What The Hey

Funny the way you can re read through this thread and notice something you missed earlier. We are talking about the holocaust, an event from over 60 years ago. I presented a couple (out of many) of Hitler's statements regarding what he thought of Jews and what he was going to do to them. All of this discussion has been about this event, and in an answer to a post of mine, you say you disagree with me, saying that there is currently no attempt to exterminate the Jewish people.

Currently? I never said anything about whether or not there were any current attempts to exterminate them. You are disagreeing with me on something I never said anything about. Or is that an admission from you that the Holocaust was an attempt to exterminate the Jewish people? After all, that is what this thread is about.

Has anybody else done what I did...go over this threads and notice something that they missed?

Again, we see someone slow to catch up to revisionist scholarship.

The Revisionist claim is: Official state policy towards the Jews in the Third Reich was emigration, not extermination.

It is true that Hitler Germany wanted to remove the Jews from the German people's "sphere of influence." The country was at war - a war largely seen as having been instigated by international banking Jewry, and Jews were seen as a corroding influence, not only financially but also racially and culturally. Hitler Germany was adamant in not wanting Jews to be part of Germany because they were held to be harmful to the fabric of an ethnically cohesive society as it was woven by Hitler. The Führer wanted the Jews "out of his face." He certainly was not fond of them.

But that is where the story stops. The Talmudic twists and gyrations some of these people still go through, when "relocation" and "evacuation" of Jews suddenly become code words for "extermination", is amazing! All of this was covered in the Zündel Trials in the minutest detail and has been laid to rest forever in the transcripts of those trials - now permanent documents in the Canadian judicial law libraries!

The Himmler Posen speech, to be even more specific, was the subject of lengthy analysis in the two Toronto Zündel trials. Minute detail can be gleaned in studying the testimony of German political scientist Udo Walendy and Dr. Robert Faurisson in the 1985 trial and in the testimony of Browning, Faurisson British historian David Irving and Mark Weber in the second, 1988, trial. (Again, the reference here is the Kulaszka book, Did Six Million Really Die?)

Of course, a little basic research on this would have gone a long way for Nizkor. Time and again, the Holocaust Promotion Lobby counts on the naivety of the reader who is not likely to check on the facts and fine-tune his thinking on what was meant by "evacuation" and "relocation." So, did the Nazis whisper in each others ears how to exterminate millions and millions of Jews? The exterminist's would also like to make this believable. Maybe so is the Easter bunny?

So now it is agreed by friend and foe alike (except by those who still need to catch up) there was no Führer order.

What is still left are two incendiary words: "Final Solution" - or, the German equivalent, "Endlösung."

Let's look at those.

It is true that the words "Endlösung" or "Final Solution" were used in reference to the Jews. So what? Does that prove anything? Does that mean "extermination"? Does a "Final Solution" to the unemployment problem mean the government is going to exterminate all the unemployed?

During the war, the phrase was used in Canada when dealing with the Japanese - and nobody claims today that Canada was planning genocidal things with reference to Orientals!

In a recent television documentary about Canada's wartime policy toward Canadians of Japanese origin, documents were unearthed that talked about "The Final Solution" to the "Japanese problem" - which was relocation, denaturalization and deportation of the Japanese from Canada to Japan.

This was exactly what Germany's policies were towards the Jews - for almost the same reasons.

The country was at war, and Jews were seen as subversive to the government and to the war effort - just as Japanese were seen as subversive to Canadian wartime policies.

In fact, Germany's policies were far less race-based and much more ideological in nature than Canada's. As a matter of fact and record, tens of thousands of Jews lived and worked in Germany during the war outside concentration camps, even in Hitler's capital, Berlin - one of them being the famous Rabbi and Zionist leader Leo Boeck, who was a practicing rabbi in 1943!

If you doubt that, check the 1943 Berlin telephone book!

...

I don't see "the revisionists" posting on this thread and commenting on what was posted here- just him.

That's a very good question. Why should the revisionists bother to post here?

The truth of the matter is - the revisionists DO want a debate.

However, that wold be: - An intellectual, up-front debate in a respected global forum. They have invited the entrenched and powerful Holocaust Lobby to do likewise.

GSC (and this particular thread) hardly qualifies as being either. Apparently WordWolf thinks GSC and this thread qualifies as being such - but then, that is his problem.

Despite WordWolf's problem, there exists a global discipline called Revisionism. Its aim is to shed new light on certain widely accepted but never scrutinized claims regarding certain aspects of World War II, including claims pertaining to the Holocaust. (i.e. one of those aspects would be the gas supposedly used to exterminate the Jews - specifically HCN or Zyklon B - it's trade name.) Revisionists all over the world have worked very hard, for decades, unearthing documents and inspecting forensic evidence so as to bring history in accord with the facts - not in accord with myth and emotion.

The aim of the exterminists however, is always to explain history in accord with myth and emotion. Afterall, what would the holocaust be without that "mystical Nazi gas chamber?" One might as well ask, "What would Christmas be without Santa Claus? Christianity be without the Trinity?" Traditional Christianity and Christmas would take on a completely different view without those stories. To no one's surpirse, traditionalists always feel very uncomfortable whenever their views and their stories are challenged. Likewise the exterminists have many "stories" to explain their version of the Holocaust, just as there are many stories to explain to you the Trinity and Santa Claus.

