From Abracadabra to Zombies
reader comments: Holocaust denial
22 Feb 2010
Are you really getting people to gobble this stuff? That is a fine line you
tread asking people to be skeptical, all the while blowing the smoke from your
menorah up their asses. If you had balls you would write your real name. What is
it really? Carrollkike? Carrollstein? Carrollberg? or Hooknosejewbastard?
"Walter Carter"
reply: "There is nothing to gain by engaging in a battle of wits with an unarmed man, even if he treads on a fine line." --Albert Einstein on his deathbed
__________
31 May 1997
They deal with numbers: were there six million or four million or ? Jews who died or were killed? They deal with technical issues: could this shower have been used as a gas chamber? Were these deaths due to natural causes or not? They deal with minor facts: did Hitler issue a Final Solution order or not? If so, where is it? What they do not deal with is the question of racial laws, of arresting and imprisoning millions of people in several countries for the crime of "race," of herding people together like animals and transporting them to "camps" where millions died of disease, malnutrition, or were murdered. What the Holocaust deniers do not deal with is racial hatred. I do not wonder why.
In regards to the above, if we do not make sure that we are telling the whole truth about the holocaust then eventually everyone may be "deniers". Were the showers used for gassing or not? What evidence is there either way? Did most victims die from disease and starvation or were they burned alive or gassed? I don't see how anyone could argue that Hitler's policies were ok or benign. Of course it is evil to do the things Nazi Germany did. Lying about the details only makes folks question the whole story. That is not the way to make sure it never happens again.
The evidence for using the showers for poisoning people is readily available. Your use of the word "lying" seems to reveal a less-than-sincere concern for the truth. You seem to assume that historians, politicians, journalists, survivors, witnesses and soldiers who reported the story of the Holocaust are all "liars." Why?
Stalin is said to have had 30 million of his citizens killed but we never hear anything about the crimes of the Soviet Union. Pol Pot is said to have had 4 million Cambodians killed just for being educated or appearing "smart", yet where is the outcry? I am not saying that these people were right in their actions, I am saying that these are evil manipulative mass-murderers. The policies advocated by these individuals cannot be "sugar-coated" into being anything less than evil defined. But we must get the details straight. So I ask again, was it 6,000,000 or 4,000,000 or (most likely) 1,500,000? Was it gas or neglect?
I don't know where you get your history or your news, but it is obviously not from the same sources with which I am familiar. I've never read a sugar-coated account of Stalin or Pol Pot. In any case, what does that have to do with your loaded question: "was it gas or neglect" that killled the victims of Nazism in the concentration camps? You've raised a false dilemma. Many died of neglect and many were gassed. You seem to think you have the data to prove that the number of those who died in the camps was 1.5 million. Publish your arguments for all to examine.
I don't see revisionism espousing the ideals of Nazism or race-hate. I
do see revisionism as a healthy way to keep the facts straight as to what
really did happen. I remember as a small child the number of Jews murdered
by Hitler being 4,000,000. Now they all say 6,000,000 why would there be 2
million added in twenty years? Maybe the answer has something to do with
the incomprehensibility of such large numbers, or for effect. We need to
get the numbers right.
Lane Walker
If you think it is "healthy" to blithely call thousands of witnesses and authors "liars" because they haven't handed you a list with the names of every victim or a detailed order sheet for poison and notebooks from the death camp operators, then I suggest your criteria for truth are such that it is unlikely you will ever be satisfied with mere numbers. And I stand by what I wrote: Holocaust revisionists deal with minor details and ignore such major themes as "the question of racial laws, of arresting and imprisoning millions of people in several countries for the crime of "race," of herding people together like animals and transporting them to "camps" where millions died of disease, malnutrition, or were murdered. What the Holocaust deniers do not deal with is racial hatred."
4 Jun 1997 - Mr. Walker replies
In regards to your answer, The reason I (and others) do not concentrate on the legal and moral aspects of this event is because no one, unless they are deranged, thinks that race laws, herding, starving, torturing, imprisoning, even hating are acceptable. If your beef is with folks who condone Hitler's policies then I am in your corner. Whether it is in Russia, Cambodia, Germany, Bosnia, or even in America (Japanese in WW2, Indians) putting people in concentration camps and not caring for their needs is a crime against all humanity. I am not trying to "sugar-coat" what happened to the Jewish people. They were mistreated terribly and it was more than just wrong. But there should have been a near exact body count after the war. The Nazis were supposedly fanatical record keepers. That is where a lot of the evidence presented at Nuremberg came from. I cannot understand the addition of 2,000,000 victims since the 70's. The reason I said 1.5 mil is more likely number is because the more you tell a story, the greater the numbers become. If there had been an "official" number given a few years after the war and it was still the same number then there would be no real way to question it. However, the number of victims has risen as the years have passed and there is no way to account for this unless you take deception (whether intentional or not) as a possible reason. I am not a Holocaust denier in the sense that I don't believe Jews were murdered at the hands of the Nazis and their allies. I only question the details because they are the only thing open to questioning. The rest of the story cannot be denied. It is established fact. I bear animus towards no race or even individual, all are God's creatures and I am no better than any other. But the fact that it is a criminal offense to say you question the details of the holocaust in most of Europe makes me suspicious that there may not be a solid defense when the details are questioned. I cannot trust any government to tell the truth. They have horrible track records when it comes to official versions and the like. I can easily be convinced that there were 6 million people. I do not need to see the documents, I do need to see the conclusions reached by the men who were on the scene immediately after Germany fell. I have read emotion heavy accounts of what happened - Anne Frank, Schindler's list, etc. I have never seen a transcript of those who found the camps but did not live there. I guess what I am saying is that I need to hear it from someone who was there, but has not sought to profit from it or tell it a million times a year for a fee. I want to hear it from the American and Soviet soldiers who found these camps and wrote letters home about what they saw. I want to read their reports. I will then be convinced if their story is the same as the one I hear everywhere else. I hope you will also post this clarification along with my previous letter.
Have a nice day!
PS If you know where I can get these reports on the net, I will look at
them.
Lane Walker
Jesus is coming soon!! Are you ready?
reply: Was it also Jesus who said that there are none so blind as will not see? You have an interesting criterion for evidence. Do you expect someone to deliver the documents to your door?
Holocaust denial
