What The Hey

As stated in the conlcusion from my previous post: I'll go on record saying they (refering to Mr Hammeroni and WW) are putting forth a whole heck of a lot of effort into believing a lie - the lie and myth regarding the Holocaust. It may indeed have become a "religion" - although a false one. Not that they have become martry's for their cause mind you - but I realize they are putting a lot of effort into it. And throwing taxpayers money toward Holocaust education is magically going to make that lie go away?

OK Mr. Hammeroni. So all you have proven so far is you have a beef with the testimony given by Mr. Fred Leuchter. Fine. If what he stated and what he found at Auschwitz bothers you, why don't you get your own engineering team together and go to Auschwitz and conduct your own study to your own satisfaction? I wonder just how far you will get? We all know the outcome of trying to do that, and that you already know (just as well as I know) that you won't get very far - for reason's that I've already previously outlined. But I also made an earlier challenge and I don't think you picked up on the offer, (which I think is much easier than getting an engineering team together and going to Auschwitz to conduct your own study). Simply call the US Holocaust Museum. Let me say it again, (but I won't shout this time). I'm willing to be convinced I'm wrong about the gas chambers. Authentic physical remains or wartime-generated documents would do the trick. I say the US Holocaust Museum displays neither. Call the US Holocaust Memorial Museum and find out for yourself! The telephone number is: (202) 488-0400. Ask which (specific) Museum exhibits display prove gas chambers really existed. Have this (or any) newspaper publish the result. Then we'll all see what's what. But I got a "certain feeling" you won't get very far doing this either, because the phone conversation might go something like this: Mr Hammeroni: (dialing the US Holocaust Museum - 1 ringy-dingy, 2-ringy dingy, 3 ringy-dingy) Phone answers. US Holocaust Museum Rep: "U.S. Holocaust Museum. How may we help you?" Mr. Hammeroni: "Hi. I would like to know if you have evidence at the US Holocaust Museum or the other Holocaust Museums throughout major cities of the United States (i.e. Simon Wiesenthal Center, etc.) that proves and substantiates 6 million Jews were exterminated at Auschwitz in gas chambers by the Nazi's during WWII. I am not interested in viewing photographic displays of Holocaust victims, etc., but I would like to see authentic physical remains and/or war-time generated documents." US Holocaust Museum Rep: "F*** off! You, YOU NEO-NAZI, WHITE-SUPREMIST, ANTI-SEMITE!" Click. (dial tone resumes.)

Hmmmm.... Why do I recognize a particular historical pattern here that was established and confirmed a very long time ago, which is: You tell the truth - you don't have a degree (recongizable qualifications) - but then you end up being crucifed for telling the truth. Do you recognize this particular pattern? That particular pattern was established centuries ago by Jesus Christ.

Hmmm... not to mention all the brown noses!

Verse 1: Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends. We're so glad you could attend, come inside, come inside. There behind a glass stands a real blade of grass. Be careful as you pass, move along, move along. Chorus: Come inside, the show's about to start. Guaranteed to blow your head apart. Rest assured you'll get your money's worth. The greatest show in Heaven, Hell or Earth. You've got to see the show, it's a dynamo. You've got to see the show, it's rock and roll, oh. Right before your eyes, see the laughter from the skies. And he laughs until he cries, then he dies, then he dies. (To Chorus;) Verse 2: Soon the Gypsy Queen in a glaze of vaseline, Will perform on guillotine, what a scene, what a scene. Next upon the stand will you please extend a hand, To Alexander's Ragtime Band, Dixieland, Dixieland. Roll up, roll up, roll up. See the show. Verse 3: Performing on a stool we've a sight to make you drool. Seven virgins and a mule, keep it cool, keep it cool. We would like it to be known the exhibits that were shown. Were exclusively our own, all our own, all our own Come and see the show, come and see the show. Come and see the show. See the show. ----------------------------------------------- Already seen TWI's show. Yes siree. Looks like "Karn Evil 9" if you ask me. (With apologies to ELP.)

Wrong, I do understand you. I also understand people are at their worst when they begin to see their opponents as the: "embodiment of evil". They make "insinuations" about them and go so far as demonizing them. Of course, you can do anything you want to a demon. The fact is, there are no demons in the real world. But this leaves some people in a very difficult position does it not, without having someone to intimidate and demonize? Censoring people's thoughts does not make them go away, they just resurface later, much stronger and often more violently than before. Frankly, what is there to do or say if the truth is not relevant - or even ***forbidden*** to raise it in one's defense? Truth in history is thus outlawed?" History will answer, in the not-too-distant future, that divisions were the words that marched across its printed pages. The proof of that prophecy lies in the renaissance of enthusiasm, solidarity and determination that has arisen among the rapidly swelling ranks of revisionists world-wide, who are coming out of seclusion to form an unbeatable coalition of activist truth-seekers, eager to confront nothing less than the mind-polluters and enslavers of humanity. Their prowess shall unravel a universe of lies.

