation facilities show concentrations as
high as 600 ug/kg ang 900 ug/kg, respectively. Samples taken from Block
eleven, the site of a single gassing of Soiet POWs, show maximum
concentrations no higher than 30 ug/kg. QED.
>
> Leuchter was easily shown to be both a charlatan and an ignoramus.
>
> =====================================================================
> Phillips
>
> Your charlatan plus ignoramus was described by Time Magazine (than which
> none could be more mainstream) as America’s foremost expert on execution
> hardware.
Checks of his career showed that he had changed a few gaskets in an
electric chair and invented a lethal injection device that turned out
to be faulty. Both the Leuchter Report and his appearance in court
revealed him to be woefully ignorant of the properties of cyanide, the
gas used in American execution gas chambers with which,it turned out,
he was woefully little theoretical or practical experience.
Time Magazine has been known to make mistakes. Leuchter revealed
himself to be an ignoramus and a charlatan.
> =====================================================================
> Phillips
>
> I find the two hard to reconcile. Either Time Magazine was
> talking through its editorial asshole or else your “charlatan plus
> ignoramus” talk was nothing more than hysterical Jew-inspired hyperbole.
>
> ==========================================================================
My assessment of him as an ignoramus and a charlatan is based primarily
on my reading of the Leuchter Report and secondarily on my reading of
his testimony at the Zündel trial.
>
> Nobody needs such allies. Indeed, it was by associating with people
> such as Ernst Zündel, who evidently still regards Leuchter as qualified
> to make scientifically valid statements about matters he clearly does
> not understand and lacks the competence to investigate properly, that
> David Irving eventually destroyed any credibility and status he once
> enjoyed as an historian.
>
> =========================================================
> Phillips
>
> Jewry claims Irving has done that to himself but then Jewry claims a
> great many things, very few of which stand up to careful examination.
>
> =======================================================
Careful examination reveals that David Irving himself decided to commit
professional suicide by taking on the community of professional
historians, and that he compounded the error by insisting on serving as
his own legal council. If there was ever a clearer case of a man doing
himself in, I’d like to know about it.
> You talk about going to “bizarre lengths” to destroy both the report
> and the man who wrote it. That Leuchter’s report was a travesty was
> obvious to anyone with scientific, legal, or historical training who
> read even the first chapter:
>
> ====================================
> Phillips
>
> To begin with, all I’m seeing here is another unsupported reiteration of
> your mantra: Leuchter is a fraud.
>
Leuchter *is* a fraud. He admitted it at the Zündel trial: he has
neither the training nor the expertise to be producing forensic
reports, does not understand why such training is necessary, and
produces them anyway. He revealed to the court that he had nothing
against the idea of a piece of expert testimony being submitted to a
court as evidence that would be used to defend a person’s legal rights
by a person who lacks competence in the field for which he claims
expertise.
> ====================================
> Phillips
>
> Secondly, you seem to be evading my question: If, as you claim,
> Leuchter’s Report SUPPORTS the claim of homicidal gassing, then why has
> Jewry gone to such outlandish lengths to shoot it down. Certainly not
> because his technique was “flawed.”
>
> ===============================================================
Precisely for that reason. I cannot understand that you do not
comprehend the importance of producing solid, scientifically valid
evidence.
> =============================
>
>
> Leuchter’s working assumption that Nazi
> gas chambers should have been analogous in form and function to
> American execution gas chambers is as unjustified as it is absurd.
>
> =====================================================
> Phillips
>
> Leuchter claimed that a structure used for mass execution by gassing
> would have to have had
> provisions ensuring the safety both of the personnel operating it and of
> any visiting firemen.
>
> He is hardly alone in that view. It is shared by several other men, all
> bearing the formal credentials so dear to your heart.
>
> ==========================================
Nevertheless, Zyklon-B was a product specifically designed to allow
cyanide to be used in lethal concentrations in places lacking such
features, providing that certain precautions were taken and the people
using it had been properly trained.
A gas chamber of the American type obviously needs these features. A
gas chamber utilizing Zyklon-B needs them no more than a room being
disinfected with Zyklon-B by competent personnel needs them.
> Anybody with any sense of responsibility to science and justice would
> have done everything possible to demonstrate that the report was a sham
> from start to finish, “scientific garbage”,
>
> =============================================
> Phillips
>
> Get off your soapbox.
>
> ==============================
That’s what it is.
>
> as Robert Jan ven Pelt has
> characterized it
>
> =============================================
> Phillips
>
> Van Pelt. A disinterested party of course?
>
> ====================================
Somebody who knows far more about gas chambers, analytical chemistry,
and the properties of cyanide gas than a certain self-proclaimed gas
chamber expert…
>
> , going to considerable lengths to identify and
> ostracize the person with the brazen audacity to present such a
> document to a court as expert testimony. When it turned out that
> Leuchter was so unqualified and so stupid – this is not editorializing,
> both the report, his behavior in court, and subsequent information
> about all reveal stupidity of monumental proportions – that he had
> actually written it in good faith and was incapable of understanding
> that it was worthless, in addition to thinking that no special
> scientific qualifications were needed to draw up forensic reports, and
> that he, a self-proclaimed gas chamber expert, did not understand that
> higher concentstions of cyanide are needed to kill lice than to kill
> people, it is obvious that honest and responsible people wanted to make
> sure that he was never able to offer his “services” as an engineer
> again.
>
> ===============================================
> Phillips
>
> Again: Get off your soapbox. Leuchter was neither incompetent, nor was
> he stupid.
