Saturday, June 30, 2007

American far right and a German Holocaust denier

Andrew Brown of guardian.co.uk informs:
Last week, an even stranger martyr was offered for the adoration of the faithful. Dr Johannes Lerle was jailed for a year by a court in Erlangen.

You might think this was unremarkable. Dr Lerle is an unabashed and deeply anti-semitic holocaust denier. He takes the view that the only good Jew is a Christian convert. All others are children of the devil: "Jews" with scare quotes round them, to distinguish them from Christians. Those "Jews", his website explains, control the world's press, and the American government, are murderers, hypocrites, liars and bent on world domination for religious reasons. All this and more is on his website but it's in German - a language few Americans read.

And so this rabid nutcase has been taken up by elements of the American right as a hero and a martyr. William Dembski, the leading proponent of "intelligent design", has argued on his blog that the jailing of Lerle proves that advocating intelligent design would soon also be classed as a hate-crime in Europe, and punishable by jail.
More information is at Gerard Harbison's blog. Here's funny stuff: the cranks at evolution-denying blog tried to deny (hehe!) that Lerle is a Holocaust denier. Ahhh, birds of a feather...

More interesting were the comments on the wingnut Free Republic site when one of initial bogus news items about Lerle has been withdrawn. A lot of freepers tried to change the topic to the issue of the free speech in general, i.e. they're now outraged that Holocaust denial is banned in Germany. And I can certainly sympathize with that. But lots of people are prosecuted each year for Holocaust denial in Europe. Were all those freepers under a rock all this time, or is this a "face-saving" outrage?

Sunday, June 24, 2007

Meet Karl Frenzel (4)

[Continued from Meet Karl Frenzel (3)]

II.2.2.3 Frenzel’s Version

Apart from denying or playing down the excess killings he had been accused of, how did Frenzel explain his participation in the killing of at least 150,000 helpless and innocent human beings, largely women and children, at Sobibor extermination camp? Did he admit to having been the eager and enthusiastic executor that the jury court found him to have been, or did he try to portray himself in a more favorable light? In the latter case, on what basis did the court refute his defense allegations?

Friday, June 22, 2007

Just so it's absolutely double clear

'PotPie' comments over yonder

He may not have noticed that you have to enter the security code in the box before your registration will actually be entered. I forgot to do that the first time and I got an email verification of my registration but it did not actually register me. I had to start over and voila, here I am


Did that. Did that both times in fact. :-)

Just so there's no misunderstanding

On the assumption that one moderator doesn't know what the other moderator(s) might be doing, I re-registered.

Let's see how long it takes them this time to act as if I didn't.

To: holocaustcontroversies@yahoo.co.uk
Subject: Welcome to The CODOH Revisionist Forum Forums
From: noreply@codoh.com Add to Address Book
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 14:53:04 -0400

Welcome to The CODOH Revisionist Forum Forums

Please keep this email for your records. Your account information is as
follows:

----------------------------
Username: nickterry
Password: ************
----------------------------

Your account is currently inactive, the administrator of the board will
need to activate it before you can log in. You will receive another
email when this has occured.

Please do not forget your password as it has been encrypted in our
database and we cannot retrieve it for you. However, should you forget your
password you can request a new one which will be activated in the same
way as this account.

Thank you for registering.

--
Thanks, Moderator

Guys.... are you really not speaking to each other?

As one of my friends just said to me, 'Oh my freaking God!'

Over at CODOH, 'Germania' posts the following

speaking about debate, is true that terry does not allowed to join the forum?


To which 'Moderator1' replies

Terry has never registered.
M1


OH RLY?

To:
holocaustcontroversies@yahoo.co.uk
Subject:
Welcome to The CODOH Revisionist Forum Forums
From:
noreply@codoh.com Add to Address Book
Date:
Fri, 15 Jun 2007 05:41:32 -0400

#message46501081946890178977401710 { overflow:auto; visibility:hidden }
Welcome to The CODOH Revisionist Forum Forums
Please keep this email for your records. Your account information is as
follows:
----------------------------
Username: Nick Terry
Password: ***************
----------------------------
Your account is currently inactive, the administrator of the board will
need to activate it before you can log in. You will receive another
email when this has occured.
Please do not forget your password as it has been encrypted in our
database and we cannot retrieve it for you. However, should you forget your
password you can request a new one which will be activated in the same
way as this account.
Thank you for registering.
--
Thanks, Moderator
* Note *


The only thing altered above is the password, which is displayed in the email. I could even give that one up as it wasn't anything personal, in case these guys need to have a screen-shot thrust under their noses.

