What The Hey

THE BIG LIE Hitler writes in "Mein Kampf" (MURPHY translation: page 134:) "All this was inspired by the principle - which is quite true in itself - that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes. From time immemorial. however, the Jews have known better than any others how falsehood and calumny can be exploited. Is not their very existence founded on one great lie, namely, that they are a religious community, whereas in reality they are a race? And what a race! One of the greatest thinkers that mankind has produced has branded the Jews for all time with a statement which is profoundly and exactly true. He (Schopenhauer) called the Jew "The Great Master of Lies". Those who do not realize the truth of that statement, or do not wish to believe it, will never be able to lend a hand in helping Truth to prevail." And that was written in the year 1925, describing the situation after the First World War! But I also would like to mention some of the additional consequences that evolve from the multi-faceted big lie. Whenever one confronts someone wrapped-up in this net of lies, the discussion usually goes something like this: "Well, you mean the 6 million is a lie?" "Yes, it is a lie for many reasons, and that is proven. It had been peddled before. In a recent book entitled "Keystone of the New World Order: The Holocaust Dogma of Judaism," the author, Ben Weintraub makes the point that the number has, in fact, mythical significance because it is based on cabalistic sources. (Weintraub, Ben, The Holocaust Dogma: Keystone of the New World Order, Cosmos Publishers, 1994) "But what about the Final Solution order, that existed?" "No, that too, is a lie. 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? "But we have seen all the gaschambers! They are everywhere!" "Those are forgeries, built after the war. In point of fact, the British Ministry of Information at first requested British clergy to help spread the "gas chamber" story which was planned to be put in circulation by the Ministry. (Rozek, Edward J., Allied Wartime Diplomacy, pp 108-110. John Wiley and Sons, New York ) However, from the start, it was judged to be too problematic and bizarre and, therefore, it was quickly withdrawn as a potential strategic embarrassment. "But there are so many Jews whose relatives were gassed!" "Yet no one has ever really seen that. There would have been no hesitation to use the story of the "gassings" even during the war - had it been plausible. However, even during the war, the leadership of the Allied Nations - such as Churchill and Roosevelt as well as those of the Catholic hierarchy, including the then-Pope Pius XI - knew from their various intelligence agencies, spies on the ground, inmates with radio transmitters inside various camps (including inmate soldiers, inmate priests, even those who took confessions of local military, police and guard personnel) that no organized mass exterminations by gassing or any other means were going on inside these camps. "But one can see all those mountains of corpses in documantary movies." "Many of them, as has been proven, were victims of the bombing terror unleashed over German cities. Many people, without a doubt, were killed in the chaos of war and resulting starvation - inconcivable in today's minds." And question upon question from people keep coming: question #6, #7, #8, ... ad infinitum and ad nauseam. The answer is always: lies, lies and more lies. However that doesn't work very well; as people simply cannot believe that. They can't imagine such a monstrous lie could exist, and hence, they only see the revisionsits as nothing more than fanatics who want to deny everything, trying to turn all bad events into good deeds. It is impossible to remove every little detail from the minds of the indoctrinated masses. Therefore I believe that it is important to dispute the large dogmas like the 6 million, or the gaschambers which is easier today than at Galilei's time of the "orbiting sun"! Along with the repetitious screems of the old lies, the weapon of silence is used rather sucessfully in combating counter-evidence. It is very crucial to emphasise the importance of propagating revisionist evidence and research materials, even if the politicians of our nations are total and complete puppets, subservient to the Dark Powers, who never miss an opportunity to affirm their guilt complex draped in nebulous dogmas, even banning the doubting of the official governments as ". . . indisputable facts which need no evidence". Like a bee caught in a spidernet, it can only escape by jerking and breaking the main threads of the net, so we must tear through the prime lies of the Holocaust. But I also realize that very few people today are concerned about nor are they looking for the truth. At least they aren't concerned or looking for it any longer. What they are only concerned about and are looking for is censorship. What Revisionists are offering is the state of the art on Revisionism as it stands of right now. The final word is not yet in; it will come when more people in all kinds and sorts of disciplines will kneel into the murky matter of the "Holocaust" and find out for themselves exactly what is and what isn't true.