And he's skipped over several things. That's his choice, and he's entitled to stick with it, but it's rather silly of him to pretend he's not doing it, and to attempt to obfuscate that by mentioning other people elsewhere are discussing it, which has nothing to do with whether he looks at video footage, for example.

That's merely your assumption. Just because I have not addressed everyone's conern at GSC or in this thread does not imply or indicate I have "skipped over" several things. On the contrary, I have spent a lot of time scrutinizing things the exterminists have not even yet considered themselves. The truth of the matter is, people here (as well as other places on the Internet) are very slow to catch up to revisionist scholarship. As I stated earlier, that is your (and their) problem, not mine.

...

(again, everything else WW says after this is just more monkees flying out his ...)

I'll go on record saying that I'd be amazed if anyone but WTH thinks this is me putting any significant effort into something. As for WTH thinking the Holocaust is a "lie", "myth", or any type of religion, he's entitled to think that, but we're entitled to examine the evidence more closely. Such as, everything we've mentioned in the thread that he's skipped over, such as footage from the sites, and discussions of non-Jews who said what they saw, and bore the serial #s on their skin.

The revisionists have already covered and discussed many of the issues you have mentioned, i.e. footage from other sites, Holocaust survivor testimonies, etc. - issues that have been brought up here - by you and by others elsewhere. (GSC and this thread is not the only disscussion board on the Internet discussing the Holocaust.) So truly, nothing has been "skipped over" like you claim they have. Apparently you have NOT examined the evidence more closely - like you claim you have done. (Anybody can make a claim, but the proof is in the pudding.) WW says he's entiled to examine the evidence more closely, but to the contrary - he's been very slow to catch up.

Exactly WHO's believing something false is really not that difficult to determine. If one is really honest and trying.

No disagreement there. I just have a hard time believing the exterminists version regarding the Holocaust. (Of course they portray themselves as being honest and trying). When confronted with revisionist evidence however, they move the goal posts (skip over that evidence) so they can continue to appear honest and trying. But they too, are very often - "slow to catch up".

A) Still not putting in SIGNIFICANT effort, let alone "a lot."

B) I never said anything about adding more education on the Holocaust. However, since the subject's been raised, I believe WTH himself has provided the

strongest evidence that some REAL education on this subject needs to be introduced in some places.

Thanks. (I also realize you never said anything about Holocaust education or the need for more eduction on the Holocaust on this thread, or even at GSC.) I am just thanking you for at least recognizing and being honest enough to realize I have provided the strongest evidence more education on the Holocaust is needed. (But as I have also raised the issue earlier, this is becoming increasingly difficult because of the "Holocaust denial laws" and the "thought police" currently enforicing those laws.) And yes, this subject is being introduced and discussed in other places - not just here at GSC. This chat board is too emotionally charged to discuss many issues rationally, such as the Holocaust.

Otherwise, you get what we've seen on this thread....

Emotionally charged responses ... not necessarily rational ones.

Myself, I think education in general could always use some improvement, and that's when things are less dire than this....

And when people make things "less dire than this" that is usually when they state they have examined all the evidence.

It may be a minor point.. but that's not exactly the description I'd be pleased to see in my own personal resume, or on my tombstone either..

If I were an amateur mathmatician. and I came up with a new version of the multiplication table..

I suppose I'd be "vilified" as well.

Very doubtful. You might be thought of someone who is "crazy", but not many would physically assault you, send you a mail bomb, or burn down your home because of your beliefs.

9 times 9 is not 81.. it's 156.

Kind of a remarkable point you are making using mathmatics - the point being revisionist scholarship has actually decreased that 6 million figure by a rather large and significant amount instead of increasing that figure. (We revisionists prefer to leave those mathmatics up to the Holocaust exterminists.)

Moreover, I would like to believe DECREASING the amount of Jewish people reported as being killed [or exterminated] by Nazi Germany during WWII would actually be a good thing - not necessarily a bad thing - ESPECIALLY for Jews! But the truth is, increasing the number of Holocaust victims is the mathmatical by-product of the Holocaust exterminists. Sorry. You simply can not blame the revisionists for doing what the exterminists themselves have done - and apparently they still are doing. I suppose you need further proof of this.. Well, let me run these figures by you then.

Not many US Citizens are aware of a current bill in Congress that will require and make Holocaust education (barf - whose version?) mandatory and will eventually end up costing the US tax payer $10 million over the next 5 years or so. But not many US citizens I believe are willing to discuss these "Holocaust mathematics are they - mathmatics based on $$$" and just what precisely it is going to cost - eventually. (Personally, I believe it will ultimately end up being a figure much more than $10 mil. if that bill becomes law.)

cmon, you smart guys.. we need some independent investigation here..

can you imagine.. in a court of law..

"mr. ham, what are your qualifications to make such an assertion.."

I'd better have a pretty convincing argument, and a degree from Harvard.. or Oxford..

The state of Indiana once was considering establishing the constant Pi as 3. Not the customary 3.14159265....

The "poor, vilified" professor who asserted this.. well, the results were proven to be unfounded and false. Poor, persecuted, destitute (probably didn't hold much of a job after such a claim) MARTYR..

only thing I can say.. if someone wants to be a martyr, there are a lot better causes looking for one, other than holocaust denial, or desecration of the numer Pi..

