Re: RR Finally comes out

"David Iain Greig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Frank Reichenbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Copied from the thread, "seen evidence of Holocaust in museums?"
> > (Hasn't shown up in Google just yet)
> > ___________________________________________
> >
> >> > What is the theory of evolution?
> >>
> >> Gee, you think I should evade this and go running away like you do when
> >> asked direct questions about your position on the Holocaust and the
> >> scientific method? If I answer this question, does that mean you will
> >> finally attempt to answer the questions I've been pestering you about:
> > What
> >> is the scientific method? Did the Holocaust occur as commonly believed?
> >
> > See, you use the word 'believed'!
> >
> >>
> >> No? I didn't think so. If you are anything, it is predictable.
> >>
> >> Nevermind, I am not afraid to answer a direct question.
> >>
> >> The theory of evolution is the theory that all organisms descended from
> > one
> >> or a few common ancestors. Usually the question is asked in reference
to
> >> Darwin's theory, which not only proposes common descent, it offers a
> >> mechanism as well. So the theory of evolution by means of natural
> > selection
> >> is the theory that evolution is accomplished by the action of natural
> >> selection acting on random mutations of genomes in populations of
> > organisms.
> >>
> >> My position on the Holocaust is that the German Nazi rulers of
1933-1945
> >> developed a deliberate policy of genocide of Jews throughout the
occupied
> >> territories. By 1945 they had very nearly carried it out through a
program
> >> of murder and starvation, resulting in approximately 6,000,000 dead
Jews.
> >
> >> Your turn.
> >
> > Records are quite incomplete and not clear on the matter.  These numbers
> > have been changing all the time quite radically.
>
> The numbers have been consistent in the millions since 1945.  I don't
> think any historian would argue otherwise.

Try some different sources.  The number has not been consistent.


>
>
> > The propaganda on the
> > matter is is of a gigantic proportion and deriving mostly from
> > American(Jewish reports and sources (not German's that is).
>
> Most of the documentation used to develop the body counts is German.
> The Germans themselves have the Institute for NS-Crimes who research
> the Holocaust and agree with the work done by others.

Any idea how incomplete these are? True, the Germans kept meticulous records
about things, but in the end much of it has been destroyed also.

> > 'Experts' at
> > the Nürnberg trials testified they had 'evidence' that soap was produced
> > from human bodies at the camps, as well as lampshades of their skin
(both
> > were physically presented on the tapes). Now, this is not accepted as
being
> > true anymore.  There were also rumours that human hair was used to fill
upp
> > pillows.
>
> Human hair was apparently collected and used for felt.  The hair was
washed
> and dried in the attics of the Crematoria.  The Russians found huge
amounts
> of human hair when they captured the death camps.

What does that prove?  It were also the Russians who 'restored' the
gaschambers at Auschwitz (correct me if I'm wrong)

>
> > Ever heard of Russian concentration camps where German's were taken
shortly
> > after WWII, history books are in complete silence about that. Any idea
how
> > many died there and in what manner?
>
> A lot; a friend's father was in the Waffen-SS and captured at Stalingrad.
> He was held in a camp in Siberia for a decade, only released when it was
> thought he had terminal TB.  He doesn't talk about it.  Almost nobody
> captured at Stalingrad came back.
>
> However, Soviet treatment of German prisoners (or, in the West, Allied
> treatment of German prisoners) can not be used to somehow make up
> for German crimes.   The Soviets killed millions in the name of
> Communism; how does this justify killing 6 million Jews, as well
> as millions of Poles and Russians?

Your interpretation, I never concluded that.  I didn't even think about a
justification, why do you?  My whole point is that much attention is on this
'holocaust', but little on some other indeed horrible history.  Be little
more critical about things.

>
> > German records only speak about some 'final solution', this can be
> > interpreted anyway you choose.
>
> German records speak about a lot more than just the 'final solution':
> they talk of 'resettlement', 'special treatment', 'dragging them through
> the camps', 'transfer', etc.  Why don't you go talk to some of the
> people who went through Westerbork and see what happened to them when
> they were 'deported to the East'.
>
> To seriously claim that the 'final solution' wasn't, by 1942, mass murder
> of the Jews in Nazi-controlled Europe, is to totally ignore almost 60
> years of careful scholarship by *many* researchers, Jewish or not.

I never denied anything of all that, why do you assume that?