The exterminationist's are always left with a lot of "pins" to juggle. But like any poor juggler, they just keep dropping them. Although you might be wondering: Just exactly what difference does any of this make in the real world? I am going to suggest what difference it does make. In the real world. Today. If the Germans did not have weapons of mass destruction, the Jews of Europe were not "holocausted." The story would be a fraud. If the Jews of Europe were not "holocausted," it would be a fraud to use that non-event to morally justify their conquest and occupation of Arab land in Palestine to create a Jewish state there. If the United States Congress had not bought and paid for Israel for the last 60 years, using a fraud to morally justify it, Arab fanatics would not be able to morally justify - in their own eyes - their attack against America on 9/11. If Arab fanatics had not attacked New York City and Washington on 9/11, Americans would not be able to use a weapons-of-mass-destruction fraud to morally justify our conquest and occupation of Iraq. And there we are. A red, bloody thread that reaches from the German gas-chamber fraud to the Iraqi gas-chamber fraud and to the horror of the American campaign in Iraq where more than half a million - more than half a million! - Iraqi civilians have been maimed, crippled and killed for what the American Government tells us is a "greater good." But let's not talk about or discuss this "holocaust" either - the great taboo. Ask yourself: how many enemies did America have in the Middle East before Israel? How many enemies do we have now? And all of it morally justified because of a demonstrable fraud? There is a moment when cinema becomes quietly dangerous, when it becomes a studied revolt against the good-that is, against what we are told is morally right for us to believe, and that we must believe because - it is morally right.

Just what difference would it make to you (or anyone else) as to what I think it is? Why don't you just be honest and say, "I don't want to take the time to become educated and make my own conclusions as to what really happened - yea or nay." Apparently for someone like you to become educated, one would have to read a whole lot of "bombastic b.s." But I already realize what you're saying. Your saying the Germans allowed those "news-casters and film-makers" to bring their camera's in and also allowed them to capture footage while they were executing all those innocent human beings. Yep, I'm sure that's exactly what those German's did and how it really all happened back then. Any further questions?

Ah yes, there's always someone bringing up: The Great Taboo! --- the great taboo regarding writers and film makers, that is. Theater, like all art - and cinema is certainly theater - is dangerous to the culture in which it comes to life because it is oftentimes a revolt against what is held to be morally right by those who rule, and what has been accepted as being morally right by those who are being ruled. "Cinema-as-art" can be, and in some cases must be, a rebellion against what culture holds to be morally right. We call our documentary The Great Taboo. The great taboo is meant to suppress, censor, and punish those who express doubt that during World War II the Germans used weapons of mass destruction (gas chambers) to murder millions of innocent, unarmed civilians. It is considered morally right to believe in the unique monstrosity of the National Socialist German Worker's Party (Nazis), and morally wrong to suggest that they were fully human in the same way that, in America, Democrats and Republicans are fully human, no matter how many people we kill, or how we kill them. It is well known all over the world that during World War II Americans used weapons of mass destruction - great fleets of heavy bombers and nuclear bombs - to intentionally murder masses of innocent, unarmed civilians in all the cities of Germany and Japan. But let's not discuss that. Today we're only being permitted to talk about the "Holocaust" and about what those nasty: "Nazi Germans" did. The great taboo is meant to suppress the fact that German Nazis are held to one standard of justice and morality, while American Democrats and Republicans are held to a different one. The great taboo argues that while German Nazis were monsters for intentionally killing innocent, unarmed civilians for a "greater good," American Democrats and Republicans who did the same are heroes - indeed, we often speak of ourselves as: "the greatest generation." And finally, the great taboo is exploited to suppress, censor, and imprison writers and film makers who argue that it cannot be demonstrated that the Germans actually had weapons of mass destruction, unlike Americans who clearly do, and who no one claims do not. So... what difference does any of this make? It makes a difference because it goes to the heart of what is morally right, and what is not. The first weapons of mass destruction fraud morally legitimated the creation of a Jewish State on Arab land in Palestine. We all know what has come of that one. The second weapons of mass destruction fraud was used to morally legitimate the invasion of Iraq by the United States. We all know what has come of that one. And now, of course, there are the weapons of mass destruction being planned by the Iranian Government. Maybe they are, maybe they are not. Are we going to trust the United States Government to tell us the truth about Iranian weapons of mass destruction? The truth is, the only State in the Middle East that actually has weapons of mass destruction is Israel. But in the United States, that is never talked about. Never. It too, is part of: The Great Taboo. During the 1990s, Bradley Smith published essay advertisements in student newspapers at universities around America. His first full-page revisionist essay-advertisement ran in The Daily Northwestern, the student newspaper at Northwestern University near Chicago. It appeared on April 4, 1991. It was titled "The Holocaust: How Much is False?" The text was some 2,700 words. The text of this essay is online. For the first time on an American university campus, core revisionist arguments challenging the orthodox Holocaust story were outlined in a university publication. Every observation made reflected a commonplace revisionist argument. (...) Among them were these. It cannot be demonstrated that the German State had a policy to exterminate the Jews of Europe, or anyone else, by putting them to death in gas chambers or by killing them through abuse or neglect. It cannot be demonstrated that 6 million Jews were "exterminated" during WWII. It cannot be demonstrated that homicidal gas chambers existed in any camp in Europe which was under German control. It cannot be demonstrated that the awful scenes of the dead and emaciated inmates captured on newsreel footage at Dachau, Buchenwald and Bergen-Belsen-were the victims of intentional killing or intentional starvation. It cannot be demonstrated, as the Holocaust Industry claims, that there are "tons" of captured German documents which prove the mass murder of Jews and others in homicidal gas chambers. It cannot be demonstrated that, as was claimed during war crimes trials, that Jews were cooked to make soap from their fat, or skinned to make lampshades from their hides. It cannot be demonstrated that during the war the Red Cross, the Pope, humanitarian agencies, the Allied governments, neutral governments, and prominent figures such as Roosevelt, Truman, Churchill, Eisenhower all knew about "gas chambers" but really did not want to talk about it. (...) Yep, there it was - for the whole world to see. Standard Holocaust revisionist arguments. Nothing original.