As previously noted: Fred Leuchter intially went to Auschwitz to PROVE the holocaust claim. He would have testified in court against Ernest Zundel if what he saw corroberated the "orthodox version of the Holocaust". He went, he saw - but came back a very much enlightened man. But then again, you are entirely missing the point - which is the point of someone who is being truthful, regardless if you happen to think they are or not.

There were plenty of people througout history willing to become martyr's for Jesus Christ as well. Are you now suggesting the reason they decided to become martyr's is because He [Jesus Christ] didn't have the proper degree's in Christian theology? We all know today Jesus Christ never had any degrees - whatsoever - and yet he claims he spoke the truth. HOW DARE HE MAKE THAT CLAIM! (Whose version of the truth was he speaking, anyway? His own?) [sounds very familar to me - very similar to the "third degree" the Judge was giving Fred Leuchter regarding his degree.]

Afterall, it was Him-Jesus and no one else who made the claim He was the Son of God - and Jesus certainly had no proof (or degree to prove) he was the Son of God either! So how would someone today prove and substantiate the claims that He [that Jesus Christ] made - that He truly is the son of God?)

You may as well say that is precisely the reason why many people have become martyr's for Christ - because the claims Jesus made were false as he had no "doctorate degree in theology" - and as a result many people ended up and were also likewise deceived by Him and that is why they became martyrs. But then again, these be preposterous and ludicrous claims you be making! Why?

Because no one decides to become a martyr for a lie that they believe in!

Just who are you trying to kid with all your "double talk" anyway?

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?

.....

Leuchter- who claimed expertise in an area he was a layman in and got caught pretending he had credentials-

I agree with you only in the sense that Leuchter did not gain a degree specific to his work, however --- he became an expert from his work, and everyone knows that. Unavoidably, Leuchter became a target of Jewish activists, and it was only a matter of time before prison wardens stopped hiring him. In Massachusetts, he was prosecuted and threatened with jail for practicing engineering without a license. (The Massachusetts prosecution was instigated by Beate and Serge Klarsfeld and their stooges, who also sent private circular letters to prison governors in the United States suggesting that they cease hiring Mr Leuchter. This is how they operate.) He was victimised, assaulted, and prosecuted at the instance of local Jewish bodies on the hardly relevant pretext that he had been practicing as an engineer without proper registration (as did over half of that state's engineers!)

The Feb. 1990 Atlantic Monthly described Leuchter as: “the nation’s only commercial supplier of execution equipment…A trained and accomplished engineer, he is versed in all types of execution equipment. He makes lethal-injection machines, gas chambers, and gallows, as well as electrocution systems…”

The New York Times, a few months later called Leuchter the “nation’s leading adviser on capital punishment.”

Author Stephen Trombley in his book on US capital punishment writes:

“America’s first and foremost supplier of execution hardware. His products include electric chairs, gas chambers, gallows, and lethal injection machines. He offers design, construction, installation, staff training, and maintenance.”

Missouri State Penitentiary Warden Bill Armontrout referred to Leuchters expertise to Zundel’s attorney.

(I realize close minded individuals like you do not like what is said in the Leuchter Report, but you're too late to do much about that). Many tens of thousands of copies of what has become known simply as the Leuchter Report are now in circulation around the world. It has been published in numerous countries and languages. Earlier this year, for example, it appeared for the first time in Russian in a collection of Revisionist writings published in Moscow. More recently, it was published in Hungarian in the August 25 issue of the Budapest intellectual journal Hunnia.

During the last two years, unfortunately, there has been no let up in the bigoted campaign to discredit Leuchter's work and reputation, and to destroy his career -- all because of his courageous refusal to lie about his professional findings. What his enemies want, apparently, is for Leuchter to violate his conscience, betray his profession, and to lie under oath in a court of law, all for the sake of upholding what has become, in essence, an article of religious belief. It is fair to say that no American has suffered more for his defiance of the Holocaust lobby than Fred Leuchter.

The most insidious (and effective) effort has been has been a behind-the-scenes campaign to destroy his livelihood by pressuring state governments to stop employing him as their execution hardware engineer. To allow Leuchter to continue working for the state, declared Illinois Representative Ellis Levin (D-Chicago), "would be an affront to the Jewish community." (Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, August 17, 1990.) Sadly, these underhanded efforts have been successful. The Chicago Sun-Times newspaper, for example, confirmed (in August 1990) that "the state [of Illinois] cut its ties with him over statements that Nazi gas chambers, including those at Auschwitz, could not have been used for executing Jews."

In spite of the clearly unfair and bigoted nature of the campaign against him, the normally vociferous champions of civil liberty and freedom of speech in America have, so far, anyway, been noticeably silent about this case.

An important propaganda weapon in this campaign has been a book published jointly by the Klarsfeld Foundation and a group that calls itself "Holocaust Survivors and Friends in Pursuit of Justice." This book bears the pretentious title: Truth Prevails: Demolishing Holocaust Denial: The End of 'The Leuchter Report'.

The most important charges made against Leuchter, which are also included in this widely distributed book, are:

• First, that Leuchter's motive in concluding that the alleged gas chambers were never used to kill anybody was the professional fee he received from Zündel for his work.
  