Yes he was. No gas chamber expert would have such gaps in his knowledge
about the fundamental properties of cyanide gas to have made the
blunders Leuchter did in his report and as a witness. No intelligent
person with college training in history, a qualification that Leuchter
does have, would claim that cyanide traces on the wall of a building
are the result of a fumigation that took place a year before the
building was constructed, something he could easily have checked. No
person investigating the use of Zyklon-B would ignore the fact that it
was specifically designed to enable lethal concentrations of cyanide to
be used in rooms and buildings lacking the engineering safety features
of American execution gas chambers. No person investigating Nazi gas
chambers who was not a total fool would have the poor taste to express
amazement, as Leuchter did, at the fact that the Nazi authorities,
world leaders in the use of poison gas with a track record of using
mass gassings in concealed gas chambers to kill people within the
framework of the T-4 euthanasia program, did not contact American penal
authorities for tips on how to construct gas chambers.
> =============================================
> Phillips
>
> His failure (for which he paid dearly) was in not anticipating that he
> was going to be subjected to an EXTREMELY hostile cross-examination.
Which to me is a clear demonstration of both his stupidity and his
incompetence. A man appears before a court as an expert witness, but
tells the court non-chalantly that only does he lack all of the
qualifications normally expected of a person submitting a forensic
report, but that he also does not see any reason why such
qualifications should be enecessary. After that he was given the
benefit of the doubt and asked an extremely basic question about the
lethal properties of cyanide, the only gas used in American gas
chambers, and he showed that he lacked the knowledge to answer it.
If these are not examples of gross incompetence and stupidity, I don’t
know what would be.
> =============================================
> Phillips
>
> And, yes, he should have anticipated being grilled on the lice vs people
> issue and done some homework on that.
I am happy to see you conncede this point, but you are still trying to
downplay the degree of stupidity and incompetence it reveals: a man
claiming to be a gas chamber expert submitting what he claims to be a
forensic report on gas chambers that used cyanide who reveals that he
does not know even the most elementary facts about the properties of
cyanide is incompetent and stupid.
> =============================================
> Phillips
>
> As I said before, yes, he showed poorly under cross-examanation but then
> lawyers are TRAINED to make witnesses show up that way. To stand up
> under such a practiced assault requires both enormous strength of
> character and enormous self-possession. I only hope I’m never put to
> such a test.
>
> ===========================================
The cross examination was ther icing on an already large the cake.
Leuchter revealed himself to be stupid and incompetent when he
explained to the court that he had no qualifications to be an expert
witness and that he saw no need for such quaklifications. When a simple
question was asked about the properties of cyanide, he flubbed it,
revealing just how unqualified he was in the area for which he claimed
expertise.
I reiterate:
> The fact that this was Holocaust-related is incidental. Anyone as
> unqualified as Leuchter trying to submit documents as garbageous as the
> Leuchter Report as evidence to be used by a court in determining a
> legal decision deserves the fate that befell Leuchter.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:14 EST 2002
Article: 1303283 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Phillips vs Holman II
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 01:41:06 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <070120020141067063%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <GpIC[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eh-ibook.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010360465 794 128.214.77.45 (6 Jan 2002 23:41:05 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 6 Jan 2002 23:41:05 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1303283
In article <[email protected]>, Richard Phillips
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> ============================================
> Phillips
>
> Mr Keren: What you have written is a possibly plausible answer to a DIFFERENT
> question.
>
> I was not talking about a comparison of the traces from the execution chamber
> vs the
> traces from the fumigation chambers. I was talking about a comparison of the
> EXECUTION chamber traces as reported by Leuchter vs the EXECUTION chamber
> traces as
> reported by Krakow. Now IF your depth-of-penetration theory is correct, we
> would
> have expected the second to be considerably larger than the first.
> Unfortunately for
> your theory, it is not. The figures reported are roughly the same in both
> cases.
>
> =========================================
1. No they weren’t.
2. The figures are the results of differenet tests: Leuchter’s for
Prussian blue alone, the IFRC’s for cyanide ions in any compound. They
are incommensurable except in the trivial sense of both indicating the
presence of cyanide.
> >
> > Unfortunately, you continue to ignore this point, as you continue to
> > ignore the fact that there are 20 times more concentrations in the
> > homicidal chambers than in the cellars of Block 11. It’s clear that
> > you’re not interested in pursuing the truth, but only in spreading
> > propaganda.
>
> ========================================
> Phillips
>
> Again, Mr Keren, you would be more convincing if you addressed the issue I posed
> rather than the issue you prefer to address
>
> ============================
The issue you posed is a non-issue. Leuchter was testing only for a
specific cyanide compound, IFRC was testing for cyanide ions, an
essential component of any cyanide compound. Neither Prussian blue nor
other cyanide compunds are necessarily formed when surfaces are exposed
to cyanide: some of the samples taken from the inside of the fumigation
chambers gave a zero reading for cyzanide ions.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:15 EST 2002
Article: 1303834 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!nntp-relay.ihug.net!ihug.co.nz!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Phillips vs Holman II
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 14:52:46 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <070120021452466797%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010407965 14650 128.214.199.213 (7 Jan 2002 12:52:45 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 7 Jan 2002 12:52:45 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1303834
In article <[email protected]>, Richard Phillips
<[email protected]> wrote:
> =========================================================
> Phillips
>
> Jewry claims Irving has done that to himself but then Jewry claims a
> great many things, very few of which stand up to careful examination.
“Irving’s conclusions were completely untenable. I thought his
scholarship was sloppy and unreliable and did not meet even the most
basic requirements of honest and competent historical research.”