I never said anybody here ever made that claim. The fact remains however: that is indeed a claim people have made regarding the holocaust as to what Nazi Germany did to the Jews. I was simply pointing out a fact I believe many people here (and also people out in the world) are probably not aware of. I am not claiming anybody here ever made this claim, regardless of what "you claim" I said. Gee, for the "intellectual type of person" you want to portray yourself to others, I certainly thought you were able to read better than that. HOWEVER ... if I were going to insisit upon anyone here making any kind of absurd claim about the holocaust, then that would be the same claim many people out in the world (those who are not GSC members) have already made and are still making. What claim is that? It is the claim that 6 million Jews were exterminated by Nazi Germany in the manner that "people claim" they were. The "Holocaust deniers" have already respond to that particular claim with: "It has been proven both scientfically and physically impossible to exterminate 6 million Jews in the manner that "people claim" Nazi Germany did." I realize I have repeated myself, but differently - unlike the "pro-Holocaust" people regarding "their claims". AS YOU YOURSELF SO APTLY PUT IT FOR THEM: when discussing the millions of people the Nazis imprisoned, many of them for the "crime" of being Jewish, and the subsequent execution BY the Nazis for that "crime" ... etc., etc., etc. Yes sir. People everywhere (not just here at GSC) are holding onto that "Holocaust" claim as if it were the truth - just as if it were their daily bread. The Holocaust is not true. The Holocaust is more like this "song" some people started a very long, long time ago. What kind of song is it? this is a song that never ends. It goes on and on my friend. Some people started it not knowing exactly what it was, and it will continue going on forever just because ... this is a song that never ends. It goes on and on my friend. Some people started it not knowing exactly what it was, and it will continue going on forever just because ... this is a song that never ends. It goes on and on my friend. Some people started it not knowing exactly what it was, and it will continue going on forever just because ... this is a song that never ends. It goes on and on my friend. Some people started it not knowing exactly what it was, and it will continue going on forever just because ... (the second verse is the same as the first) ... this is a song that never ends. It goes on and on my friend. Some people started it not knowing exactly what it was, and it will continue going on forever just because ... this is a song that never ends. It goes on and on my friend. Some people started it not knowing exactly what it was, and it will continue going on forever just because ... this is a song that never ends. It goes on and on my friend. Some people started it not knowing exactly what it was, and it will continue going on forever just because ... this is a song that never ends. It goes on and on my friend. Some people started it not knowing exactly what it was, and it will continue going on forever just because ...