• Second, that Fred Leuchter has no qualifications as an execution equipment specialist, and
  
• Third, that he lied under oath in the 1988 Zündel trial.
  

What are the facts? Let's take a close look at each of these charges.

First, Leuchter's motives in conducting his forensic investigation of the alleged wartime gas chambers in Poland were entirely professional. While it is true that he was paid a standard fee by Zündel for his work, it cannot be stressed enough that Leuchter was chosen to carry out this investigation not because of any pre-existing views on this subject, but solely because he was the acknowledged expert in this field. His political views or social attitudes were never a consideration. (Just imagine what Leuchter's critics would be saying if he had conducted his forensic examination of the Polish camps on his own initiative, without charge.)

Before he flew to Poland to begin his investigation, Leuchter warned Zündel that if he concluded that the alleged extermination gas chambers were, in fact, used to kill people, or could have been so used, he would so testify in court. Zündel agreed to this condition. Regardless of his findings, Zündel would still have been obliged to pay Leuchter his fee.

In fact, if money and comfort had been primary considerations, and if he is as dishonorable as those who now attack him insinuate, Leuchter would simply have pocketed his fee from Zündel, and then told the court what the prosecution and the media wanted to hear.

Second, Leuchter's qualifications as a technical expert and inventor are actually quite impressive. His adversaries never tire of repeating that his only academic credential is a bachelor's degree in history, which he earned at Boston University in 1964. This has never been a secret.

What is not so well known, though, is the full story of his expertise.

For one thing, Leuchter did post-graduate study in celestial navigation mechanics at the Harvard-Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Since 1965, he has worked as an engineer on projects having to do with electrical, optical, mechanical, navigational and surveying problems. He holds patents in the fields of optics, navigation, encoding, geodetic surveying and surveying instrumentation, including patents on sextants, surveying instruments and optical instrument encoders.

From 1965 through 1970 he was the technical director for a firm in Boston, where he specialized in airborne, opto-electronic, and photographic surveillance equipment. He designed the first low-level, color, stereo-mapping system for use in a helicopter, which has become an airborne standard.

In 1970, he formed an independent consulting firm. During his period with this firm, he designed and built the first electronic sextant and developed a unique, light-weight, compact and inexpensive optical drum sector encoder for use with surveying and measuring instruments. He also built the first electronic sextant for the US Navy. He has worked on and designed astro trackers utilized in the on-board guidance systems of ICBM missiles.

Because of his work in navigational devices he has had hands-on experience with surveying and geodetic measuring equipment and a thorough knowledge of map-reading and cartography. He is trained in reading and interpreting aerial photographs. He designed a computerized transit for surveying use, and several years ago he developed the first low-cost personal telephone monitor.

During the past 14 years, Leuchter has been a consultant to several state governments on equipment used to execute convicted criminals, including hardware for execution by lethal injection, electrocution, gassing and hanging. In the course of this work, he designed a new gas chamber for the state of Missouri, and he designed and constructed the first lethal injection machine for New Jersey. Leuchter has also been a consultant on execution procedures. He has held a research medical license from both state and federal governments, and has supplied the necessary drugs for use in execution support programs.

In 1987, he formed Fred A. Leuchter Associates, a consulting engineering firm specializing in general consulting and the design and construction of prototype hardware. He has been a forensic engineer consultant, and has testified as an expert in courts in the United States and Canada.

(On a more personal note, Fred Leuchter is an accomplished pianist and musician, as well as a certified small arms instructor and NRA expert marksman.) More to the point,Leuchter's expertise in precisely the field of execution hardware is a matter of public record, and has been authoritatively and publicly confirmed.

Indeed, no one was better qualified to carry out his investigation. At that time, Leuchter was recognized as the foremost American expert on the design and fabrication of gas chambers and other hardware used to execute criminals in the United States. He has worked on and designed facilities used to kill condemned criminals with hydrogen cyanide gas, the same gas supposedly used to kill many hundreds of thousands of Jews at Auschwitz.

Leuchter's expertise as the nation's foremost specialist of execution hardware, including gas chambers, has been abundantly confirmed. William Armontrout, warden of the Missouri State Penitentiary, testified on this matter during the 1988 "Holocaust Trial" of Ernst Zündel. As warden, Armontrout supervised the state's execution gas chamber. He testified under oath that he had consulted with Leuchter on the design, maintenance and operation of the Missouri gas chamber, and confirmed that, to the best of his knowledge, Leuchter is the only such consultant in the United States.

Leuchter's expertise has also been recognized by prominent periodicals, including The Atlantic in a four-page article in its February 1990 issue. An article in the weekly national news magazine Insight of July 2, 1990, called Leuchter, "the nation's leading expert in the mechanics of execution." Finally, Leuchter's expertise was acknowledged on the ABC television news program "Prime Time Live," broadcast on May 10th, 1990, and by The New York Times in a prominently featured article in its issue of October 13, 1990, which was accompanied by a front-page photo of Leuchter.

No matter what the long-term outcome of the still unfolding Leuchter affair may be, the indisputable fact will remain, that on the basis of a careful on-site inspection, the man who is America's acknowledged foremost expert on gas chamber technology has categorically declared under oath that the alleged mass extermination gas chambers were never used, and never could have been used, as execution devices.