>
> > Ever read the Talmud?  How the jews regard non jews?  Can you be
objective
> > and rational about this matter, no don't think so.  The point is that
you
> > act like a Nazi as per your shown behaviour.  I per definition do not!
>
> You are making radical claims about the Holocaust without giving any
> evidence to support them.  If you want to show that the claims made
> today are wrong, you need to show evidence why.  The fact that estimates
> of the dead in the camps was less accurate in 1950 than today is
> true, and understandable - researchers *now* are still finding documents
> buried in the voluminous archives left by the Nazis - David Irving,
> who is a revisionist, has made his career out of finding new documents
> in the archives.  He has a good reputation as a researcher, IMHO, even
> while he is properly criticized for misinterpreting his findings.

Error, I do not make any claims. I supply information deriving from various
sources.  The holocaust has been question by more then one person.  Don't be
fixated, deal with it!

>
> > Where do nowaday jews descent from?  From those talked about in the
bible
> > stories?  Do your research on that!
>
> Again, this has literally nothing to do with the factuality of the
> Holocaust, does it?

Indirectly it does, apparently you do not see that.

>
> > Now what happened with David Cole?  Instead of disproving meticulously
and
> > in scientific fashion his information he got a truly vicious attack from
the
> > jews front, and now he has disappeared into thin air? And this shortly
after
> > he renounced everything because of jewish pressure. He is assumed dead I
> > believe.  By the way, he was also a jew himself.
>
> David Cole was a confused person, and hardly central to any sort
> of serious attack on historical research.

If that is so, then it would have been easy enough to prove him wrong with
contrary information and evidence, this however was not done.

> Further, I have no
> information about his death; after his letter renouncing revisionism,
> I don't think anyone has heard about him.  Do you have a cite
> for the stories of his death?

Not anymore, you will probably find them if you look for combination "David
Cole" and "holocaust" on altavista or something

>
> > Everytime something like this happens I get suspicious, evolutionism
> > responses in the same manners.  Why not introducing creational ideas
into
> > the schools?
>
> The above has nothing to do with your views on the Holocaust, so I
> hope you will not mind me ignoring them.

I do not give my views on the holocaust, I post information, get this into
your head!  It has to do with how one deals with information, Nazi Germany
and evolution doctrines have relevances in their approach, which I assume
now you do not see.

>
> >  It is assumed that students are stupid apparently.  Fact is if
> > you have 'right' nothing can prove you wrong, so why being afraid about
it!
> > Ideas of grown-ups are simply forced upon our youth, excluding
automatically
> > other viewpoints and information.  This is the world George Orwell
describes
> > in '1984'.
> >
> > Alright, YOUR behaviour re this and that of some others simply has the
> > result that people are afraid to be scientific about it. NOTHING can be
> > allowed to be questioned, and those who do question ANYTHING at all are
> > stamped as jewhater or something like that.  So you and your kind attemp
to
> > rule out ANY opposition before there is any!  And this my friend is Nazi
> > behaviour.  History shows that jews were made subject to his kind of
> > behaviour in those years foregoing the war in Nazi Germany.
>
> Nonsense.  If you would actually give evidence to support your claims
> people would not have to make unfounded assumptions.

The subject of 'evidence' is utterly subjective.  If I would say elevation
is a fact and I would show you 100 people swifting up into the air, you
still would say that it has to be a trick.  Why? Because it will not fit in
your preformed ideas about how things are supposed to be.


>
> > So 'believe' evolution to be a fact or be stamped as an 'idiot'!  Now,
> > that's the world you and your kind have created!  And this my dear Nazi
> > friend is living a 'LIE'!
> >
> > By the way, I am giving this information not for you but for all those
who
> > read these threads.  There IS a backside of history!
>
> Yes;  I would hope that those who believe they have evidence to
> contradict evolution or Holocaust research would be free to
> speak about it.

You will not be open for this information.  Explained earlier.

>
> But RR has continually avoided making any specific claims other than
> he doesn't believe everything.  Scepticism is fine, but he gives
> no reasons for being so.  He also doesn't seem to have done much
> research or reading into the Holocaust, at least from actual
> historians.  He does seem to have trawled revisionist sites and
> propaganda.

That's your opinion, I hardly 'trawled' anything at all.  I gave expression
to my critical and analytical mind.  No more, no less.