I believe the title of this thread is: "What gives Holocaust denial such an appeal?" Actually that is a very good question that very few people today have an answer for - and why is that? Because the more appropiate question to ask is, why do people still need to believe in the Holocaust? Yep. WE need to believe the Nazi's murdered and exterminated 6 million Jews - despite the fact it has been proven to be both scientifically and even physically impossible for them to have done so. WE need to beleive that the Germans turned human beings into "human soap" and "human lampshades" - and by golly, we'll damn all those who dare to question any of our incongruent and absurd conclusions about it! There will always be those people who try to lock the barn door long after the horse has bolted. Why is that? Because locking the barn door gives them a sense of security even though the "horse" is no longer there. Forget about talking "horse-sense" with them or even into any of them, because it's not about someone having any "horse-sense" anymore - what it's really about today is: whatever makes me feel secure! SO I BETTER BE SURE TO LOCK THAT BARN DOOR! Yes, being and feeling secure is certainly one of our basic human needs. We all need to feel secure and have a certain sense of security. But the question that is hardly ever asked is - where does one derive their sense of security? Does your sense of security come from believing the truth. or does it come from believing a lie? If your sense of security comes from a lie, then you'll hang on to it and hold on to it like it was your daily bread. And that's the reason why some people's arguments never seem to die or go away, because behind that argument is usually a lie that helps them feel secure. It was Jesus Christ who said, "Leave them alone, for they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, shall they not both fall into the ditch?" But nobody's listening or taking his advice too much at all. I know that for a fact, because people today are still pretty much stuck in the same old ditch that Jesus talked about over 2000 years ago. But one day you might wake up and realize that Jesus Christ indeed spoke the truth. You'll come to realize that when you see people who are still stuck in the same old arguments that they have had with one another and with their neighbor - day in and day out - day after day, week after week, year after year, and they have only gotten and gone nowhere. But let's forget about the fact that I'm still stuck in the same old ditch (the same old argument) that I've had with you and with my neighbor for decades. Let's not talk about me or focus solely upon me. Let's talk all about you, shall we? I wonder just how far we will go this time.

An arguement that only comes off sounding like: "Dont confuse me with the facts!" just because I find it unacceptable that someone who is born in Germany today doesn't even have the right to critically examine his or her own country's history? Yet one can deny the Holy Trinity, the Virgin Birth and even the Resurrection of Jesus Christ - but the so-called Holocaust has become a state-mandated article of faith to the point in which even the questioning of the manufacture of bars of soap and lampshades out of human tissue by the National Socialists has become a punishable offense for anybody who dares to question any absurd, incongruous aspect of their history. I know that wasn't something you really wanted to hear, was it? It is more convenient for you to remain confused by the facts. But it is the Jews who have a very real problem. They have lied on a colossal scale. In the process they have deceived many of their own people as well as the world. Of course the political repercussions would be disastrous if the truth ever got out. That is the primarily reason why the "Holocaust Denial" laws exist in Germany and all over Europe today. Be grateful that you still live in the land of the First Amendment, because just about everywhere else you can be fired from your job, have your career destroyed and be turned into an unemployable social outcast. But you cannot be thrown into jail - at least not yet. That will have to wait until Michael Chertoff can classify "Holocaust Denial" as a form of intellectual terrorism. Then you can read Arthur Butz upside down while your hanging from your toes at Guantanamo Bay.

So we've gone from being an anti-Semit, a Neo-Nazi to a Potato Head, have we? Well, I'm sure you were just "speaking your mind" as a civilized person on clean paper in neat print. But let's take one common concern for example: The worries many people feel about "The New World Order." A great deal is embedded in this phrase, but simply put, it means that, in the eyes of many people, liberalism has been repackaged cleverly, yet is still plain old Communism in disguise. But why not say so in your own words? Just call a spade a spade. But to be honest, if you want to make headway then don't present yourself as having come out of the gutter. There are enough graffiti people in this world already, as any bridge will tell you. Your only kidding yourself if you really think that "somebody" is going to be intimidated by "somebody else's" political slogans.