Now, shall we try again, Moderator1?

Thursday, June 21, 2007

CODOH Moderators, You Have 24 Hours

On Friday afternoon I registered with the CODOH Revisionist Forum, under my own name, purely so I could post a factual correction since one member (who also posts at RODOH) was making remarks about me.

In contrast to all the other members of this blog's team, I've never once set foot in CODOH forum, yet six days later there is still no follow-up email to confirm that the moderators there have activated my account. The automatic email came through, but after that, zip. Since the forum is attached to the Committee for the Open Debate of the Holocaust, one might think they'd welcome every new recruit they could get, but apparently not.

Why, even today, the most active poster at CODOH, 'Hannover', posted the following:

I even salute those who promote the standard storyline at this forum

which is pretty remarkable, since currently there is absolutely no one who accepts the "standard storyline" over at CODOH. More's the pity, since there are many at CODOH who utter some basic factual errors concerning this subject, and there is no one around to set them straight.

So, CODOH moderators, here's the deal. I'd like to have my registration activated. I don't think that's an unfair thing to ask since however you spin it, I have absolutely no history over on your forum. I haven't broken the rules on your forum because you haven't even given me the chance to. I don't intend to anyway, I'd just like to make the odd post from time to time.

Since it's been six days, I think another 24 hours are in order. After that, well, everyone can draw their own conclusions about what CODOH really means.

Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Guest Columnist

Ladies and Gentlemen, Scott Smith of Real Open Debate on the Holocaust.

Read more!
I used to write book reviews for Germar Rudolf's Revisionist before his rendition to the Bundestablishment, and I wrote a couple of movie reviews for Ted O' Keefe before the JHR got closed down.

I started the RODOH message forum back in 2003.
www.rodoh.us

Basicaly I've known Dr. Mathis for a few years now. I used to post on the old CODOH bbs and he was a reliable opponent.

Then the CODOH board was shut down and some of us started our own message boards. I didn't like the censorship policies at Hannover's "Revisionist Forum" so I started my own, called "Real Open-Debate On the Holocaust," since the CODOH bbs was defunct. I didn't invent the title but I find it ironic and even a tribute to Bradley Smith's ideas and what CODOH stands for: Open Debate.

Even though Andrew Mathis is vulgar and no friend of Revisionism or Revisionists, we have an understanding and a mutual respect, and for freedom-of-speech. I let him speak his mind on my forum and he hasn't disappointed me yet. Real debate lets the opposition have its fair say.

This has made me unpopular with some Revisionists. CODOH eventually acquired Hannover's forum as its own, and in addition to banning the opposition I am now banned from using Hannover's, now CODOH's, message board because I allow Mathis to post on mine. The two have a mutual vendetta going on.

Other than refusing to try to conceal Hannover's real name, it is not true that I collect personal information about Revisionists to make it public, which is what is said about me. Some of the anti-Revisionists that do post on my forum regularly might do so in their own personal blogs, however, which I have nothing to do with, and no control over.

Long story short--I think Dr. Mathis is quite serious in debating Hannover. Back in 2003-04 he and Paul Grubach were going to debate, but they couldn't agree on a format. Mathis did not want it published in the Revisionist and Grubach didn't want to publish it online at RODOH. So it fell though.

However, Dr. Robert Countess stepped up to the plate and agreed to debate Mathis. Eventually Mathis declined but he did arrange to have another anti-Revisionist take his place, Steve Mock, who did a fine job indeed. This was called the "Scholars' Debate" at RODOH and everybody said that it couldn't be done. Only a couple of Revisionists agreed to help me.