With regard to the third charge -- that Leuchter lied under oath in the 1988 Zündel trial -- it might first be pointed out that the laws of physics have not been suspended for the sake of the Holocaust story. To repeat:

1. If Leuchter is wrong, it should not be difficult to prove it.
   
2. If he is right, his work and findings will stand the test of time - and his courage will be vindicated.
   

At the 1989 IHR Conference, Leuchter dramatically called for a neutral, international commission of engineers, historians and scholars to go to Auschwitz and the other camps, and to either confirm or repudiate his findings. Not surprisingly, those who have been trying so hard to silence and discredit Leuchter have ignored his challenge. Indeed, the very nature of this insidious campaign, including the unwillingness of his adversaries to seriously come to grips with his work, implicitly confirms the soundness of Leuchter's findings.

In this regard, it is highly significant that Leuchter's findings have recently been authoritatively corroborated and confirmed:

First, the Institute of Forensic Research in Krakow, Poland, corroborated Leuchter's findings in a confidential September 1990 forensic report. Although it was not meant to be made public, Revisionists were able to obtain a copy. An English-language translation of the complete text was published in the Summer 1991 issue of the IHR Journal.

Second, Austrian engineer Walter Lüftl explicitly endorsed Leuchter's findings in a March 1992 report, which appears elsewhere in this issue of the Journal.

Third, German engineer Germar Rudolf, a highly qualified professional, has thoroughly supported Leuchter's findings in an exhaustive report that will probably be published in 1993. (Sorry about this old excerpt which was discussed prior to 1993. In 1994, Rudolf was sentenced to 14 months in prison by the district court of Tübingen because of the "Rudolf Report", as Holocaust denial is a crime in Germany. Rudolf avoided prison by fleeing to Spain, England and finally to Chicago, USA. There, he applied for political asylum, but his request was denied).

Another German engineer, Wolfgang Schuster (Dipl.Ing.), pointedly defended the validity of Leuchter's findings against the criticisms of French pharmacist Jean-Claude Pressac in a five-page essay published in the German quarterly journal Deutschland in Geschichte und Gegenwart (Tuebingen, June 1991).

There you have it folks.

At least three highly qualified engineers have substantiated the validity of Fred A. Leuchters findings - but Mr. Wordwolf and Mr. Hammeroni are still apparently having a lot of difficulty with those facts.

(Some others here are having difficulty too, because many people at GSC apparently respect these two windbags personal opinions - because of what was said in a court of law?)

OK. If what is said in court, and if these three qualified engineers aren't enough to convince anyone -- we DO have the testimony of someone under oath in a court of law - Dr. William B. Lindsey giving his testimony. (Note very carefully the specific italicized and underlined section below:)

Finally, it is worth noting that Dr. William B. Lindsey, an American research chemist (now retired) who was employed for 33 years by the Dupont Corporation, anticipated Leuchter's findings during testimony given in the first Zündel trial in 1985. Based on his own careful on-site examination of the alleged extermination gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau and Majdanek, and on his years of experience as a chemist, Lindsey declared under oath: "I have come to the conclusion that no one was willfully or purposefully killed with Zyklon B [hydrogen cyanide gas] in this manner. I consider it absolutely impossible." (The Globe and Mail, Toronto, Feb. 12, 1985, p. M3.)

(Conclusion: We NOW have three qualified engineers, as well as the testimony of someone else (besides Fred Leuchter and William Armontrout) testifying under oath in a court of law substantiating Leuchter's findings. But we are supposed to believe all three individuals (Mr. Fred Leuchter, Mr. William Armontrout, and Dr. William Lindsey - all three of them, delibertly purjured themselves in court? Apparently this still isn't enough to convince Mr. Wordwolf and Mr. Hammeroni though. I'll go on record saying they are putting forth a whole heck of a lot of effort just to believe a lie.)

In spite of the vicious campaign against him, Leuchter has remained defiant and confident of ultimate vindication. As he has put it:

I have been vilified by the caretakers of the Holocaust dogma whose desperate tactics prove the failure of their arguments. My livelihood has been destroyed, my character has been impugned and my life turned upside down. But I will not bend the knee: Not now, not tomorrow, not ever. Time and reason will vindicate the Leuchter Report.

One day, after the dogmatic passions of our era have given way to open-mindedness on this most emotion-charged of issues, Fred Leuchter will be admired as a most remarkable man of integrity and courage who defied powerful forces of bigotry and close-mindedness. He will be remembered as a man who, in striking a mighty blow for historical truth and understanding, has himself made history.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1992-93 (Vol. 12, No. 4), pages 421-428.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you truly doubted Mr. Leuchters credentials, then I am fairly certain that you would have contacted Fred A. Luechter yourself to satisfy your own curiosity on the matter, and not simply take anybody else's word for it.

1. Mr. Luechter is an engineer specializing in gas chambers and executions.
   
2. He is well versed in all areas, and he is the only consultant in the United States I know of.”
   

(I highly doubt anyone here will call Mr. Luechter or his associates to make an inquiry about his credentials. The reason I doubt that is because I already know no one here is even up to the challenge of calling the US Holocaust Museum to find out if there truly is any physical evidence, war time documents, etc., at any of the Holocaust Museums in the US - for pretty much the same reason. That reason would be you are afraid to face the facts and change you're belief in the "Holy Blessed Holocaust" religious myth).