At least I give you credit for coming to the conclusion the Holocaust is a traditional belief - but that is all. However, an accusation does not make a fact. A headline does not make a fact, nor a tortured prisoner [such as: Rudolf Hoess] making a "confession" cannot make his words a fact either. Yet these are "the facts" that have lead many people to believe in the Holocaust myth. You - like many people - are merely stumbling over a label, that is, the label: "Holocaust denier." It is a label the Holocaust Promotion Lobby places on all Holocaust revisionists. However a Holocaust revisionist is not a Holocaust denier, technically and logically speaking for a Holocaust revisionist does not deny that "the Holocaust happened." Those who say it [the Holocaust] "never occured" only want to muddy the issue. Therefore the real question is not: "Did the Holocaust happen or did it not?" (Holocaust revisionists know that it did - but not according to: "traditional beliefs".) The question that the Holocaust revisionists are asking is: If there were no gas chambers, then what was the Holocaust? Yet whenever a revionist challenges such gas chamber vaporings they are going to be slandered as an anti-Semite by the "true believers" representing the Holocaust Lobby. These quasi-religious Holocaust zealots claim that because of the purity of their own feelings about the Jewish experience during World War II, the revisionists view must be soiled whenever they express doubt in what they [the exterminists] preach as "truth." Not even Winston Churchill in his six-volume history of World War II, or Dwight D. Eisenhower in his memoirs, made reference to homicidal gassing chambers. So then ... just how does the Holocaust Lobby and its Museum explain that? Intellectuals who do not believe that intellectual freedom is worth the while on this historical issue should ask themselves why they believe it's worth the while on any historical issue. Then they should explain their answers to the rest of us. I'm willing to be convinced I'm wrong about the gas chambers. Authentic physical remains or wartime-generated documents would do the trick. I say the US Holocaust Museum displays neither. Call the US Holocaust Memorial Museum and find out for yourself! The telephone number is: (202) 488-0400. Ask which (specific) Museum exhibits display prove gas chambers really existed. Have this (or any) newspaper publish the result. Then we'll all see what's what. Special pleaders imply that to investigate the gas chamber stories in the light of day will be harmful to the Jews. I challenge this bigoted insinuation! Free inquiry will only benefit the Jews - for exactly the reasons it benefits us all. In any case, why should it not?

Not surprisingly, indignant defenders of the orthodox Holocaust extermination story have tried frantically to discredit Leuchter and refute his findings. Undoubtedly the most ambitious effort to impeach The Leuchter Report on scientific and technical grounds consists of two articles by French pharmacist Jean-Claude Pressac in a book sponsored by "Nazi-hunter" Beate Klarsfeld, and grandiloquently titled Truth Prevails: Demolishing Holocaust Denial: The End of the Leuchter Report. Throughout both his essays, Pressac strongly implies that Leuchter consciously falsified his findings in order to disprove the existence of the gas chambers. As a case in point -- concerning sample 2 from Crematorium II -- Pressac insinuates that Leuchter planted a brick with no cyanide residue in the "gas chamber" area in order to "prove" his case. (p.65) At the 1989 conference of the Institute of Historical Review, Leuchter publicly challenged the international scientific community to investigate his findings -- hardly the behavior of a man who is guilty of falsifying his results. (From a videotape of Leuchter's lecture in the videotape recording, "Highlights of the 9th IHR conference" (Feb. 1989)) A team of scientists could easily expose deliberate deceptions, as well as methodological errors, by Leuchter. All they would have to do is retrace his path, take more samples from the same facilities, and subject them to chemical analysis. Based on spurious knowledge, inducing specious logic which leads to false conclusions, Pressac's attacks on The Leuchter Report stem from faulty scientific and technical understanding, and thus utterly fail to demolish it. Since the publication of Truth Prevails, a study by Poland's leading forensic institute has given strong corroboration to Leuchter's findings, and thus to his methodology. Pressac's ad hominem attacks on Leuchter and Faurisson, who by daring to subject the gas chamber myth to scientific and technical investigation, have risked their livelihoods, their personal freedom, and even their lives, will, one hopes, strike future generations of readers as no less obscurantist than the attacks directed at Galileo, at Darwin, or at the geneticists who dared to defy Lysenko during the Stalin years. May The Leuchter Report help to free, not only the Western world, but the entire literate world from the chains of an oppressive illusion: The lie of the Hitler gas chambers.

In many European countries, scholars, researchers, experts and historians can now be sentenced to hard time in prison for ". . . questioning the Holocaust." In Germany, the penalty can be five years. How is this done? By legislators passing laws called "Hate Laws." These "Hate Laws" are designed to snap around good people's hearts and minds like hand cuffs - for merely asking politically incorrect questions. It is costly and dangerous asking questions pertaining to topics like the "Holocaust". What is now becoming clear many, even to those who enacted the so-called ‘Hate Law,’ is that we enacted not so much an instrument against hate as an instrument against truth. Germany's parliament passed legislation in 1985, making it a crime to deny the extermination of the Jews. In 1994, the law was tightened. Now, anyone who publicly endorses, denies or plays down the genocide against the Jews faces a maximum penalty of five years in jail and no less than the imposition of a fine. See: No Room for Holocaust Denial in Germany