It turns out that Dr. Countess didn't contribute a lot and in November of 2004 told me that he was terminally ill and dropped out. That was devastating news but I was planning on continuting myself to wrap it up but then I was hit by a car while riding my bicycle home from work. Anyway, the effort was a good learning experience for me but I'm not 100 percent satisfied with our performance. One flaw in my plan was that our moderation panel couldn't get along in setting the rules (especially as to length) and I had to abandon that hat and join the Revisionist team myself or nothing would have happened.

You can read the Scholars' Debate here if you are interested:

http://p102.ezboard.com/frodohforumfrm23.showMessage?topicID=2.topic

I'm also not pleased that so many Revisionists refused to help debate when they have been making such noises about precisely this for so long.

The best way to prove Mathis wrong is for Hannover (and any Revisionists that want to help him) to engage Dr. Mathis in the challenge. Mathis is bending over backwards to make it fair. Yes, there is a personal element at work here, but Dr. Countess wasn't afraid to help the Revisionist cause.

I really think that Revisionists ought to consider this one. I don't want to get involved myself this time but I would be willing to host the matter--although Hannover may not agree to that aspect since there is some bad blood between us on account of my being banned at his forum. Dr. Mathis is flexible on the terms and it need not involve RODOH at all.

Feel free to forward this as you wish.

Best,
Scott Smith

Check it out!

Holocaust Denial On Trial, the treasure chest filled with materials from Irving v. Lipstadt trial, finally has a new face. Now all the expert reports and documents are neatly formatted and easy to read. Check it out!

Monday, June 18, 2007

Sergey the Goebbels Guy, or a Commie loon for a change

It's that Katyn issue again.

Today I've discovered old comments left by someone called "haisanlu" who tried to defend Grover Furr and Mukhin at seek-the-truth-serve-the-people.blogspot.com
Most messages seem to have been deleted from that blog, but here's Google cache. He calls me one of the "Goebbels Guys", "The anti-Russian Katyn Guys", etc. Here's his poem:
Goebbels Guys

Poem dedicated to Y I Mukhin

Defending Goebbels Lies is the task of anti- communist guys
The anti-Russian Katyn Guys - Sergei Romanov being one
Well they were having so much fun
That Goebbels himself smiled

Until a a man called Mukhin gave them all a surprise
Because 20 million dead Russians said don't bend your knee to Nazi lies
Mukhin heard this and his "Katyn Detective" nailed the lies of these Goebbels Guys

For that Mukhin wins the seeker after truth prize

Now Goebbels is feeling down and wears a frown
For Mukhin kicked him in the balls
He told the truth to us all !

There will be no 21st Century Goebbels Pall
Thanks Mukhin from us all
Take that, Romanov!!!

Read more!

Haisanlu focuses on my rejection of the alleged "Schellenberg interrogation". He repeats Furr's claim that, according to Doerries, some of the records have disappeared, but doesn't even give the page. But the main question is: who cares? If anything is missing, there is no evidence whatsoever, that these missing records contained anything about Katyn, much less Schellenberg's confession.

Here we have someone who rejects lots of authentic documents and testimonies proving that Katyn was NKVD's deed on Stalin's order in favor of allegedly unavailable records with unknown content! That's even loonier than Holocaust denial.

Haisanlu writes:

There are also personal attacks against Mukhin saying that he associates with anti semites - well I think you should read a summary in English of the Mukhin's Katyn Detective of 1995 to understand the basis of Mukhin's criticisms of the Russians who did it theory and see what Y I Mukhin's thinks of anti semites in his own words. This might also help you make up your own mind about the veracity of Mr Sergei Romanov.
Except if you search my article for "semit", you'll come up empty. What I do is show a photo of Mukhin in company of well-known Holocaust deniers Graf and Mattogno - and Mukhin is a denier himself. This should help you make up your own mind about the veracity of Haisanlu.

As for the question of Mukhin being antisemitic or not, in his books and articles he more than often uses the word "zhid", which is translated as "kike". True, he claims he doesn't mean Jews but rather some sort of parasitic social category. But the very choice of words betrays his true feelings.

In the library section on the site of his newspaper you'll find quite a lot of hardcore antisemitic literature, like "A note on ritual murders". Possibly, Mukhin himself doesn't believe in this crap, but he does keep it online.