– Professor Richard Evans, _Lying About Hitler_, pg. 70
Professor Richard Evans is a representative not of Jewry, but rather of
the scholarly community of professional historians.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:15 EST 2002
Article: 1303843 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: So, did Irving pay up?
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 16:10:08 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <070120021610085973%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <dbqi3u8m46pe4[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010412608 20214 128.214.199.213 (7 Jan 2002 14:10:08 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 7 Jan 2002 14:10:08 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1303843
In article <[email protected]>, “david_michael”
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Have you actually read any of David Irving’s books yet, Miss Ostrov?
>
> A simple yes or no will suffice.
Awaiting Miss Ostrov’s reply, I shall add my two [euro]cents.
I have read the first edition of his _Hitler’s War_, as well as
excerpts from some of his other writings, as well as his website. He’s
a good writer and and interesting popularizer of history, but he is not
an historian in the academic sense. Additionally, it is quite clear
that he is far more interested in sensations and scandal-mongering than
he is in giving a balanced version of history.
“Irving’s conclusions were completely untenable. I thought his
scholarship was sloppy and unreliable and did not meet even the most
basic requirements of honest and competent historical research.”
– Professor Richard Evans, _Lying About Hitler_, pg. 70
Professor Richard Evans, Professor of Modern History at Cambridge
University (
http://www.hist.cam.ac.uk/academic_staff/further_details/evans-r.html )
is a highly regarded representative of
the scholarly community of professional historians. David Irving is a
self-taught historian lacking the professional training and hsitory of
scholarly publications one normally expects from representatives of
this profession who has produced a few interesting but sloppily
researched and provably mendacious or tendentious books dealing with
the history of Nazi Germany for the mass market. He has fatally
discredited himself and his work by uncritically accepting a piece of
pseudo-scientific garbage offered as “scientific proof” that Nazi gas
chambers did not exist, associating himself with uneducated people who
deny history to further an anti-Semitic political agenda sympathetic to
the objectives of Hitlerite National Socialism, and having the hubris
to think he could successfully take on the community of academic
historians as well as the legal profession. This combination of
unbridled egotism, unmitigated gall, and a glaring lack of critical
acumen resulted in both his bankruptcy and his being reduced to giving
his books away for free over the internet.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:15 EST 2002
Article: 1303864 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!cyclone-sf.pbi.net!63.208.208.143!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: So, did Irving pay up?
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 18:12:32 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <070120021812327686%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <070120021610085973%[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010419952 27722 128.214.199.213 (7 Jan 2002 16:12:32 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 7 Jan 2002 16:12:32 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1303864
In article <[email protected]>, “Kurt Knoll”
<[email protected]> wrote:
> You are a dreamer Holman. Seit wann sind nur University Schweine Historier
> ?.
Man braucht nicht unbedingt eine Universitätsdienststelle zu haben, um
als Historiker angesehen zu werden. Es reicht, eine höhere Ausbildung
erledigt zu haben, die Methodik und Praxis der Geschichtsforschung
enthält. Praktisch bedeutet das, daß man ein Universitätsstudium mit
Geschichte als Haupt- oder Nebenfach erledigt hat. Herrn Irving fehlt
eine erledigte Universitätsausbildung überhaupt, und er kann
folgedessen höchstens als popularisierender und geschickter
Schriftsteller, der sich besonders für geschichtliche Themen
interessiert, angesehen werden. Das von Herrn Professor Doktor Evans
jüngst geschriebene Buch zeigt, wie Herrn Irving die professionellen
Voraussetzungen als ernst zu nehmender Historiker angesehen zu werden
völlig fehlen.
> Since when are only
> University Biggs qualified historians. Haben Diese Aroganten Schweine mehr
> Rechte ?. Character
> haben sie ja sowieso nicht.
Natürlich haben diese “arroganten Scheine” Rechte. Sie haben das Recht
ihre professionelle Spezialisation gegen Angriffe unqualifizierter
Dillettanten und Scharlatane, die Historiker sein wollen, zu
verteidigen.
Charakter haben sie zwar. Sie sind ehrlich.
>
> > Professor Richard Evans, Professor of Modern History at Cambridge
> > University .
>
> Do you believe your Professor Evans is any different because he discredits
> others to make the limelights.
David Irving was the one who wanted to make the limelight: the trial, a
massive ego trip which pitted him against the twin Goliaths of the
scholarly community of historians as well as the British legal system,
was his idea from start to finish. Professor Evans was merely part of
the defense team, called in to give expert testimony. If a person
discredits himself, as David Irving did, there is nothing dishonest in
pointing this out in a public forum if the discredited person wants to
sort his dirty laundry for all the world to see.
—
Mit freundlichem Gruß,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:16 EST 2002
Article: 1306037 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!news-hog.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!192.50.8.47.MISMATCH!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Why do people become Communists?
Supersedes: <080120021703277813%[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 18:01:38 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 112
Message-ID: <080120021801387777%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010505695 20643 128.214.199.213 (8 Jan 2002 16:01:35 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 Jan 2002 16:01:35 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1306037
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Joe Bruno) wrote:
> my Stalin’s propaganda that they went to the USSR to help build
> it-they really believed the lie that Communism was creating “a
> worker’s paradise”.