The only question you missed was: What about the "soap" the Germans "manufactured" from the bodies of their victims? Macabre "Jewish soap" jokes became popular in the ghettos and camps, and many non-Jews on the outside came to believe the story. When trains loaded with Jewish deportees stopped temporarily at rail stations, Poles reportedly would gleefully shout at them: "Jews to soap!" Even British prisoners of war interned at Auschwitz in 1944 testified later about the wartime rumors that corpses of gassing victims were being turned into soap there. Numerous Jews who lived in German ghettos and camps during the war helped keep the soap story alive many years later. The "human soap" story demonstrates anew the tremendous impact that a wartime rumor, no matter how fantastic, can have once it has taken hold, particularly when it is disseminated as a propaganda lie by influential individuals and powerful organizations. That so many intelligent and otherwise thoughtful people could ever have seriously believed that the Germans distributed bars of soap brazenly labeled with letters indicating that they were manufactured from Jewish corpses shows how readily even the most absurd Holocaust fables can be -- and are -- accepted as fact. So to answer most of your "what about" questions, most of those stories were "manufactured" and have also been proven to have turned out to be a bunch of "soap stories." Those who advocate criminal persecution of "Holocaust deniers" are still living in the world of 1946 where the Allied officials of the Nuremberg Tribunal have just pronounced their verdict. But the Tribunal's findings can no longer be assumed to be valid. Because it relied so heavily on such untrustworthy evidence as the Hoess testimony, some of its most critical findings are now discredited. It is now well established that Hoess' crucial testimony, as well as his so-called "confession" (which was also cited by the Nuremberg Tribunal), are not only false, but were obtained by beating the former commandant nearly to death. (Rupert Butler, Legions of Death (England: 1983), pp. 235-237; C. Hitchens, "Whose History is it?," Vanity Fair (New York), Dec. 1993, p. 117.) Hoess' wife and children were also threatened with death and deportation to Siberia. In his statement -- which would not be admissible today in any United States court of law -- Hoess claimed the existence of an extermination camp called "Wolzek." In fact, no such camp ever existed. He further claimed that during the time that he was commandant of Auschwitz, two and a half million people were exterminated there, and that a further half million died of disease. ("How the British Obtained the Confession of Rudolf Hoess," The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1986-87, pp. 389-403) Today no reputable historian upholds these figures. Hoess was obviously willing to say anything, sign anything and do anything to stop the torture, and to try to save himself and his family. But for purposes of their own, powerful special interest groups desperately seek to keep any substantive discussion of the Holocaust story taboo. One of the ways they do this is by purposely mischaracterizing revisionist scholars as "deniers." But the truth can't be suppressed forever: There is a very real and growing controversy about what actually happened to Europe's Jews during World War II. The issue can only be settled as all great historical controversies have been resolved: through free inquiry and open debate in our journals, newspapers and classrooms. I doubt anything like that though will ever happen here at GSC.

So no, I am not avoiding answering your question(s). YOU just have to catch up and get your facts straight before you (and others) are willing to accept the answer.

No subject enrages the "Thought Police" more than Holocaust Revisionism. We debate every other great historical issue as a matter of course, but influential pressure groups with private agendas have made the Holocaust story an exception. Those who promote the Holocaust story complain that "the whole world" was indifferent to the genocide which allegedly was occurring in German-occupied Europe. When asked why this was the case the promoters usually respond by saying that it was due to some great moral flaw in the nature of Western man. At other times they make the absurd claim that people did not realize the enormity of what was happening. It is true that the world responded with indifference. How else should people have responded to that which they did not believe, and which for them was a non-event?