Finally, Haisanlu wants to sway us with this powerful argument
I also give you an extract from Goebbel's Diary entry 8th May 1943 " unfortunately German ammunition has been found in the graves at Katyn .. it is essential that that this incident remains top secret. If it were to come to the knowledge of the enemy the whole Katyn affair would be dropped "

Again reading Y.I.Mukhin we can see why Goebbels was so concerned about the German munitions found at Katyn.
Um. Hello? Sure Goebbels would be concerned about the German ammo found in the graves, because common sense would've told him that this would give the Soviets a very great weapon against the German claims, and Goebbels' propaganda campaign would lose some force. As we know, though, the Germans did not hide the fact that they had found German ammo in the graves. And if Goebbels knew all along that it was the Germans who did it, why was the find such a shock to him?

Haisanlu also presents us with an outline of Mukhin's earlier book, which Western Holocaust deniers should find instructive. Mukhin's main positive argument is that absence of several thousands Polish POWs in internal Soviet documents dealing with POWs since spring of 1940 was caused not by their death, but by their change of status from POWs into prisoners. Except both Burdenko Commission report and internal NKGB report about preliminary investigation of the Katyn case always call them POWs. Moreover, the alleged "authentic" contemporary documents (like Menshagin's notebook or Vetoshnikov's report) quoted in these reports also designate the Poles as POWs. Sorry, that canard is dead.

Haisanlu then repeats all the bullshit Mukhin wrote, including his erroneous arguments about Katyn documents. E.g. Haisanlu says that the letter of Beria was dated 5.3.40, but it wasn't. There is "agreed" ("za") on the document, but Haisanlu says that there isn't. He says that Kaganovich's and Kalinin's signatures on the document are forged, because they were absent from that Politburo meeting. But exactly because they were absent, there are no signatures by Kalinin and Kaganovich - only notes by a secretary that they agreed with the decision. He says that on Shelepin's letter there is no registration number and no signature, except there is both number and a signature. Etc., etc., etc. The guy obviously doesn't know what he is writing about - just like Mukhin.

Sunday, June 17, 2007

Meet Karl Frenzel (3)

[Continued from Meet Karl Frenzel (2)]

II.2.2.2 Excess Killings

The criminal actions of which Frenzel was found guilty in this section of the judgment were considered by the court as not "just" being part of his eager and enthusiastic participation in the mass killings, but going beyond what Frenzel was supposed to do under the orders received and the camp’s regulations. Each of them was therefore held to constitute a separate count of murder in addition to Frenzel’s overall participation in the mass killings at Sobibor. Like Frenzel’s actions described in the previous part of this article, these cases of excess killings will be summarized mentioning, in each case, the charge, the court’s findings of fact, Frenzel’s defense allegations against the charge, the evidence that the court’s findings of fact were based on and eventual defense motions for counter-evidence as well as the court’s decision on such motions pursuant to Section 244 of the German Criminal Procedure Code.

Thursday, June 14, 2007

Beyond even Chutzpah

In his post of Thu Jun 14, 2007 11:34 am on the CODOH "Revisionist" forum, Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis, one of the lowliest pieces of garbage in the "Revisionist" cesspool, treats newcomer "Potpie" to yet another session of his hollow and cowardly breastbeating:

For Roberto Muehlenkamp / aka Cortavagatas, simply use our search function for Muehlenkamp and read, there's plenty of debate with him here. The poor man never had a chance.


One wonders why, if I "never had a chance" against "Revisionist" brilliance, poor Hargis found it necessary to delete all those posts of mine, which I have collected on this thread, among others, and eventually ban me from his lovely place.

Or why, if "Revisionists" have such superior arguments, so few of them show up for real open debate on uncensored boards like RODOH and the biggest mouth of them all, Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis, never dares to leave his warm and cozy Führerbunker.

Not all "Revisionists" gratefully swallow "Hannover" Hargis’ mendacious bragging, however. Some of them have realized what the fellow is all about. One of these is Mr. Wilfried Heink aka "neugierig", who in his RODOH post 18-Dec-2006 19:29 wrote the following:

I agree, Herr Muehlankamp, those guys over there are not entirely honest. Banning you and others and then performing victory dances is beyond even chutzpah. Hopefully this new poster, if he is new, will soon realize that dissenting views, if you will, are verboten.