It’s more complicated than that. Communism and its milder version,
Socialism, gained a following because of the kind of abuses of workers
typical of early 20th century robber-baron type capitalism documented
in Upton Sinclair’s blockbuster novel, _The Jungle_ (1906, available in
electronic form at
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/Literature/Sinclair/TheJungle/)
In Russia, then as, unfortunately, now that robber-baron capitalism has
been restored, exploitation of workers by industrialists was and is
particularly vicious. Communism was originally imposed there as a
revolutionary ideology which would right these wrongs by having the
state in the form of the collective mass of the workers take over the
means of production from the exploiting class. It appealed to
large masses of exploited industrial workers in Germany, France, and
other countries during the first decades of the 20th century, and the
industrial and political establishments ran scared trying to discredit
it or clean up their act to lessen its appeal. It is no accident that
social-democrats, Marxists who are more interested in reforming and
regulating employer-employee relationships (see
http://socialistinternational.org ) than in replacing them with a
system that would have the state be the sole employer, providing basic
services with minimal competition, quality-control, or choice, have
been the party primarily responsible for the social equality and
overall prosperity which have characterized Western-European societies
during the past-war period.
Even if the methods used to construct the Soviet “worker’s paradise”
were brutal, many intelligent and moderately critical people such as
H.G. Wells and Henry “I’ve seen the future and it works” Ford were
impressed, accepting the brutality used to implement it as a necessary
means which would justify the eventual desirable ends. The methods
which had been used in Britain and the United States to industrialize
agrarian societies, forcing surplus rural population off the land to
become urban proletariats working for minimal wages, and importing
immigrants always ready to work for less than the natives to keep wages
low, were also quite brutal, even if we usually prefer not to remember
these stages in the early history of industrial capitalism.
Communism did succeed in dragging a predominately illiterate, mostly
pre-industrial, peasant society into the twentieth century. The Soviet
Union fielded an army that took almost 30,000,000 losses but still
played the decisive role in defeating what was arguably the world’s
best equipped, modern, and savage military and mop-up forces, those of
Nazi Germany. During the late 1950s the Soviet Union was the first
country to conquer space, was able to offer free medical care of
acceptable quality to its entire population, and had one of the world’s
best educational systems. We will never know what the country could
have become if it had had the wisdom not to squander its resources and
compete with the United States in a space race, an arms race, and an
influence race.
> Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were two more gullible
> people duped by the propaganda.
To dismiss the Rosenberg’s as simply gullible people is an insult to
their memory. They were spies and they committed treason, that is true.
But what were their motives? They were Jews who understood what Nazi
Germany was doing to European Jewry. At the time of their espionage
they were handing over information to the USSR, then still an ally of
the United States, which they thought would help it win the war more
quickly, thus stopping the Holocaust. Legally they were committing a
serious crime, but can we cast such harsh judgement on them morally?
They were certainly not the only ones motivated by such considerations,
nor were they, as alleged, the ones who gave the USSR the “secret” of
the atomic bomb. Another aspect of the Rosenbergs’ treason, more
sinister, but also with some legitimate moral justification, was their
desire as people with socialist sympathies not to see the United States
as the only superpower in the post-war environment, one able to impose
its will and Diktat on the devastated countries of Europe, including
the USSR.
As it turned out, the Soviet Union was able to challenge the United
States as a superpower, albeit a second-rate one, and was able to
project its power, will, and influence to such an extent that the
United States took it seriously, at least until the early 1980s. The
plus side was that the USSR was able to enjoy two generations of being
a world power, a status that Russia in whatever manifestation had
dreamed of but never succeeded in becoming before. The minus side is
that this cost so much that the USSR was never able to devote itself to
developing the type of humane society which its idealistic founders had
envisioned and for which its long-suffering people had made such
tremendous human and material sacrifices.
Thus, when the USSR opted out of the space race, defused the arms race,
and decided, finally, to devote time to rethinking what its goals as a
society were to be, the majority of its population decided that what
they most wanted was to be, in Gorbachev’s words, “a normal country”,
not a sociological laboratory, vangaurd of world revolution, or
prisonhouse of nations.
> Lee Harvey Oswald was another.
Lee Harvey Oswald was a mentally unbalanced individual who, fitting
neither into American nor Soviet society, decided that his only way
to leave a mark on history was to do something extraordinary. His crime
was his way of manifesting his narcissism. His defection and crime
cannot be compared to the real and wrenching conflicts which resulted
in the Rosenbergs’ decision to commit treason.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:16 EST 2002
Article: 1306149 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Why do people become Communists?
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 00:11:48 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 61
Message-ID: <090120020011487708%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <080120021703277813%[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010527905 12511 128.214.199.213 (8 Jan 2002 22:11:45 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 Jan 2002 22:11:45 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1306149
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Joe Bruno) wrote:
> Our difference of opinion is based on political differences and
> ethical differences, Eugene. You may be able to rationalize what the
> Communists did and what the Rosenbergs did as justifiable by some sort
> of strange reasoning, but I cannot.
The reasoning is not strange at all. The Rosenbergs understood that the
Nazis were killing millions of European Jews, and they, as human beings
with a conscience, were willing to do anything, including committing
what is generally regared as treason against the United States, to stop
the genocide. This is not a Jewish thing nor an attempt to exonerate
them. Oskar and Liselotte Schindler, German Catholics, came to the same
conclusion and also committed treason against Nazi Germany. If the
United States had the means to stop the genocide, but was unwilling to
share it with the Soviets, which party, the United States, or the
Rosenbergs, was morally more culpable?
> I cannot support ANY reason for
> the death of millions in the USSR or the betrayal of the USA by the
> Rosenbergs.
The United States was not sharing all the information that it could
have shared with its ally, the USSR. Not sharing this information meant
that hundredsof thousands of European Jews were murdered unnecessarily
by the nazis. In this respect the United States was an accessory to
genocide. The Rosenbergs were willing to commit treason and thus
sacrifice their lives in order, as they interpreted the situation, to
tkae measures which might have stopped the genocide.
> You forgot to deal with the reality that Oswald changed
> his mind about the USSR and came back to the USA.