Fred A. Leuchter, Jr., is the foremost expert on the design and fabrication of hardware, including homicidal gas chambers, used to execute convicted criminals in the United States. After receiving a Bachelor's degree (in history) from Boston University in 1964, Leuchter did postgraduate work at the Harvard Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory. He holds patents on the design of sextants, surveying instruments and optical encoding equipment. Leuchter designed and maintained gas chambers for several U.S. penal institutions. He was sent by Ernst Zündel to investigate Auschwitz, Majdanek, Dachau, Hartheim and other alleged "Nazi Death Camps" and "gassing facilities." Author of the devastating series of Leuchter Reports. (I, II, III, IV) and many articles and videotaped presentations that resulted from these investigations. As was previously stated, [Leuchter] believed the Auschwitz gas chamber claim, and if he found it verified, then he would state so under oath and in his report. Leuchter went. He saw. He came back a much-enlightened man. His conclusions were clear: the evidence was overwhelming that there were no execution gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek and that the alleged gas chambers at these sites could not have been, then or now, utilized or seriously considered to function as execution gas chambers. Leuchter was blacklisted in the U.S. and hounded by the Holocaust lobby and the world's lapdog media. He was arrested and jailed in Germany while visiting there to appear on a television show. As a result of intense Jewish pressure, Leuchter lost his livelihood. Since making known his findings, he also has been libelled, slandered, and financially ruined. As was also previously stated: What Leuchter found can be, and has been, independently verified by engineers who have impeccable degrees. I also find H20 will produce water, yet I don't claim to have a degree in Chemistry. Why believe Jesus Christ? He certainly didn't have a degree in Christianity. Let me put it this way. Will any engineer come forward today to substantiate or discredit any of Fred A. Leuchter's claims? Right now in Germany, if a scientist verifies the Leuchter findings, that scientist loses his job and goes to prison. For this reason alone, you won't see too many people (specifically engineers) volunteering to tramp to Auschwitz with their own engineering gear.

After the Leuchter Reports, Fred Leuchter had been viciously attacked for two reasons: 1) He did not have an engineering degree when he wrote his trail-blazing studies, and 2) he was paid by the Zündel Defense and, hence, considered beholden to the Revisionist point of view. It is true that Leuchter did not have an appropriate degree. One might as well say Jesus Christ didn't have a degree in Christianity. Karl Marx did not have a degree in Marxism. What Leuchter found can be, and has been, independently verified by engineers who have impeccable degrees. Walter Lüftl is an Austrian engineer. He was for years president of the Austrian Chamber of Engineers, the representative body of all Austrian engineers. He was a court-approved expert frequently called to testify in engineering matters. He investigated Auschwitz and came to similar conclusions to Leuchter's. The Austrians promptly charged him criminally for stating his best engineering viewpoint - that the Auschwitz "gassing" facilities were fakes. This caused him lots of grief. As a consequence, he resigned his position. The media had a feeding frenzy. After several years, the case was quietly dropped by the state. Even worse fared young Germar Rudolf, a German scientist of the finest qualifications, with not a speck on his credentials and his record. He wrote a magnificent report. (Das Rudolf Gutachten, Cromwell Press, 1993.) Fred Leuchter was, prior to having his career and reputation ruined by the Holocaust Promotion Lobby, a most sought-after specialist in execution type equipment in America, as per Warden Bill Armontrout, who recommended him. Warden Armontrout testified in the 1988 Zündel Trial that there was only one consultant in the United States that he knew of in the design, operation and maintenance of gas chambers, and that consultant was Fred Leuchter. Leuchter was a highly competent, well-paid and respected man in his field - until he was ruined financially and in his reputation by the vicious attacks of the Holocaust Promotion Lobby that saw its lucrative racket, netting billions of dollars for years, challenged by the Leuchter findings. Furthermore, Leuchter was qualified by Judge Thomas as an expert witness during the Zündel trial. Any serious researcher could have verified that by checking the Zündel Trial 1988 transcripts pertaining to Leuchter's testimony[/b]. (Leuchter Testimony as summarized in Did Six Million Really Die? Report of the Evidence in the Canadian "False News" Trial of Ernst Zündel - 1988, Edited by Barbara Kulaszka, pp. 354-362) Dr. Hilberg and Dr. Browning were paid by the Government of Canada for their expertise to bolster the Holocaust Promotion Lobby claim. Browning alone got almost $25,000 for testifying against Ernst Zündel - courtesy of the Canadian tax payers. Again, Germar Rudolf, a German scientist of the finest qualifications, with not a speck on his credentials and his record, his life and career are now ruined, while Browning's fortune soared. The second charge is that Leuchter was paid by the Zündel defense - and, hence, his finding are automatically labeled to be "suspect." Of course Fred Leuchter was paid by the Zündel defense. He was hired to go to Auschwitz in a highly dramatic, secret mission while Ernst Zündel was on trial in Toronto in 1988, fighting for his freedom and reputation. There was no time or money to scout around for someone else. He was not a "fly-by-night" specialist, as has been repeatedly claimed. Furthermore, Leuchter stated at the outset to Zündel and his lawyer, before he ever went to Auschwitz, that he [Leuchter] believed the Auschwitz gas chamber claim, and if he found it verified, then he would state so under oath and in his report. Zündel still engaged and sent him because he was sure of his facts and counted on Leuchter's professional integrity. Leuchter went. He saw. He came back a much-enlightened man. Read what he had to say. (Leuchter, Fred A. The Leuchter Report: The How and the Why. Journal of Historical Review 9, (1989): 133-139.) So Leuchter was paid for his work. So what? Who paid for the Pressac investigation and book? Who paid for the Beate Klarsfeld Foundation? Who paid for the study of the Zündel case condensed in a book called "Hate on Trial"? (Gabriel Weimann and Conrad Winn, Hate on Trial, Mosaic Press, Oakville, 1986) Do these two facts, that Leuchter was paid, and that Leuchter did not have the necessary "rubber stamps" to do the work he did negate scientific findings that can be double-checked and verified? When Leuchter was asked what stood in the way of someone being paid to malign his (Leuchter's) scientific findings, Leuchter stated simply: "Anyone who would do that would risk his professional standing." Will there be highly reputable professionals in the engineering field willing to come forward and replicate what Leuchter did? We will just have to see. The truth is, revisionist reality is pretty grim. Right now in Germany, if a scientist verifies the Leuchter findings, that scientist loses his job and goes to prison. For this reason alone, you won't see too many people volunteering to tramp to Auschwitz with their own engineering gear.