As far as pointing him to RODOH, the name can not be mentioned, it is deleted. One of my posts was totally distorted, I dared mention RODOH, should have copied it, which almost made me quit that forum. Anyway, who knows, perhaps this lost sheep will find its way.


Not that Mr. Heink’s arguments are usually any better than those of his brothers-in-spirit, though he is one of the few "Revisionists" who at least tries to do some homework, but the above was an unexpected display of common sense for which I duly congratulated the old man.

A word now to the unhappy "PotPie", who claims that the HC blog’s contributors are "obsessed by this board and those who post here": apart from the amusement value of one or the other particular instructive showpiece of "Revisionist" imbecility, whether in quoted scripture from some vaunted guru or the CODOH yelpers’ own "wisdom", the only reason for one of us to pay any attention to the CODOH cesspit and its sorry inhabitants is their occasional mouthing off about him. That aside, we couldn’t care less about what these candy-ass losers write.

Ah, and in case anyone is wondering why Hargis & Co. are currently rambling away against our contributor Andrew Mathis: the probable reason is that this challenge of Andrew’s has meanwhile been brought to "Hannover"’s knowledge.

Wednesday, June 13, 2007

Fabian, Fabian...

I post too much about CODOH lately (it being such a source of fun), and here's hopefully the last time for a while. Fabian Eschen ("Sailor" at CODOH) posted this:
It was this fellow Sergey Romanov who posted on the other board in all seriousness, that the reason, why the remains of the hundreds of thousands of dead Jews who were allegedly killed in Babi Jar could not be found, was because the big flood came and washed it all away!

What a clever "Holocaust historian"!

They sure have some quality hoaxsters on that forum.

Sergey Romanov told the AHF that he hails from Russia. He is probably an "Ostjude" (East-Jew) who are flooding at this time Germany by the hundreds of thousands, demanding full welfare instantly and hate Germans.
Of course, there were never "hundreds of thousands of dead Jews" in Babij Jar, so I couldn't have made such a claim. And, of course, there was a well-known Kurenyovka tragedy in 1961, when a dam broke and the resulting massive mudslide buried not only numerous victims alive, but also destroyed the ravine. That is exactly the reason why Babij Jar no longer exists. (The official contemporary documents of investigation of the tragedy can be found in Babij Jar: chelovek, vlast', istorija, vol. 1, compiled by T. Yevstafjeva, Vitalij Nakhmanovich; Kiev, Vneshtorgizdat Ukrainy, 2004).

What is interesting, though, is that Eschen, who is a "Valued contributor" at CODOH, is completely unaware of this event (as his dismissive tone suggests). For those who don't know, Eschen is also a prolific translator of denier "literature". And that bit of antisemitism at the end - well, that's just classic. And I'm not even Jewish. Once again: so much for "revisionism" having no relation to antisemitism!

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Soap-for-brains Hargis

Jonnie Hargis lies through his teeth again:
See the contrived documents used at Nuremberg 'proving' soap was made from Jews:
!!! Human Soap - Official Nuremberg Documents !!!
http://forum.codoh.info/viewtopic.php?t=676

Yet another example of the Nuremberg fraud.

This is just too easy.
Except none of these documents suggest that the soap was made from Jews. The only fraud is Hargis himself.

Skadi Poll: Did the Holocaust happen?

The results of the poll at the "Germanic online community" kinda blow that "Germanic intellectual superiority" theory out of the water, don't they.

Monday, June 11, 2007

CODOH AnswerMan's scholarly level

Let's examine what the CODOH AnswerMan has to say about this question:
Dear AnswerMan,
I'm curious about the recent opening of the Nazi archive. Would we be able to, once and for all, settle this issue of how many Jews were actually killed by the Nazis? Could this be the moment of truth for the revisionists?

Best, [name withheld for fear of persecution]
We have our own answer. And CODOH's boils down to the first paragraph:
Only time will tell for sure what the exact impact of the opening of the "Nazi archives" at Arolsen will bring. With that said, AnswerMan believes that the opening of the archives will be another minor revisionist victory.
The AnswerMan goes on to explain why, and in the process commits some very embarassing mistakes.