The Holocausters accuse Revisionists of being hate-filled people who are promoting a doctrine of hatred. But Revisionism is a scholarly process, not a doctrine or an ideology. If the Holocaust promoters really want to expose hatred, they should take a second look at their own doctrines, and a long look at themselves in a mirror. The Holocausters often deceptively claim that Revisionist scholarship has been proven false during a trial. The fact is, Revisionist arguments have never been evaluated or judged by the courts. Those who take up the Revisionist cause represent a wide spectrum of political and philosophical positions. They are certainly not the scoundrels, liars and demons the Holocaust Lobby tries to make them out to be. If you call me a bank robber in print and I am not a bank robber, that is called libel. If you call me a child molester and I am not a child molester, that is called libel also. If you call me in electronic print a ". . . prolific publisher of hate literature." You have just libeled me. The fact is, there are no demons in the real world. People are at their worst when they begin to see their opponents as an embodiment of evil, and then begin to demonize them. You can do anything you want to a demon. That logic will not succeed.

Did the "Holocaust" of the European Jews really occur? Is it true that during the Second World War, the Germans ordered, planned and carried out a policy of physical destruction of the European Jews? More specifically, did they design, build and use execution gas chambers for that purpose? Did they cause the deaths of millions of Jews in that manner? To these questions, the majority of writers say yes; they believe in the "Holocaust" of the European Jews. We shall call these writers "exterminationists" because they defend the thesis of the physical extermination of the Jews. To these same questions, other writers say no; these writers are called "revisionists" but it goes without saying that the revisionists do not dispute the fact that, during a world conflict which caused 40 to 50 million deaths, many Jews (the approximate number remains to be determined) died. Who is right? The exterminationists or the revisionists? ... The occasion gave me the opportunity to emphasize again what I call "one of the 20th century's great paradoxes": that millions of people, stupefied by incessant media propaganda, believe in the Nazi gas chambers without ever having seen one, without having the slightest idea of what this allegedly fantastic weapon was, without any ability to describe its shape and operation. The Nazi gas chamber is alleged to have physically existed; yet no one can provide us with a representation of it! This gas chamber is immaterial and magical. Nobody, and above all, not J.C. Pressac in his work with the misleading title, has been able in a half-century to provide us with a photograph, a blueprint or a model. .... I have had the following idea: when one deals with a vast historical problem like that of the reality or the legend of the Holocaust, one must strive to get to the core of the problem. In this case the central problem is Auschwitz and the core of that problem is a space of 275 square metres: the 65 square metres of the "gas chamber" of crematorium I at Auschwitz and, at Birkenau, the 210 square metres of the "gas chamber" of crematorium II. In 1988, my idea remained the same: let us have expert studies of those 275 square metres and we will have an answer to the vast problem of the Holocaust! ... Thus, the challenge I have made to the adepts of the "Holocaust" religion for decades remains the same: "I will be prepared to believe in the Nazi gas chamber, the central pillar of the 'Holocaust' religion, on the day you can describe 'a single one of those gas chambers' to me." Sometimes I add: "But you are unable to do so. Those chemical slaughterhouses where, according to you, one could have entered with impunity to retrieve millions of bodies out of an ocean of hydrocyanic acid were a physical and chemical impossibility. One cannot describe or draw the alleged homicidal gas chamber of Auschwitz as one cannot describe or draw a square circle or a circular square."(From the Foreward: Did Six Million Really Die?, Dr. Robert Faurisson) ---------------------------------- Here's a better idea. Why don't you ask GarthP2000 and the other "exterminationists" to describe a "Nazi gas chamber" to you? Truthfully speaking, I highly doubt that he, like many of them could or would be able to. Just like the facets of a false religion it is being shoved down people's throats while being told to accept it by "blind faith." The Holocaust is entrenched dogma, before which the people genuflect.

What other remak can one expect from someone who is parrotting the organized Jewish-Zionist corruption of our political system.

I've used both Cakewalk and Sonar. Sonar also records analog audio (wave files, .wav) as well as midi (.mid) files, so you can record vocals, guitar, or any other non-midi instrument and mix it along with your midi instrument recording(s).

Where's Libby?

That's kind of par for the course here - especially when someone has anything good or positive to say about TWI, etc.

That is the only thing you said I agree with, since much of the Holocaust revisionism has been conducted by Jewish scholars. That sort of makes your above argument for objectivity a moot issue IMO.