Oh my, just how wrong can one be? Revisionists DO have scientific and physical evidence to back up their claims. What they have evidence for I have boldfaced below. (The sources are cited in parenthesis.) The truth is, more and more historians and engineers have been challenging the widely accepted Auschwitz story. These "revisionist" scholars do not dispute the fact that large numbers of Jews were deported to the camp, or that many died there, particularly of typhus and other diseases. But the compelling evidence they present shows that Auschwitz was not an extermination center, and that the story of mass killings in "gas chambers" is a myth. A key Holocaust document is the "confession" of former Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höss of April 5, 1946. Although "it is still widely cited as solid proof for the Auschwitz extermination story", it is actually a false statement that was obtained by torture. Many years after the war, British military intelligence sergeant Bernard Clarke described how he and five other British soldiers tortured the former commandant to obtain his "confession." Höss himself privately explained his ordeal in these words: "Certainly, I signed a statement that I killed two and half million Jews. I could just as well have said that it was five million Jews. There are certain methods by which any confession can be obtained, whether it is true or not." (Source: Rupert Butler, Legions of Death (England: 1983), pp. 235; R. Faurisson, The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1986-87, pp. 389-403.) Even historians who generally accept the Holocaust extermination story now acknowledge that many of the specific statements made in the Höss "affidavit" are simply not true. For one thing, no serious scholar now claims that anything like two and a half or three million people perished in Auschwitz. The Höss "affidavit" further alleges that Jews were already being exterminated by gas in the summer of 1941 at three other camps: Belzec, Treblinka and Wolzek. The "Wolzek" camp mentioned by Höss is a total invention. No such camp existed, and the name is no longer mentioned in Holocaust literature. Moreover, the story these days by those who believe in the Holocaust legend is that gassings of Jews did not begin at Auschwitz, Treblinka, or Belzec until sometime in 1942. At the postwar Nuremberg Tribunal, the Allies charged that the Germans exterminated four million people at Auschwitz. This figure, which was invented by the Soviets, was uncritically accepted for many years. It often appeared in major American newspapers and magazines, for example. (Source: Nuremberg document 008-USSR. IMT blue series, Vol. 39, pp. 241, 261.; NC & A red series, vol. 1, p. 35.; C.L. Sulzberger, "Oswiecim Killings Placed at 4,000,000," New York Times, May 8, 1945, and, New York Times, Jan. 31, 1986, p. A4. ) Today no reputable historian, not even those who generally accept the extermination story, believes this figure. Israeli Holocaust historian Yehuda Bauer said in 1989 that it is time to finally acknowledge the familiar four million figure is a deliberate myth. In July 1990 the Auschwitz State Museum in Poland, along with Israel's Yad Vashem Holocaust Center, suddenly announced that altogether perhaps one million people (both Jews and non-Jews) died there. Neither institution would say how many of these people were killed, nor were any estimates given of the numbers of those supposedly gassed. (Source: Y. Bauer, "Fighting the Distortions," Jerusalem Post (Israel), Sept. 22, 1989; "Auschwitz Deaths Reduced to a Million," Daily Telegraph (London), July 17, 1990; "Poland Reduces Auschwitz Death Toll Estimate to 1 Million," The Washington Times, July 17, 1990.) It is often claimed that all Jews at Auschwitz who were unable to work were immediately killed. Jews who were too old, young, sick, or weak were supposedly gassed on arrival, and only those who could be worked to death were temporarily kept alive. But the evidence shows that, in fact, a very high percentage of the Jewish inmates were not able to work, and were nevertheless not killed. For example, an internal German telex message dated Sept. 4, 1943, from the chief of the Labor Allocation department of the SS Economic and Administrative Main Office (WVHA), reported that of 25,000 Jewish inmates in Auschwitz, only 3,581 were able to work, and that all of the remaining Jewish inmates -- some 21,500, or about 86 percent -- were unable to work. (Source: Archives of the Jewish Historical Institute of Warsaw, German document No. 128, in: H. Eschwege, ed., Kennzeichen J (East Berlin: 1966), p. 264.) The Auschwitz gassing story is based in large part on the hearsay statements of former Jewish inmates who did not personally see any evidence of extermination. Their beliefs are understandable, because rumors about gassings at Auschwitz were widespread. Allied planes dropped large numbers of leaflets, written in Polish and German, on Auschwitz and the surrounding areas which claimed that people were being gassed in the camp. The Auschwitz gassing story, which was an important part of the Allied wartime propaganda effort, was also broadcast to Europe by Allied radio stations. (Source: Nuremberg document NI-11696. NMT green series, Vol. 8, p. 606.) Of course, we also have survivor testimony. Former inmates have confirmed that they saw no evidence of extermination at Auschwitz. An Austrian woman, Maria Vanherwaarden, testified about her camp experiences in a Toronto District Court in March 1988. She was interned in Auschwitz-Birkenau in 1942 for having sexual relations with a Polish forced laborer. On the train trip to the camp, a Gypsy woman told her and the others that they would all be gassed at Auschwitz. Upon arrival, Maria and the other women were ordered to undress and go into a large concrete room without windows to take a shower. The terrified women were sure that they were about to die. But then, instead of gas, water came out of the shower heads. Auschwitz was no vacation center, Maria confirmed. She witnessed the death of many fellow inmates by disease, particularly typhus, and quite a few committed suicide. But she saw no evidence at all of mass killings, gassings, or of any extermination program. (Source: Testimony in Toronto District Court, March 28, 1988. Toronto Star, March 29, 1988, p. A2.) America's leading gas chamber expert, Boston engineer Fred A. Leuchter, carefully examined the supposed "gas chambers" in Poland and concluded that the Auschwitz gassing story is absurd and technically impossible. Leuchter is the foremost specialist on the design and installation of gas chambers used in the United States to execute convicted criminals. For example, he designed a gas chamber facility for the Missouri state penitentiary. In February 1988 he carried out a detailed onsite examination of the "gas chambers" at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek in Poland, which are either still standing or only partially in ruins. In sworn testimony to a Toronto court and in a technical report, Leuchter described every aspect of his investigation. He concluded by emphatically declaring that the alleged gassing facilities could not possibly have been used to kill people. Among other things, he pointed out that the so-called "gas chambers" were not properly sealed or vented to kill human beings without also killing German camp personnel. (Source: The Leuchter Report: An Engineering Report on the Alleged Execution Gas Chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek (Toronto: 1988).) There is plenty of evidence the Holocaust revisionist's have that support their claims. Due to time contraints, I won't take the time to post or list them all, such as: Telltale aerial photos, absurd cremation claims, German Camp regulations, and the fact that [Heinrich Himmler] had ordered that the death rate absolutely must be reduced. As I stated in an earlier post: The only way a bee can escape from a spiders web is when the main threads of that web have been broken. The story of the Holocaust has proven itself to be a web woven from lies and deceit. It's main purpose is to extort only more $$$ from people still caught in it's web. Today, nearly everyone has heard of Auschwitz, the German wartime concentration camp where many prisoners -- most of them Jewish -- were reportedly exterminated, especially in gas chambers. Auschwitz is still widely regarded as the most terrible Nazi extermination center. The camp's horrific reputation cannot, however, be reconciled with the facts. The Auschwitz extermination story originated as wartime propaganda. Now, more than 40 years after the end of the Second World War, it is time to take another, more objective look at this highly polemicized chapter of history. The Auschwitz legend is at the core of the Holocaust story. If hundreds of thousands of Jews were not systematically killed there, as alleged, then one of the great myths of our time collapses. Artificially maintaining the hatreds and passions of the past only prevents genuine reconciliation and lasting peace. Holocaust Revisionism promotes historical awareness and International understanding. That is why Holocaust Revisionism is so important, and - it deserves your support - not scorn.