....

(every thing else said was just more monkeey's flying out your ....).

....

Fred Leuchter is a crackpot. He claims he's an expert in areas he's a hobbyist in, and most REASONABLE people can tell the difference.

Apparently you have never read: The Fourth Leuchter Report. Your claim of Leucther being a crackpot apparently stems from a book written by Jean-Claude-Pressac, [author of: "Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers"] a pharmacist, who ... (as stated in the Leuchter report)

although a first-rate researcher, is blinded by a belief, so strong, that he sets aside the fundamental laws of physics in which he, as a technician (pharmacist), definitely has been trained, and draws conclusions which certainly cannot logically result from the data he has massed. ... The conclusions reached are fallacious, the translations are at times questionable and often taken out of context, and the opinions stated are clearly erroneous. Mr. Pressac shows at times that he is capable of clear, logical thought but, with a true 'doublethink' mentality, manages to destroy all his fine work while he 'undistributes his middle.'

Except for the clearly erroneous final conclusions and propaganda, the book is an excellent piece of work. Jean-Claude Pressac demonstrates himself as a fine researcher and archivist. Unfortunately, he fails in the technical department. I [Fred Leuchter] would have expected his background and training as a pharmacist to have acquitted him well in this area but, unfortunately, it does not. He demonstrates a complete lack of competence as a technician. His logic tends to be good until he reaches his final conclusion. His greatest error, where he lacks the technical competence, is his failure to consult with someone more competent than himself. Although this might be a problem in the area of Execution technology, it certainly is not in the area of heating, air handling, plumbing and construction. His failure to get help in these areas in inexcusable.

This review will begin with the specific items which Mr. Pressac puts forth to support his thesis and the reasons why they do not stand the test of logic. A subsequent consideration will be made of each chapter, in turn, discussing the documentation, its import and meaning.

I could continue on to print the entire fourth Leucter report inside of this post just to bring you up to speed, but you can read it for yourself. But if you really wanted to bring yourself up to speed, I'm sure you would read all the Leuchter reports. Here is a link to the fourth one. The Fourth Leuchter Report

As Mr. Leucter states in his report, "The problem still remains that none of these facilities had hardware which could support gas executions. This review will begin with the specific items which Mr. Pressac puts forth to support his thesis and the reasons why they do not stand the test of logic. A subsequent consideration will be made of each chapter, in turn, discussing the documentation, its import and meaning.

Pressac's photos are included for clarification in the original report, but due to copyright infringement problems, they could not reproduce Pressac's maps, technical drawings and photos for use on-line. In the report Mr Luecter states: Please note the direction of flow on the gate valve as designated by the arrow. The flow is backwards, the valve would leak and the operator [the Nazi Holocaust exterminator himself] would die.

Here's a news flash for you - and one doesn't have to have become an engineer or have an engineering degree to be able to understand this. Gas chambers used for execution are constructed and made of steel. Logic would dictate that if the Nazi's really wanted to kill the Jews using gas chambers then they would have used steel gas chambers. The gas chambers they used had wooden doors. Wooden doors leak. Again, the Nazi's would have killed themselves in the process while they were exterminating the Jews by gas. Fred Leucther goes on to say in the report ...

Hydrogen Cyanide [Zyklon B] will always leave blue stains if it is effectively used, unless the walls are painted steel or of some other inert, non-porous material and washed down with ammonia or bleach after every usage. Pressac claims that because of the short exposure time and low temperature the HCN [Hydrogen Cyanide or Zyklon B] would only have had time to leave traces on metal hardware and not the brick and mortar. This is incorrect. We know from experience that brick and mortar will pick up cyanide quicker than metal. Mr. Pressac seems to have his facts backward, again. I [Fred Leuchter] would suggest that he study the American Execution System to see what really occurs. The concept that delousing gassings leave blue stains and people gassings do not, is ludicrous.

I don't have to ask anyone just who the real "crackpot" is here - Mr. Fred Leuchter or Mr. Pressac. One will have to read the Leuchter report and simply decide for themselves, won't they?

I have a LAYMAN's interest in science, but nobody's going to put me in charge of a science department at a university because I'm not a degreed scientist- an "expert".

Furthermore, when he went into court, he tried to pretend he HAD the credentials that qualified him as an expert, and since he had none, his testimony was shot.

Wrong. Mr. Leucther's testimony is not shot - moreover, his testimony has made history and is continuing to make history. In fact, it was Mr. Leuchter's testimony in court that conviced Mr. David Irving (Mr. David Irving is a noted British historian) to change his pre-conceived conclusions regarding the Holocaust. (As a noted and admired historian, David Irving previously supported the "othodox version" of the Holocaust.) But again, you're parroting the same old media propaganda regarding Mr. Leuchter's "degree". (I thought we covered this issue a few posts ago.) Fred Leuchter also responded to that accusation by the media. It was the media who came up with that accusation BTW, [not the court] and Mr. Leuchter's response to that accusation is on-line (I found it on the web a few days ago) but I don't have the time to look it up and post a link to it right now.

Hamm doesn't have to "have a beef" with someone to acknowledge they are a FRAUD-

meaning they claim to HAVE training in an area in which they LACK training.