Consider that original Soviet propaganda put forth the estimate of 1.5 million Jewish deaths at the concentration camp Majdanek. [...] Today however, experts at the Majdanek museum have "revised" the actual number of Jewish deaths down to 59,000.
Except, of course, the Soviets never claimed that 1.5 million victims were Jewish. Oops!
Case in point, by 1992, the Soviet archives in Moscow opened. These archives held the Auschwitz "death books" (Sterbebuch). Each book contains hundreds of death certificates. Each certificate meticulously records numerous revealing details, including the deceased person's full name, profession, religion, date and place of birth, time of death and cause of death. The death registry books fell into Soviet hands in January 1945 when the Red Army captured Auschwitz. When the archive opened it was revealed that Moscow had 46 of these volumes. They covered partially the years 1941, 1942, and 1943. There were no volumes for 1944 or 1945. It has been suggested by the International Red Cross that the Soviets "misplaced" the additional missing volumes. Russian officials permitted the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) - the International Tracing Service in Arolsen, Germany to make copies of the death certificates. There were 69,000 death certificates. Even if one extrapolates for the missing books, the numbers do not grow to the mythic millions proportions. Still, this information is largely neglected by the fundamentalists.
Except this is a very blatant strawman - nobody claimed that the books would contain all the deaths. Thus the last sentences are as dishonest as they're silly. Nothing is "neglected", the Death Books in no way contradict the mass murder in Auschwitz.
When Francizek Piper, the Director of the Auschwitz museum wrote his article, "The Number of Victims" (published in the US in 1994), he states, "When the Soviet soldiers liberated the camp [Auschwitz] in January 1945, they found documents that confirmed only 100,000 deaths." Still, in light of the hard evidence, Piper suggests that many victims were never registered into the Auschwitz camp and rather went directly to the gas chambers. Therefore although maybe 100,000 inmates who were registered died at Auschwitz, some 1 million who were never registered were murdered there. What evidence you ask is there for the 1 million murdered? There is actually no evidence of the murder of these people
That mostly unregistered deportees were being murdered was known from the start from numerous witnesses. So the AnswerMan's implicit suggestion that Piper was forced to concoct an ad hoc explanation borders on libel. And of course, if the AnswerMan doesn't consider numerous statements by victims, perpetrators and bystanders, and documentary and physical evidence, corroborating these statements, the "evidence", then he is nothing but a "flat-earther", whose fundamentalist religious dogma simply cannot be budged.
Piper and others have examined train records to review how many inmates were sent to the camp. They then looked at how many were registered and theorized that the rest were murdered. They largely ignored the fact that Auschwitz also served as a transit camp and that many individuals transferred there were not registered there, because after a brief stay (a few days to a few weeks) they were moved on to other camps within the system.
Except this is a lie, of course. Piper has accounted for the people who have arrived to the camp, for the people died in the camp and for the people, who were transferred out of the camp. The difference can be accounted only by mass murder, which is yet another argument, supporting the above extensive evidence. Deniers cannot find the missing Jews.
The fundamentalists have attempted many times in the past twenty years to conclusively finish off the revisionists. Every attempt has failed miserably. When revisionists are proven to be correct, the facts are buried. I expect the same from Arolsen.
Stupidity cannot be defeated.

Conclusion regarding CODOH AnswerMan's scholarly level: a kindegartner could do better.

More CODOH silliness

Some denier (who, for some reason, reminds me very much of k0nsl aka Haldan aka...) found an old CODOH thread (with which I have dealt here) and it seems that he wanted to say something but really couldn't, so he just spouted some nonsense.