It appears the question of the day is: What motivates a "revisionist? The question was initially asked by someone who readily admits they "don't know enough" about holocaust history ... so likewise "they don't know" what is behind the motiviation for all the debate over the Holocaust. One might logically conclude that education is the sole the motivation for Holocaust revisionism, but we all realize there is a much deeper issue lying under the surface. What this individual perhaps is not aware of (like I believe most American's probably aren't aware of either) is that currently being reviewed by committees in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate is the: Simon Wiesenthal Holocaust Education Assistance Act. If passed, it would provide select organizations nationwide with competitive grants to be used to develop Holocaust curriculum guides as well as training for teachers. Believe it or not, congress is now mandating Holocaust education in grades K-12; while science and math requirements are to be dropped. New legislation would also replace arts and crafts in senior citizens' homes with workshops on "Holocaust denial". The act would distribute $10 million - $2 million yearly for five years - in federal funding to establish these programs, according to Newtonville resident Rosian Zerner, a Holocaust survivor from Lithuania who is supporting the bill. The U.S. Secretary of Education determines the recipients of the funds and the amounts of the awards. "Massachusetts should be at the forefront of this legislation," said Zerner, who has been fervently sending out letters and meeting with legislators to garner more support for the act. "Holocaust education is important because it not only stands as a symbol of what should not be repeated in history but it is also necessary at a point where there are so many Holocaust deniers." (Source: The Jewish Advocate: 7/27/07, By: Kristin Erekson) So the motivation behind this bill is apparently education. We are now being told (actually being lied to) that the Holocaust stands for a symbol of what many believe should not be repeated. We are being told that by keeping the "Holocaust" memories alive that we are helping to prevent a repetition of this in the future, but has it? Has mankind really behaved any better since this event? If it doesn't reduce the killing or the "ethnic cleansing" that we constantly hear about on the news, then why are we supporting it so strongly, i.e. to the tune of $10 million dollars, or $2 million a year over the next 5 years? Just who does it serve? These are questions that Ian Brockwell asked while writing for the American Chronicle. I wish more American's today would ask these type of questions - instead of just merely "shrugging their sholders" and casually responding with: "I don't know what motivates a Holocaust Revisionist." Perhaps the better question one should ask is: "Why do people fear those who debate the Holocaust?" In fact, that was the title of Ian Brockwell's article which appeared in the American Chronicle as recently as: 6/18/07. A reprint of the article is below. I have put in bold lettering what I believe helps answer the quesion: What motiviates a Holocaust revisionist? (My comments are in brackets [].) Why do people fear those who debate the "Holocaust"? Source: American Chronicle By Ian Brockwell, June 18, 2007 It is perhaps human nature for some of us to question historic events, [revisionists] this might simply be because it is an interesting subject to discuss, or because some of the facts do not appear to add up. Take the JFK assassination for example, could one lone shooter really have done it? We are asked to believe the government's version of events, but they won't release records that could prove it. What do they have to hide? Many believe the 9/11 'attack' was an inside job, and there is certainly evidence to suggest that the official explanation is questionable. But once again, information is withheld and there is surprise when people become suspicious. Religion is also a topic that always attracts heated discussion, as people argue about their faith. There are of course many other examples that could be presented, and whilst questioning the aforementioned subjects might upset some, the important thing is that you can! And by allowing such debates to take place, it is possible for both sides to state their case (as they would in a court of law). Unfortunately, some feel that the 'Holocaust' is a special subject that can not be debated in any shape or form, and should be accepted without question. Surely, if people have doubts, isn't it better to discuss these openly and try to convince them with the facts, rather than gag them? If something happened in a certain way, why be afraid of doubters if the truth is on your side? However, as many are already aware, to deny that the 'Holocaust' ever existed can result in a prison sentence, and some are sitting in prison right now for doing just that. If these same people had stated that the WTC was not destroyed by Islamic terrorists, they would be walking around free. [Most undoubtedly would believe they were crazy - but no one would incarcerate or put them in prison for what they believed.] Is this not a denial of the historical 'facts' as well, which involved the deaths of a large number of people? In many cases it is not the 'Holocaust' that is in question, but the numbers involved. Some believe that the total of 6 million is not accurate and there appears to be some evidence to support this. Some may argue that the numbers are not that important, and the extermination of 200,000 Jews would be just as horrific as 6 million. Whilst I agree that both would be equally terrible, is it so wrong for people to seek confirmation of this figure, in order to eliminate any doubts they may have? We are told that by keeping the "Holocaust" memories alive we are helping to prevent a repetition of this in the future, but has it? Has mankind really behaved any better since this event? If it doesn't reduce the killing or "ethnic cleansing" we constantly hear about on the news, why do we support it so strongly, and who does it serve? Would it not be better to target those who are really responsible for these crimes (governments, certain businessmen and dictators), rather than throw members of the public into prison, or brand them as anti-Semitic, because they dared to ask questions? If reminders of the past do not prevent the horrors of the future, we should look for an alternative way of achieving this. Perhaps, after more than 60 years, the 'Holocaust' should be allowed to take its place in the history books, along with other such tragic events. The Russian's lost many more millions during the Second World War, but they have learnt to live with their losses and move on. Sadly, we can not turn the clock back. This does not mean forgetting the past and pretending it never happened, but accepting that it did and that those responsible are longer around or have been brought to justice. Punishing future generations for an event they had no hand in is not the way to move forward, and will only create more hatred and new problems. I once asked the question why a new 'Holocaust' memorial in Germany only remembered the Jews that were killed, and not the "other" 5 million who shared the same fate. The reply I was given was "They can build their own memorial if they want to". Perhaps others would have responded differently, but this person gave me the impression that the memorial was for the sole benefit of Jews and not a reminder to the rest of the world that a "Holocaust" is wrong no matter who the victims are. I was of course immediately branded an anti-Semitic for bringing up the subject, but the question remains. Are 'Holocaust' reminders designed to help protect all races and religions from such an event, or not? Censoring people's thoughts does not make them go away, they just resurface later, much stronger and often more violently than before. Let the people have their say and try to win the battles with words, not censorship, accusations or prison sentences.