I hardly think that Media propaganda qualifies as proof of someone being or not being a FRAUD.

Hamm's not an expert either.

But degreed, licensed experts HAVE made their own reports- and since the results

are not to your liking, your verdict is "false report!"

Apparently you also missed the post where Mr. Fred Leuchter's finding's at Auschwitz have been qualified and verified by engineers with impecaable degrees, i.e. Walter Luftle for example. (Boy are some people slow!) I'm not a certified electrician and I don't claim to be one either, but I have installed electrical switches, outlets and also run electrical wiring and conduit in my home and I know they are all "up to code." I also don't mind if a certified electrician comes by my house and inspects the wiring, etc., because I know they are all up to code as any certified electrician can confirm that they are.

Read The Fourth Leuchter Report and decide for yourself who the crackpot is - Mr. Leuchter or Mr. Pressac. Do yourself a bigger favor and read them all and become educated and logical.

....

I won't take the time to respond to all the rest of your dribble. Later, much later - when monkeey's fly out of your ... oh never mind.

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.)

I sttill don't think you quite understood what I said..

oh well..

People tend to do a pretty good job demonizing themselves.. make wild claims without proper qualifications..

then wonder what hit them..

I have made some unsubstantiated or unqualified claims before, and been asked for some verification..

Of course you have. I don't doubt you have made unsubstantiated and unqualified claims before. However Leuchter's claims have been qualified and substantiated by engineers with impeccable degress, engineers such as: Walter Luftle. (Review points made in: post# 243 and 236) In 1987, he formed Fred A. Leuchter Associates, a consulting engineering firm specializing in general consulting and the design and construction of prototype hardware. He has been a forensic engineer consultant, and has testified as an expert in courts in the United States and Canada.

More to the point, Leuchter's expertise in precisely the field of execution hardware is a matter of public record, and has been authoritatively and publicly confirmed. Leuchter's expertise has also been recognized by prominent periodicals, including The Atlantic in a four-page article in its February 1990 issue. An article in the weekly national news magazine Insight of July 2, 1990, called Leuchter, "the nation's leading expert in the mechanics of execution." Finally, Leuchter's expertise was acknowledged on the ABC television news program "Prime Time Live," broadcast on May 10th, 1990, and by The New York Times in a prominently featured article in its issue of October 13, 1990, which was accompanied by a front-page photo of Leuchter.

In this regard, it is highly significant that Leuchter's findings have recently been authoritatively corroborated and confirmed: The Institute of Forensic Research in Krakow, Poland, corroborated Leuchter's findings in a confidential September 1990 forensic report. Although it was not meant to be made public, Revisionists were able to obtain a copy. An English-language translation of the complete text was published in the Summer 1991 issue of the IHR Journal.

it can be rather embarassing..

but I never stood before a judge and claimed I was some kind of expert and been called on it by a court..

Of course, that judge would be Judge Ron Thomas. What Mr. Hammeroni is failing to recognize is it was Judge Ron Thomas who decided Leuchter was qualified as an expert in the design, construction, maintenance, and operation of gas chambers. Leuchter was allowed to give his opinions on the operation and suitability of the various facilities to function as execution gas chambers.

that would be a little more than embarrasing.

Apparently what Mr. Hammeroni is having a problem with and is still stumbling over are the reports by the media. In October 1990, the state of Massachusetts brought criminal charges against Leuchter for representing himself as an engineer without a license. Leuchter says he was a victim of selective prosecution, since only 10% of engineers are actually licensed.

What were the repercussions? 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. The situation only worsened for Leuchter. In his speech given to the eleventh IHR conference in October of 1992 he told of his imprisonment by the German government. But still, with lack of funds, lack of work, a slandered name, Leuchter would not renounce his study. As Leuchter stated himself at the IHR conference:

I repeat for the record: I was condemned for maintaining that there were no execution gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau, Majdanek, Dachau, Mauthausen, or Hartheim Castle. There's no proof for the charge, only innuendo, lies, and half-truths. Robert Faurisson, Ernst Zündel and others said this first. They, too, live as victims of botched executions, but nevertheless free to speak the truth in a strong and growing voice that repeats: No gas chambers, no gas chambers, no damn gas chambers! ...

Because I was somewhat naive at the time, I was not aware that by so testifying I was offending the organized world Jewish community. By providing final, definitive proof that there were no execution gas chamber utilized for genocidal purposes by the Germans at these wartime camps, I established the simple fact that the Holocaust story is not true. What I did not know was that anyone expressing such beliefs is guilty of a capital crime: that of thinking and telling the unspeakable truth about the greatest lie of the age.

I would have to pay for this crime. While I innocently told the truth in Toronto, plans were made, and subsequently implemented, for a major effort to destroy me. If I could be destroyed and discredited -- so the reasoning went -- no one would accept my professional findings, no matter how truthful.

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.

Brown skirts. Brown Shirts. ... Can you see the connection? ;)

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.)

Maybe you didn't quite understand me.

What I was saying, was..

MAYBE you were actually in the camp in a previous life, and the experience was so bad, you can't consciously bring to yourself to realize how bad it really was..

:)

maybe not anybody else, but it makes sense to me..

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.

Here is my explanation why someone would adamantly deny that the Holocaust ocurred..