I agree, the numbers certainly don't matter a whole lot, especially when historians with credible reputations themselves can't agree on the exact "number." Heck I say, make up a number yourself - you might end up and be a whole lot closer to the truth then they are. Where I happen to disagree with you though is that there is currently no attempt to exterminate the Jewish people. Even if there were such an attempt, why should we be involved? As far as my personal belief about the Jews that is irrelevant. I don't consider any human being a "parasitic disease that needs to be exterminated", whether or not anyone else considers one to be Jewish or a homo. TWI did teach that "homo" was the lowest one could go on the "totem pole of humanity." However I don't recall them ever saying or teaching that about the Jews, or that they needed to be exterminated. TWI didn't even consider the homo's a "parasitic disease that needed to be exterminated." TWI just "smoked someone out" if one's conscious happened to be seared with a hot iron in that category of their life. Afterall, one chooses their sexual preference, but one's nationality, they have no say in that. But if you talked to a homo who recently got smoked out, they will probably emotionalize that experience and would tend to say and also convince others that TWI had indeed "exterminated" them. That is basic human nature and the result of two different group dynamics clashing against one another. I also believe that is largely what has been happening and what is being reported among many of the Jewish "eyewitnessess" of the Holocaust. I don't have any sources to back that all up - that is just IMHO. It is also my humble opinion the Jews deserve no special treatment or favors from us, but the government of the USA certainly showers it on them. Our world is increasingly becoming bi-polar, with the USA and Israel on one side and the rest of the world on the other. I don't believe 9/11 was just a "freak accident" that was never provoked. If you recall, President George W. Bush said on national television that "America was targeted for attack because we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world." The next day he said that "freedom and democracy are under attack," and that the perpetrators had struck against "all freedom-loving people everywhere in the world." But if "democracy" and "freedom-loving people" are the targets, why isn't anyone attacking Switzerland, Japan or Norway? Bush's claims are just as untrue as President Wilson's World War I declaration that the United States was fighting to "make the world safe for democracy," and President Roosevelt's World War II assurances that the U.S. was fighting for "freedom" and "democracy." According to a well-placed Bush administration source, "everyone in town" is now participating in a broad discussion about the costs and benefits of military action against Iran, with the likely timeframe for any such course of action being over the next eight to 10 months, after the presidential primaries have probably been decided, but well before the November 2008 elections. If you don't think our world is becoming more bi-polar - let me ask you this one simple question. How many alies does the US currently have fighting along with us and alongside us in Iraq? This war, if anything, has given American's a far less sense of peace, freedom and democracy than ever before.

Auschwitz: The Dwindling Death Toll Actually, 9 million persons were reported and documented killed in the Holocaust. That figure is according to the documentary film Nuit et Brouillard (Night and Fog, title used in the English-speaking world) (1955), whose historical advisers were the historian Henri Michel and the woman historian Olga Wormser-Migo Then .... from that 9 million figure the death toll dwindled .... 6 million went through the chimneys of the ovens of Auschwitz because one of their close or remote forerunners was of the Israelite religion" writes Tibère Kremer in his preface to a text attributed to Dr. Miklos Nyiszli, "SS Obersturmführer Docteur Mengele / Journal d'un médecin déporté au crématorium d'Auschwitz" (SS Obersturmführer Doctor Mengele / Diary of a physician deported to the crematorium of Auschwitz), Les Temps modernes, March 1951, p. 1655. ... 3,000,000 Jews gassed according to David Susskind (1986) and according to Heritage, the most inmportant Californian Jewish weekly (1993) And lately (as of 2002) there were only 510,000 persons killed, according to Fritjof Meyer (2002), of whom 356,000 were gassed Jews. What gives the Holocaust such an appeal? The same thing that gives Jerry Springer and all the other tabloids, talk shows, et. al their appeal. The Holocaust --- the invention of the quacks. (At most one of these figures can be correct, but all the rest may potentially incite to hatred, and uttering them can lead to criminal prosecution in many European countries. But most importantly, it is considered highly offensive, if not outright illegal in those countries to make such compilations in the first place.)