He accuses me of selective quotation of sources, not providing any examples whatsoever. He brings up Olga Lengyel's death toll, except the death tolls given by inmates are simply irrelevant. He brings up Vrba, claiming that he admitted to being a false witness, except this, of course, is a lie, as he never did. Here's what the Veritas team had to say about Vrba:
Let's look at the testimony about "poetic license", the grounds on which Faurisson and our esteemed opponents insistently call Vrba a “self-perjuring liar”. Unlike the Negationists, who are content to draw their conclusions based on paraphrases from their friends, we would prefer to examine the court testimony itself, and highlight the passages from which it becomes clear that if there are “self-perjuring liars” around, Vrba is not one of them. We will even take the transcription of the trial records from a "Revisionist” site, www.vho.org/aaargh/engl/vrba3.html :
Q. I suggest, also, that you falsified to some extent as well, because throughout the book you referred to someone by the name of Rudolf Vrba, and you attribute the name Vrba to the conversations, and Rudi, meaning you, and in fact, there was nobody by that name in the camp, sir. Is that right?
A. That is perfectly so, but I would take a great objection against your word "falsify", because I would say, then, that the artist drawn my moustache in a different way has falsified something. This is not a document, but literature, and literature has been meant mainly for young people and it would be for young people a considerable confusion to explain to them all the methods of clandestine work and how it came that the names have to be changed. Moreover, I would have to explain my real ground and reasons why I changed my German name to the name of my native language, and this would have transferred, perhaps, a national hatred to the reader, which I wanted to avoid, against the Germans.
In other words, I used my licence of a poet, it is called licensia poetarium, to put in the book only those facts and events which will enable a young person to understand the general situation.

Q. Mm-hmmm. So for you it's poetic licence?
A. Poetic licence in this particular case.
Q. Yeah.
A. In other words, I am not bound to make of it a document, but re-creates the situation as close as possible to the truth without complicating it.

So Vrba never testified to using "poetic license" in the 1944 report, as Faurisson and our opponents would have us believe. He openly admitted to having used it in a personal memoir written twenty years after the report, where it was perfectly legitimate for him to do so, and that in regard only to details which in no way affected the accuracy of his description of events at Auschwitz-Birkenau. Apart from trying to make a fly into an elephant (another well-known “Revisionist” tactic) our opponents and their source seek to mislead their readers about the occasion, contents and object of Vrba’s statements.
Note how he doesn't give a link to the Veritas team statement, and instead chooses to misrepresent it. Perhaps this is because all links to RODOH are censored at CODOH forum? Actually, even the name "RODOH" is censored. It is automatically turned to "shills", as you can witness in the posting in question. This just shows how the CODOH bunch and Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis are afraid of the open debate.

The hapless chap then talks about Mattogno destroying this or that, but what about Mattogno himself, who has been destroyed by the HC team? To repeat his own words: "Once a source is exposed as fake and writers keep using him, aren't the writers that keep using it exposed as fake, too?"

All in all, this guy's posting amounts to one big ad hominem - he doesn't deal with a single argument at this blog. Which is only to be expected.

Ah, CODOH. For dessert, here's another nice thread:
vincentferrer
Valued contributor

[...]

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 1:13

[...]

He [Finkelstein - SR] cast a little bit of doubt on the holocaust. The Jews who control the place denied him tenure.

Personally, as a Catholic, I support this since I think Jews should not teach at private Catholic colleges.
Given that Finkelstein is an atheist, only his ethnicity is meant. "Vee arr not antisemitic!" Yeah, yeah.

Read the updates...

Update: In the same thread an old German CODOH member "Sailor" who is known as a translator of some denier texts from German into English, as an outspoken antisemite and simply as an all-around doofus, adds:
The man was booted off the forum when he lost his cool and abused people who did not agree with his views on Babi Jar.
Take away the spin, and there is the core of truth. I was debunking the deniers' guru John Ball regarding the Babij Jar issue (see the full debunking here), and my last posting, which addressed the insane ramblings of some "Turpitz", who was making some rather outrageous claims like "why did the Zionist not intervene as one of their sacred burial sites was destroyed" ("Zionists"? "Intervene"? In Soviet Union? During Stalin's reign? The boy is a babbling ignoramus) - was deleted and I was banned. When a person describes this as a matter of "disagreement", rather than outright censorship by Hargis, who is always afraid of good debunkings, you can say that the person is severely deluded, or full of it. This Eschen guy is known to be a Mattogno fan, but he never addressed the refutations of Mattogno's stuff on our blog. All he can do is whine in online forums. Same applies to Hannover-Hargis, who is simply pathetic.