Oswald was a jerk. He did not have to deal with the type of ethical
problems the Rosenbergs had to deal with.
> In Joe Bruno’s
> system of priorities, murder of innocent people is just as heinous
> when done by Communists as it is when done by Nazis. I am a loyal
> American and can NEVER rationalize treason against the USA. I can find
> things wrong with the USA, too, but I would never betray her or even
> try to justify someone else’s betrayal of her.
The United States is just another country, and more than once it has
put itself in situations which have required that citizens with a high
sense of morality, if not necessarily common sense, make the
distinction between patriotism and principles. The Rosenbergs made
decisions that we might not agree with and which we may regard as
criminal, but we have to understand that they were motivated by a sense
of ethics and morality.
—
Best,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:17 EST 2002
Article: 1311392 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Why do people become Communists?
Supersedes: <090120021158552445%[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 14:58:23 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 175
Message-ID: <090120021458236721%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <080120021703277813%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <090120020011487708%[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010581099 866 128.214.199.213 (9 Jan 2002 12:58:19 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 9 Jan 2002 12:58:19 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1311392
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Joe Bruno) wrote:
> Eugene Holman <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<090120020011487708%[email protected]>…
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] (Joe Bruno) wrote:
> >
> > > Our difference of opinion is based on political differences and
> > > ethical differences, Eugene. You may be able to rationalize what the
> > > Communists did and what the Rosenbergs did as justifiable by some sort
> > > of strange reasoning, but I cannot.
> >
> > The reasoning is not strange at all. The Rosenbergs understood that the
> > Nazis were killing millions of European Jews, and they, as human beings
> > with a conscience, were willing to do anything, including committing
> > what is generally regared as treason against the United States, to stop
> > the genocide. This is not a Jewish thing nor an attempt to exonerate
> > them. Oskar and Liselotte Schindler, German Catholics, came to the same
> > conclusion and also committed treason against Nazi Germany. If the
> > United States had the means to stop the genocide, but was unwilling to
> > share it with the Soviets, which party, the United States, or the
> > Rosenbergs, was morally more culpable?
>
>
> >>What “means” are you talking about? I hope you are not referring to
> the A bomb. Are you trying to say the Russians would have dropped the
> Abomb on Nazi Germany? There was no A bomb until the war was
> practically over. Your timing is way off. The first nuclear chain
> reaction did not occur until 1942.
We don’t know how quickly the bomb could have been produced – it would
have depended on many factors. Two teams rather than one and a pooling
of efforts would have probably produced quicker results.
The bomb would not have had to have been dropped on anyone: a
demonstration of its power would have sufficed.
> At any rate, the exterminations were a top-secret operation and the
> USA did not know about them until the war was almost over.
Nonsense. The Riga extermination – 12,000 people on November 30, 1941,
and another 12,0000 a week later – was widely reported, as were some of
the other large massacres by the Einstazkommandos during the first six
months of the war. Rudolf Vrba and Afred Wetzler escaped from Auschwitz
in April, 1944, and their Auschwitz Report had been read and regarded
as credible by diplomats and officials in several governments by late
June, 1944. Raoul Wallenberg and several other diplomats stationed in
Budapest were quite aware of both the conditions at Auschwitz and the
Nazi extermination plan, and they were issuing travel documents to the
Jews of Budapest during the early summer of 1944 at the same time as
hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Jews were being hunted down by Adolf
Eichmann’s team and deported to Auschwitz for extermination. These
events were taking place almost a year before the war was over, and the
US as well as responsible people in several countries were quite aware
of what was going on at Auschwitz by then.
> Justice
> Jackson, at Nuremberg, stated that he thought the tales of the
> exterminations were just exagerrated rumors until he saw the Nuremberg
> evidence. How the hell can you blame the USA for things they did not
> know?
You are incorrect. The US and other governments were quite aware of
what was going on at Auschwitz by mid-1944. The motivations and actions
of the Rosenbergs, who would probably have had access to information
provided by Soviet diplomats about Holocaust atrocities that had taken
place on Soviet territory such as Babi Yar and the massacres at
Karkhov, Odessa, Minsk, and elsewhere, some of this also general
knowledge by 1944, have to be understood within this context.
> > > I cannot support ANY reason for
> > > the death of millions in the USSR or the betrayal of the USA by the
> > > Rosenbergs.
> >
> > The United States was not sharing all the information that it could
> > have shared with its ally, the USSR.
>
>
> >>Bullshit. You don’t share all the info you have with someone like
> Stalin. Roosevelt knew what a butcher he was. Stalin murdered millions
> of his own people-why do you think he would have lifted a finger to
> help the Jews? The alliance was one of convenience only. The two
> parties never trusted each other. Are you so naive that you attribute
> noble ideals or concern for human life to Josef Stalin? Give me a
> break.
You are missing the point. The Rosenbergs were motivated by a desire to
stop the genocide of European Jews that was being implemented quite
robustly in 1944 by the Nazis. In this sense their actions were no
different than the treason committed by Oskar and Liselotte Schindler.
> Not sharing this information meant
> > that hundredsof thousands of European Jews were murdered unnecessarily
> > by the nazis. In this respect the United States was an accessory to
> > genocide. The Rosenbergs were willing to commit treason and thus
> > sacrifice their lives in order, as they interpreted the situation, to
> > tkae measures which might have stopped the genocide.
> >
> > > You forgot to deal with the reality that Oswald changed
> > > his mind about the USSR and came back to the USA.
> >
> > Oswald was a jerk. He did not have to deal with the type of ethical
> > problems the Rosenbergs had to deal with.