Did you or did you not say this, WW? YOU DID. So quit denying it. Remove the parenthesis from WW's quote and what do we have? (You can do this with a parenthesis to quickly establish the truth of what has been said. That's a basic rule of grammer, dont'cha know.) What WE have is: but it seems that every Holocaust denier ... is a VPW defender. That's the point WW was making and still is making from his initial post. Quit back-peddling WW. If what you initially wanted to say really was, "it seems that every Holocaust denier on the GSC is a VPW defender", then you certainly wouldn't have used a parenthesis and you certainly wouldn't be back-peddling now to make your point. YOU purposely used a parenthesis to imply and implicate that every Holocaust denier is also a VPW defender, - then you went on and used the parenthesis to single out "certain" GSC posters that YOU happen to believe are Holocaust deniers & VPW defenders. But that's no surprise to me anymore than this is a surprise: You (and others here) are also promoting and parroting the same claim on GSC the Holocaust Promotion Lobby is promoting every where else - which is: Holocaust Revisionist=Holocaust Denier, because holocaust revisionism jeopardizes the agenda of the Holocaust industry --- just like the people here who defend VPW/TWI/PFAL etc. on GSC jeopardizes your personal agenda against VPW/TWI, etc. Maybe it will come as a shock to you (and perhaps to others here) to learn: HOLOCAUST REVISIONIST'S DO NOT DENY THE HOLOCAUST! So why are they labeled: "Holocaust deniers" by the Holocaust Promotion Lobby if they don't deny the holocaust? [Here's a simple analogy - This is like Trinitarian's claiming: "People who don't believe in the Trinity also deny Jesus Christ!" It's not always true non-trinitarians deny Jesus Christ, they just deny the Trinitarian view of who Jesus Christ is.] Similarly: Holocaust Revisionists don't claim that Jews didn't suffer. They don't argue the fact that Jews were, in fact, unwanted in Germany, and that there was a state policy to remove them as a "parasitic people" harmful to the country. It is absolutely true that Jews were incarcerated and often treated cruelly. They were seen as the enemy, just as in our times the "Nazis" are seen as the enemy of entrenched oligarchies, as we frequently hear people being called these words that are so often said in hate: Nazi, neo-Nazi, white supremacist, anti-Semitic, etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseam. What revisionists do claim and argue is, that there was no state policy that called for the "mass extermination of the Jews" or any other unwanted minorities. The Allies, independently and singly, interrogated 26,000 functionaries of the National Socialist regime immediately after Germany's defeat, all based on the same set of questions. Some people have thought of lying for their own benefit by implicating others. That's what the Holocaust Promotion Lobby and the Holocaust industry have been doing for decades - but then, that's "par for the course" around here. WW claims there must be some "blindness" on my part, yet I see and realize this is something he has beome a master at, especailly when it advances his own agenda regardless of whom he slanders or might libel in the process. Apparently he is very perturbed by what I SEE.