Remarkable that you would mention these other lobbies. Just like the National Rifle Association or the AARP, the Israel lobby relies on the traditional political weapons available to any special-interest group in pressing its agenda. Unlike these other lobbies though, it just happens to be unusually skillful and effective. As was previously stated before, "It is simply a powerful interest group, made up of both Jews and gentiles, whose acknowledged purpose is to press Israel’s case within the United States and influence American foreign policy in ways that its members believe will benefit the Jewish state.” Forensic examination of the gas chambers at Auschwitz & Majdanek has debunked many claims regarding the Holocaust. But it has become a "thought crime" for someone to express any skeptism about those gas chamber stories. It is not too surprising to find that attitude in America increasing, as it already is in many countries because of their "Holocaust denial laws." However I personally don't believe it is a thought crime to question those stories anymore than it is a crime to question U.S. support for Israel and its brutal and foolish policies toward Palistine. No, I didn't misunderstand your question. It might appear that way, until one realizes the Holocaust is merely the instrument being used to morally legitimatize the ongoing colonization of Palestinian Arab land by Jewish settlers, and it continues to be used to support Israeli policies in Palestine and to secure the funding of the Israeli military by the US Congress.

Oh.... The Israel lobby makes sure of it! Working closely with members of Congress, public-policy organizations and journals of opinion, energetic, well-financed groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the American Jewish Committee, along with dozens of political-action committees, perpetuate the myth of Israel as an isolated, beleaguered state surrounded by enemies and in need of America’s unstinting financial and military support. This lobby is particularly adept at stifling debate before it begins. Whether the issue is abortion, arms control, affirmative action, gay rights, the environment, trade policy, health care, immigration or welfare, there is almost always a lively debate on Capitol Hill. But where Israel is concerned, potential critics fall silent and there is hardly any debate at all. "The problem (as John J. Mearsheimer, a political scientist at the University of Chicago and Stephen M. Walt, a professor of International affairs at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard have argued) is that Israel has become a strategic liability with the end of the cold war and a moral pariah in its dealings with the Palestinians and, most recently, the Lebanese. Uncritical American support for its closest Middle East ally has damaged American credibility in the Arab world, encouraged terrorism, stymied the search for a solution to the Palestinian problem, and in every way made America’s international position weaker and more dangerous. It is simply a powerful interest group, made up of both Jews and gentiles, whose acknowledged purpose is to press Israel’s case within the United States and influence American foreign policy in ways that its members believe will benefit the Jewish state." Israel is not simply one country among many, for example, just as Britain is not. Americans feel strong ties of history, religion, culture and, yes, sentiment, that they both recognize, but only in an airy, abstract way. They also seem to feel that, with Israel and its lobby pushed to the side, the desert will bloom with flowers. A peace deal with Syria would surely follow, with a resultant end to hostile activity by Hezbollah and Hamas. Next would come a Palestinian state, depriving Al Qaeda of its principal recruiting tool. (They wave away the idea that Islamic terrorism thrives for other reasons.) Well, yes, Iran does seem to be a problem, but both argue that no one should be particularly bothered by an Iran with nuclear weapons. And on and on. “It is time,” as Mr. John J. Mearsheimer and Mr. Stephen M. Walt go on to say, “for the United States to treat Israel not as a special case but as a normal state, and to deal with it much as it deals with any other country.” But it’s not. And America won’t. That’s realism.

I don't think he could make anything writing a book. He didn't make anything from the first one he wrote, which leads me to believe he's done with wrting books.

I guess they shouldn't have been teaching Dealing with the Adversary or the PFAL Advanced Class then. There sure was a lot of talk about the devil and his "modus operandi" in those classes.

The Palestinians call Israel’s 1948 war of independence their nakba, or catastrophic ethnic cleansing, or forced exile. The Israelis, for their part, have steadfastly rejected any suggestion of ethnic cleansing as calumny in all its anti-Semitic horror. Historic revisionism is now under way. Without fanfare, just below the media radar screen, the Israeli Education Ministry has approved a textbook for Arab third-graders in Israel that concedes the war that gave birth to Israel was a “nakba” for the Palestinians. The textbook refers to the “expulsion” of some of the Palestinians and the “confiscation of many Arab-owned lands.” Textbooks for Jewish Israelis in the same grade make no such verbal concession. But Israel’s “new wave” historians have been combing through fresh material now available from the British mandate period and Israeli archives that document the history of Israel before and after it became a state. Long-lasting myths are being debunked.