>
>
> >>Really? What makes you an expert on Oswald’s state of mind or that
> of the Rosenbergs? Have you ever met any of them?
The Rosenberg trial and execution was the first major news event I
remember following as a child. The court building where they were tried
was visible from my bedroom window. I’ve subsequently maintained my
interest in them and the trial, including reading a few books defending
and condemning their actions.
As to Oswald, it is obvious that he was unbalanced and a narcissist.
> As I said before, we
> all have to deal with conflicts and dilemmas, but very few of us ever
> become traitors.
Some people become traitors because they feel that their countries are
violating more universal laws. This is what caused the Schindlers to
become traitors. I am willing to entertain the idea that this was a
factor motivating the Rosenbergs’ treason.
> I did not support the invasions of Grenada or Panama
> or the support of dictatorships in Iran(The Shai) and Latin America by
> the USA, but I did what I could to protest LEGALLY. That’s why we have
> a Constitution and we write letters to our reps in Washington when we
> have a comlaint. It never occurred to me to betray the USA just
> because I was dissatisfied with one of it’s policies. It’s a good
> thing you never became an officer in the US miltary-if you did, the
> USA would be in deep shit. Who would you betray us to first, Eugene,
> and what kind of situation would persuade you to turn traitor? Do me a
> favor-please stay in Finland. I feel safer with you out of the USA.
> Good grief!!
I’m not out to betray a country, but both the Rosenbergs and the
Schindlers regarded themselves as being in a position to stop a
genocide. Bombings, wars, invasions are one thing, but if I were a
citizen of a country that was clearly exterminating a group of people
on the basis of their race, religion, or ethnicity, I would think I had
a higher obligation to the moral principles that make me a human being
than to the laws of my country that allow it to be a participant in
genocide to do something to stop it if I could. The Schindlers won
universal acclaim for their treason – rescuing more than 1,200 Jews,
stealing SS property, and sabotaging military production – the
Rosenbergs received a death sentence for theirs.
> > > In Joe Bruno’s
> > > system of priorities, murder of innocent people is just as heinous
> > > when done by Communists as it is when done by Nazis. I am a loyal
> > > American and can NEVER rationalize treason against the USA. I can find
> > > things wrong with the USA, too, but I would never betray her or even
> > > try to justify someone else’s betrayal of her.
>
> > The United States is just another country
>
>
> >>Not to me, it isn’t. I would not risk my life for any other country,
> including Israel. I would not spend 6 years of my life defending any
> other country.(AS a CPA, I took a huge cut in salary by doing so, in
> addition to the life risk)
> I am so glad that you are in Finland-please stay there.
If you had been alive 170 years ago when American Indians were being
driven off of their ancestral lands, often at the point of a gun, and
frequently brutalized and killed, would you just accept it as tough
nuggies for them?
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:17 EST 2002
Article: 1317473 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: “Joe Bruno” caught fibbing again
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 22:11:20 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <090120022211208419%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <3c3c2262.2176424@shawnews> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010607075 27490 128.214.199.213 (9 Jan 2002 20:11:15 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 9 Jan 2002 20:11:15 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1317473
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Joe Bruno) wrote:
> Go back on the street and practice saying filthy things about other
> people’s relatives, you filthy, stinking punk.
> Do you hear me, toilet mouth? Do You hear ME, you filthy stinking
> coward? Have you got the message, outhouse mouth? Do you hear me,
> shitbrain?
Neat cussin’!
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Wed Jan 9 19:00:17 EST 2002
Article: 1317719 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!128.230.129.106!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: When did the West become aware of the Holocaust? (was: Why do people become Communists?)
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 22:34:33 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 125
Message-ID: <090120022234339985%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <080120021703277813%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <090120020011487708%[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010608469 28615 128.214.199.213 (9 Jan 2002 20:34:29 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 9 Jan 2002 20:34:29 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1317719
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Joe Bruno) wrote:
> At any rate, the exterminations were a top-secret operation and the
> USA did not know about them until the war was almost over. Justice
> Jackson, at Nuremberg, stated that he thought the tales of the
> exterminations were just exagerrated rumors until he saw the Nuremberg
> evidence. How the hell can you blame the USA for things they did not
> know?
Source: http://motlc.wiesenthal.com/text/x06/xm0616.html
<quote>
The Escape of Vrba and Wetzler
Two detailed reports about mass killings at Auschwitz that were based
on information provided by four escapees from the camp in the spring of
1944.
On April 7, 1944, with the help of the Auschwitz underground, two
Slovak Jews, Rudolf Vrba (Walter Rosenberg) and Alfred Wetzler, began
the steps that would lead to their escape from the camp. Members of the
Auschwitz underground prepared a hideout for them in a gap in a
woodpile that was located beyond the camp’s inner perimeter. To confuse
the dogs that would inevitably search for them, strong Russian tobacco
that had been soaked in gasoline was spread around them. For three days
and two nights Vrba and Wetzler waited for the search to end, and then
fled toward Slovakia.
The Report is Written
Two weeks later they arrived in Zilina, where they met Erwin Steiner, a
representative of the Jewish Council. After hearing their story,
Steiner contacted the Bratislava Jewish Council and spoke to Oscar
Krasnansky on the phone. Krasnansky immediately arranged permission to
travel by train to Zilina. At Steiner’s house, he heard the two
escapees’ testimony and wrote a thirty-page report based upon it. Vrba
and Wetzler described the workings of the camp, gave estimated
statistics of Jews who had been killed (about 1.75 million), and warned
that preparations were being made for the murder of the nearly 800,000
Jews of Hungary and the 3,000 Czech Jews who had been brought from
Theresienstadt six months earlier.