Now these be "revisionists" claims you are making, Mike. Yes, you WILL BE persecuted for making those claims, and if you are any kind of true "revisionist" then you should expect this kind of treatment from others. It's like the Holocaust Revisionists who are being persecuted for making their claims. Sounds to me like the same typical "depraived human" responses to the same kind of "revisionist claims." But at least no one here has beaten you up, broken your jaw, burnt down your house, sent you letter bombs, unjustly hauled you into court, thrown you in jail, etc., etc., etc., much like they have already done to Ernest Zundel and Robert Faurisson for their "denial" of the Holocaust - or have they? Well, it wouldn't surprise me to learn there are some people here who would like to do those kind of things to you, for reasons listed below. Apparently providing an accurate record and account of TWI and PFAL history doesn't arouse too many people's interests, emotions and outrage (at least to the outside world) as does providing an accurate account and record of the Holocaust - that is, until you start stepping on the toes of those who have a specific agenda and invested interest to protect that you are putting into jeopardy. Frankly speaking, the outside world could care less about TWI and about PFAL historical accuracy. Why is that? Because there's no big $ involved in that, and nobody's pocketbook is in danger like there is when one is protecting the "Holy Blessed Holocaust".

Why guess what it [Auschwitz] was like and keep wading through the "doo doo" the Holocaust Promotion Lobby keeps peddling when you don't have to "guess" what it was like? Take this video tour with David Cole, (a Jewish individual BTW) who visited Auschwitz first hand in September 1992 - if you dare. Unfortunatly the video is broken into 6 clips as it is hosted on You Tube which has a video clip limit, and this video takes some time to completely watch. Regardless of what your opinion may be regarding the Holocaust, I think you'll find David Cole's video worth further discussion as he cuts through much of the "doo-doo" that's been out there, as he asks some very "common sense" questions regarding the Holocaust. Part 1: Part 2: Part 3: Part 4: Part 5: Part 6:

Marked down from $200 you say? I thought they were selling it 50% off - it was $299.99. OH BOY! WHAT A DEAL!!