I wish someone asked, but I'll offer it unsolicited..

a person would have to step outside of traditional beliefs.. enter if you dare..

The person lived through it once, either as a victim, or as a perpetrator.. and the experience was so excruciating, so harrowing, so troubling.. that they can't consciously consider what happened.. even a life or two later..

Laugh if you want.. but it's the best I have, for me, at the moment.. and it is subject to change..

:)

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?

I really don't have a whole heck of a lot of respect for someone who wants the title.. vainly tries to substitute a curriculum of what they can do vs. what they can't..

*mr* leuchter said he didn't have the opportunity to to acquire a degree in SOME kind of engineering at the school he attended..

and it was a bald faced lie..

they offered three different engineering programs..

sure.. the most prestigious university you can think of is gonna skip the requirements for a guy who has a vested interest in death..

doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

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.

Right now in Germany, if a scientist verifies the Leuchter findings, that scientist loses his job and goes to prison.

------

Would it seem too imposing of me to ask for some sort of reference for this statement?

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

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/l/leucht...as-witness.html

I'd say if anybody "ruined" him, he did it to himself. He had a perfect scam in the US, claiming he was some kind of expert.. to the extent they even let him maintain said equipment once in a while.

Of course, after this publicity, they called him on the credentials. It would be like finding your neurosurgeon was really the janitor at the hospital..

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.

Sorry, he's not an engineer. Doesn't even have an engineering degree. Hasn't done any of the post grad engineering study either.

...

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.

If "revisionism" indicates the attempt to explore and understand evidence that things didn't happen according to the official and/or accepted story, then why make that a bad term? That process of course is different than the promoting the "things just don't add up' theory and seeking to explain something without evidence. ...

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.

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.

...

While I certainly wouldn't call myself a "revisionist" since I don't believe I know enough about the holocaust history to make an attempt to revise, I'm also sure I don't know what motivates a revisionist...I suppose my question regarding the holocaust would not so much be the numbers or even the other groups of people involved ...

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 [].)

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.

but it seems that every Holocaust denier (on the GSC) is a vpw defender.

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.

...

NOR is it the case that I simply (as you put it) “promote your personal agenda here at greasespot...”

What I have to offer is not my personal impressions, but the actual record: book, magazine, and tape. It’s not simply my personal agenda, but a SPEAKING UP that we need to look at the actual history, the facts of what we were taught, and not trust our HUMAN memories so much.

***

....

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".

We've been dealing with quite a pile of doo doo, haven't we.. I'm glad for one thing.. at least one of us here admitted working with a pile of mixed emotions about all this. :)

Sometimes.. I think I am as much of a sham.. as much as I try to put myself in the shoes of those who endured horrific stuff and understand.. sometime, all I can do is guess what it was like..

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:

I did not notice any responses about Stevie K. A couple of years ago or three, ted Ferrel mentioned she was teaching music in Colorado. I did not locate her, but that was the last I read here.

O a;lso just saw this:

http://cgi.ebay.ca/RARE-OBSCURE-XIAN-FOLK-...6QQcmdZViewItem

someone in Wichita is selling "Love Child" 33rpm record of hers for $149.00 (marked down from $200)

~HAP

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

So, apparently, Arthur Butz, Bradley Smith, etc, are all posters on the GSC, since WTH replied to my comments-which were specifically flagged to refer ONLY to the GSC in case someone was skimming or lacked the wit to contextualize properly- by saying they applied to these people.

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.

I don't make that connection. I believe a person can believe in Revisionist thought, without hating the Jews. The Revisionists believe that the Holocaust, or various parts of it, was not true. That belief is not necessarily equal to or means that one hates Jews. It "can" mean that, but it would depend on other factors too. Its just not fair to label someone as hating a whole race/religion of people because he may have different views on what occurred in the past.

(To the things I have bolded texed above.)

I'm still curious why there are people who keep saying that vpw was neither anti-Semetic, nor pro-Nazi in any way, and never taught along those lines, and yet the only times we EVER see ANYONE denying the millions of Jews and non-Jews imprisoned and killed for the "crimes" of being different by Nazi Germany during World War II,

these are people who are enthusiasts of vpw, and feel the need to defend both the public image of vpw and the public image of Holocaust denial.

Here's a logical question for you WW - that is, if you can provide a logical answer to it [which is doubtful]: Just how are all these Holocaust revisionists, (i.e. Arthur Butz, Bradley Smith, Fred Leuchter, John Ball, Keith Stimely, Germar Rudolf, Norman Finkelstein, etc., etc., etc., etc.) all these people who have never ever heard of VPW before, nor have they ever been affiliated with TWI - have now magically become enthusiasts of VPW and are somehow defending his image?

Is this connection supposed to be accidental?

And I keep wondering ... exactly what makes you think there ever WAS a connection there to begin with?

I'm not saying every vpw defender is a Holocaust denier, but it seems that every Holocaust denier (on the GSC) is a vpw defender. (I expect there may be some vpw defenders who are NOT Holocaust deniers, but there don't seem to be any GSC Holocaust deniers who are NOT vpw defenders.)

I fully realize what you are saying. What you are saying is: Every holocaust denier = a VPW defender.

But that too, is a preposterous claim, as the handful of the few people I listed above have likewise never heard of GSC, nor are they affiliated with the GSC community either.

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.