Additional Information from Mordowicz and Rosin
In Bratislava, the report was passed on to Rabbi Michael Dov
Weissmandel of the Pracovna Skupina (Working Group) in Slovakia. A
follow-up report was supplied by two more escapees, Czeslaw Mordowicz
and Arnost Rosin, who reached the Slovak border on June 6, 1944,
following their escape from Auschwitz on May 27. Meeting with
Krasnansky, they added fresh information about Auschwitz. Among other
things, they told of the arrival and murder of about three thousand
Greek Jews, and the beginning of the murder of Hungarian Jews – 900f
whom were killed immediately upon arrival. Their information was
combined with the first report.
An Abridged Version Reaches Switzerland
Attempts to smuggle the protocols abroad met with mixed results. First,
the Pracovna Skupina tried to dispatch the Vrba-Wetzler report to
Istanbul, giving it to a supposedly reliable courier. However, instead
of passing it on to the representatives of the Rescue Committee of the
Jewish Agency in Istanbul, the courier apparently handed over the
report to the Budapest Gestapo. Rabbi Weissmandel then tried to use his
contacts with Swiss Orthodox Jews to transmit it to the West. At first
this channel failed him, but on May 16, 1944, the Pracovna Skupina sent
a message that reached Isaac Sternbuch, the representative of the
Orthodox Va’ad ha-Hatsala (Rescue Committee) in Switzerland. The
message contained an abridged version of the Auschwitz protocols, and
exhorted the Allies to bomb the extermination camp and the railway
lines leading to it. In addition, the group suggested that Hungary be
warned, the facts of the mass killings be publicized, the International
Red Cross be allowed into the camp, and money be provided to help
rescue Hungarian Jews.
Dissemination in Slovakia and Hungary
With the hope that it would later reach the free world, the report was
also disseminated to key people in Bratislava. Krasnansky and Oskar
Neumann (a member of the Pracovna Skupina) gave Rezso Kasztner of the
relief and rescue committee of Budapest a copy of the Vrba-Wetzler
report on April 28, 1944, when he visited the city. Apparently Kasztner
brought it back to Budapest, but did not publicize it for fear the
information would disrupt the rescue negotiations taking place between
Hungarian Jewish leaders and the Nazis. In mid-May, Rabbi Weissmandel
also sent the report to Fulop Freudiger (the leader of the Orthodox
Relief and Rescue Committee in Budapest), specifically warning him that
the Nazis were about to begin the liquidation of Hungarian Jewry.
According to his testimony at the trial of Adolf Eichmann, Freudiger
forwarded the information to the Zsido Tanacs, the Jewish Council of
Hungary; Angelo Rotta, the papal nuncio; and the Hungarian regent,
Miklos Horthy. The papal charge d’affaires in Bratislava, Giuseppe
Burzio, was also given the report and sent it to Rome on May 22, 1944.
It is not known for certain when it reached the Vatican, but the notes
on the Vatican’s copy are dated October 22 and 25, 1944.
The Full Report Reaches the West
Following the arrival of the escapees Mordowicz and Rosin, the expanded
report was sent to the West. Dr. Jaromir Kopecky, the Geneva
representative of the Czechoslovak government-in-exile, received a copy
>from the Pracovna Skupina’s courier on June 13, 1944. He informed
Gerhart Riegner of the World Jewish Congress, who in turn sent a
telegraphic summary of the report (the Riegner Cable) and a cover
letter by Kopecky to Elizabeth Wiskemann of the British legation in
Bern. She dispatched the information to Allen Dulles, the head of
United States intelligence in Switzerland, who sent it to the American
representative in Bern, Roswell McClelland, and he in turn forwarded it
to the Department of State in Washington on June 16. Others received
the report soon thereafter. The BBC broadcast some of the details on
June 18, and the Swedes received a copy of the report on June 23, 1944.
With the reception of the protocols in the West and the dissemination
of the information contained in them, the true purpose of the Auschwitz
extermination camp became clear to the free world.
Courtesy of:
“Encyclopedia of the Holocaust”
©1990 Macmillan Publishing Company
</quote>
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Mon Jan 14 18:58:15 EST 2002
Article: 1333206 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Cyanide, Zyklon-B & Mass Murder
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 23:27:37 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <120120022327374413%[email protected]>
References: <a1p8e[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010870858 5256 128.214.199.213 (12 Jan 2002 21:27:38 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 Jan 2002 21:27:38 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1333206
In article <[email protected]>, Richard Phillips
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Phillips
>
> You’ve made a case that it would have been POSSIBLE to gas people using
> Zyklon. Now all you have to do is to prove that it was done.
>
> ==============================================
No, your case is to prove that it wasn’t
We have:
– people such as Nazi physician Hans Münch, who said that it was done;
– people such as Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höß, who say that it was
done;
– people such as Sonderkommando members David Olère and Hans Tauber,
who say that it was done;
– people such as Nazi Bigwig Adolf Eichmann, who say that it was done;
– people, such as Swedish diplomats Per Ånger and Raoul Wallenberg, who
say that it was done;
– people, such as the various Polish teams that conducted forensic
analyses of the gas chambers of Auschwitz in 1945 and then, later, in
1989 and 1994, who say that it was done;
– the Nuremberg Military Tribunal which, after having asssessed all the
evidence presented, say that it was done;
– self-designated historians, such as David Irving, who say that it was
done;
– building plans indicating modifications of harmless structures to
ones consistent with claims of genocide;
– testimony of the manufacturers of Zyklon-B that they knew that their
product was being used to kill people;
– various references in captured German documents to homicidal gassing
(Vergasung);
– reports of concentration camp escapees such as Rudolf Vrba indicating
that Auschwitz deportees were being gassed;
– deportation records indicating that the people deported to Auschwitz
and other Nazi death camps are never heard from again;
– evidence that the concentrations of residual cyanide compounds found
in places alleged to have been mass-execution gas chambers are high,
such as the concentrations found in former fumigation facilities,
rather than low, such as the concentrations found in places known to
have been subjected to a single gassing with HCN.