I don't recall making any claim that these Holocaust revisionists are also poster's here at GSC. I don't even know where you got that idea. But then again, it appears that you are making "a connection" where none exists - which apparently you are very good at, especially when you drop little comments like: "but it seems that every Holocaust denier (on the GSC) is a vpw defender." I simply found that to be a ludicrous and preposterous claim - and I still do. (Apparently you consider me to be one of those "VPW defender's" though - which only goes to prove how little you know because there are many things VPW did I don't care to or want to defend.) You might have just as well gone on to say that all of these Holocaust revisionists also post here at GSC and that they are also VPW defenders simply by the comment you made earlier. I will simply go on record by saying: "There is no connection between them and VPW and TWI, anymore than there is a connection between them and the GSC." That is the point I was making and am still making. Remarkable though how you chose to respond to everything I said, except for this comment I also made: And I keep wondering ... exactly what makes you think there ever WAS a connection there to begin with? Well WW, do you care to respond to that comment or not? Probably not. And why is that? Because none of us really knows exactly what your basis is/was for drawing any connection beween Holocaust deniers and VPW defenders, regardless if they happen to post on GSC or not. Of course I realize you "conveniently" choose not to respond to that particular comment I also made, simply because you wanted to make it appear as though I were the one drawing that connection instead of you. WELL - HAVE I MADE MYSELF CLEAR NOW? Or are you still deaf? But then, with all the "noise" you make, it's a wonder anyone can hear at all.

(To the things I have bolded texed above.)

Of course, what it is all about today is: "my community" and doing whatever it takes to preserve "my community". Similarly, I find discussing the holocaust with some people today is akin to the results Marilee Martin got when she spoke at the Acadamy Award's ceremony. The "hearing community" was completely fine with her speach, but the DEAF COMMUNITY was totally and completely outraged! The deaf community actually believed "one of their own" had betrayed them, as she infringed upon their right to sign language (because she had spoken at the award ceremony instead of signing when to present the awards) and that by doing so, she jeapordized many of the legal rights of the deaf and the hard of hearing. Of course, everything would have been 'peachy keen' with the deaf community if she had gone along and signed everything instead of deciding to speak and call out the names of those who had won the awards - for the deaf community is quite content and very happy with silence. They consider signing to be their "legal" right, and for a deaf person to speak instead of sign is likewise and therefore, infringing upon their legal rights to sign. I also realize that I am speaking to a "deaf community", as it appears that the majority of the GSC community has shown that they are not at all happy with many of the things that the holocaust revisionist's have "spoken up and said" and have yet to say, even though their message is logical and clear and has been well received by those who "can hear". It is exactly like what Jesus Christ himself had said, " ... He that hath ears to hear, let him hear." Mark 4:9. But it's also like what I just stated. Today it's all about "my community" and doing whatever it takes to preserve "my community" - and every community is governed by "politics" - just like the deaf community is, dontch know. Politics are often very messy, and they frequently become very ugly. That is one reason why most people never speak up - in fact the greater stay away for that very reason. (AND TWI WAS ALL ABOUT POLITICS - JUST LIKE THE GSC IS!) Also, there are many other things I prefer to do with my time other than wrap myself up in and around all the politics of the GSC community here; simply because I have very little desire to be part of all the "nitty-gritty" that goes on around here most of the time. Most people I know are pretty bad at it anyway. I would also be very bad at it; as my skin is too thin and my opinions are far too dear - just like theirs.

Is that what this is all about? Or is it not rather to keep the Germans in perpetual mental, political, economic and financial bondage and to make them susceptible to ever new, thinly disguised blackmail schemes which have extorted over 100 Billion DM out of them for the Holocaust Lobbyists and the members of their tribe, institutions and organizations - not to forget the State of Israel? Which did not even exist at the time of the alleged crimes that were supposed to have been committed by the Nazis? The ethnic abuse of Germans and Germany must stop! The Holocaust is not, and never has been about this touted "Jewish victimhood." It is about extortion. It is about Power politics. It is about money, revenge, and hate! The German people, most of whom were not even born when the tragedy of the Second World War befell their country, have been paying huge, huge sums of reparations to the Jewish state and people - many of them beneficiaries who themselves were equally not yet born when what the world now has been taught to call "The Holocaust" took place. These German people have a right to all the facts. The Holocaust Promotion Lobby is brazenly misrepresenting their "facts" to fit its agenda of intolerance toward all those who would question its unconscionable, underhanded methods and goals, employing secret agents, slush funds, boycotts, threats and Holocaust terrorism. Sorry, but victimizing ever new generations of Germans for the misdeeds, real and imagined, of their grandfathers and soon great-grandfathers is no way to bring peace, tolerance and harmony to the world. The persecuted of yesterday have just become the persecutors of today!