You have nothing to refute this evidence.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Mon Jan 14 18:58:16 EST 2002
Article: 1333238 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,can.politics
Subject: Re: Cyanide, Zyklon-B & Mass Murder
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 00:15:31 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <130120020015317231%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <120120022327374413%[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1010873731 7030 128.214.199.213 (12 Jan 2002 22:15:31 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 Jan 2002 22:15:31 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1333238 can.politics:628394
In article <[email protected]>, “Kurt Knoll”
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Holman your comments here have no relevancy here who cares what Eichman or
> Hoess said.
People interested in the history of the Holocaust do.
> Like in
> any other instance you have witnesses that are just as unreliable as can be
> since nobody really know
> if this are fakes or not.
Höß and Eichmann were key figures in the Holocaust, and much of what
they offered either as testimony presented as witnesses or in their
memoirs and diaries, jibes with evidence available from other sources.
> You have here about 800 Stokers that worked at Auschwitz and only one or two
> of them to be your Witnesses.
Na und, du lustiger Freund?
> What did haven to the rest of them, What did happen to the ones that
> operated the Gas chambers ?. Did they
> disappear into thin air. I have seen photographs of the so called SS Woman ?
> but this were Arbeitsdient Uniforms.
Na und, du lustiger Freund?
> What did happen to the First Aids (Sanitaeter) Women’s of the Camps where
> did they disappear to after the war was
> over. I am very sure if you have no proof now it wont be long you will come
> up with one you just made up.
People who were in these positions are not likely to present themselves
and say “Ja, ich war’s”.
> If some of the Camp Guards are still alive today would the ordinary German
> Citizen allowed to ask them some
> questions. Or is this your Exclusive Jewish domain.
Zum tausendsten Mal, ich bin kein Jude.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Thu Jan 17 21:36:02 EST 2002
Article: 1337235 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-01!supernews.com!newsfeed.gamma.ru!Gamma.RU!news1.spb.su!newsfeeds.funet.fi!newsfeeds.funet.fi!newsfeed2.funet.fi!130.230.10.15.MISMATCH!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Why Clinton had so many Jews in his administration
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 19:17:03 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <150120021917034066%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1011115022 23047 128.214.199.213 (15 Jan 2002 17:17:02 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 Jan 2002 17:17:02 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.revisionism:1337235
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (tom moran) wrote:
> >For Clinton, the event offered a chance to help shore up his legacy.
> >The former president reportedly is frustrated that his image has been
> >battered since leaving office and has launched an aggressive campaign
> >to remind the public of his administration’s achievements.
>
> Clinton’s “achievements”? Which were?
Staining a perfectly good skirt? Finding healthier ways to use cigars
than smoke them?
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
From [email protected] Thu Jan 17 21:36:02 EST 2002
Article: 1338906 of alt.revisionism
Path: hub.org!hub.org!fr.clara.net!heighliner.fr.clara.net!news.mailgate.org!ams.uu.net!newsfeed.song.fi!news.cc.tut.fi!news.helsinki.fi!holman
From: Eugene Holman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,soc.culture.jewish,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.usa,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: “We’re taking down the old white guys” – Markowitz (A new Jewish America)
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 22:34:31 +0200
Organization: University of Helsinki
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <170120022234311620%[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eng-0047.eng.helsinki.fi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: oravannahka.helsinki.fi 1011299671 7659 128.214.199.213 (17 Jan 2002 20:34:31 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 Jan 2002 20:34:31 GMT
User-Agent: YA-NewsWatcher/3.1.8
Xref: hub.org alt.politics.nationalism.white:541678 soc.culture.jewish:617697 soc.culture.israel:448657 soc.culture.usa:825262 alt.revisionism:1338906
In article <[email protected]>,
“Richard Phillips” <[email protected]> wrote:
> =============================================
> Phillips
>
> Well, since it is now plain that Washington has ceased to be fashionable, it
> is time to replace his portrait with that of someone who better reflects our
> “diversity.”
>
> I predict a neck-and-neck race to the finish between Al Sharpton and Elie
> Wiesel.
>
> It was by these same antics that the Jews brought some very unhappy
> consequences for themselves in 1930s Germany. It is their misfortune that
> they are too sunk in their own self-righteousness to learn from their folly.
>
> ==================================================
Hunh?
Could you be more specific? In pre-1933 Germany Hitler and his
supporters blamed the Jews collectively for:
– Germany’s loss of WW I;
– war profiteering;
– hyperinflation;
– the social unrest in post-WW I Germany;
– clannishness;
– cultural parasitism;
– the cosmopolitanism that characterized the Weimar Republic;
– communism and the appeal it had to certain segments of German society;
– domination of the media;
– modern science;
– the invention of Christianity and the imposition of it and other
Semitic mindsets on the Germans;
– corrupting the arts;
– polluting the gene pool.
As far as I know, Hitler and his supporters never blamed the Jews for
removing portraits of Founding Fathers such as Bismark and Kaiser
Wilhelm in public places, and replacing them with pictures of former
prisoners or sharpster lawyers. Correct me if I’m wrong.
—
Regards,
Eugene Holman