Update 2: a denier lemming "Laurentz Dahl" (spanked here) brings up some irrelevancies to counter the point that "No Jew who was once inside the gas chamber in operation come out alive". He brings up Yaakov Biskowitz, claiming that the latter claimed to have seen the collapsing floor of Sobibor gas chamber. This has been already dealt with: Biskowitz explicitly said that he did not see the collapsing floor. Moreover, here are the circumstances under which he had seen the gas chambers:
When I was passing by the two larger stores in Camp 2, I detached the cart and pushed it towards Camp 3. I was supposed to leave it near the gate, but I could not hold the vehicle back. The gate opened and it pushed me inside. Since I knew I would not get out alive from there, I began to run back at top speed and managed to reach my place of work without anyone noticing.
So he was there for a few seconds, he was at a distance from the gas chambers, in a state of great panic, and later misinterpreted what he had seen in these few moments as a hollow "underneath" the chambers. Big deal! One must be a total loon to think that this "proves" anything. Besides, Biskowitz mentioned nothing about the method of murder. So he is irrelevant in this case!

Then he brings up Hersz Cukierman, whose testimony only underscores the ignorance of the Jews like Pechersky, who were outside the Totenlager, about the method used. However, inside the Totenlager the information about specifically the use of "gas" was also probably a conjecture - again, only the Nazis and "motorists" would know for certain.

For the same reason his mention of other witnesses, like Bahir and Lichtman, is absolutely irrelevant - they were outside of Totenlager, if they did repeat the "collapsing floor" story, then it probably came from Biskowitz, AND "collapsing floor" is not the method of murder, so again, irrelevancy upon irrelevancy. Kalmen Wawryk told something by a kapo? The kapo was from the same camp as Kalmen, obviously, i.e. outside of Totenlager. Even if earlier that kapo had been in the Totenlager, there is, again, no guarantee that he somehow saw what had happened inside the gas chambers.

But despite the lack of knowledge about the precise method of murder, the Sobibor survivors are still valuable witnesses, because they can testify to the very fact of murder, to the proven fact that Sobibor was the last stop for the absolute majority of the arriving transports. Indeed, as Wewryk wrote:
However, only a severely retarded person could remain ignorant of what went on there. The smoke and the smell said it all and we occasionally heard a terrified "Shma Yizroel" echo over to us from there.
"Dahl", you're even stupider than I thought.

Update 3: the denier in question responded. Well, kind of. As is only usual for CODOH deniers, he did not address a single point, thereby conceding that he has lost the argument. Instead, he wrote several ad hominem-filled paragraphs, which in effect, amount to "nyah-nyah-nyah, your behavior is childish and you fling ad hominems". Talk about pot(pie)s and kettles! So much for "open debate". Thanks for confirming that most CODOH deniers are retards, who are unable to deal with logical arguments - once again.

Update 4: Dahl responds to the comment regarding Biskowitz, but does not even link here! What a chicken. So, here's what Chicken Dahl (as I will call him from now on for refusal to link here, until he does) has to say:
Sergey Romanov (hello Sergey! since you are reading this) claims that Biskowitz did not see the collapsing floor and that anyway it's "irrelevant since the collapsing was not the murder agent". He is lying.

This is what Biskowitz actually attested to:
Q. Please understand me. You are somewhat familiar with these matters. Did you see the floor when it had opened up?

A. I did not see that ? I merely saw that underneath the gas chamber, there was a hollow which already contained bodies.

Presiding Judge Thank you, Mr. Biskowitz, you have concluded your testimony. I know you have not told us everything. But there was no alternative.
So what he claims that he did not see was the process of the floor opening up. What he claims he saw was corpses in a pit underneath the gas chamber. Which means that he claimed to have seen the floor of the gas chamber in its opened up state.
Note how Chicken Dahl does not deal with a simple fact that since the floor was not claimed to gave been a murder weapon, it is a non-example when it comes to the issue at hand. Worse yet, he accuses me of lying, but then cannot support his accusation. Let's see. What is my claim?
Biskowitz explicitly said that he did not see the collapsing floor.
How does the witness answer the question "Did you see the floor when it had opened up?"?
I did not see that - I merely saw that underneath the gas chamber, there was a hollow which already contained bodies.
So once again: he did not see the "collapsing floor" itself. I.e. exactly what I have claimed. Game, set, match. I.e., it is Chicken Dahl who is lying through his teeth, especially when he claims that Biskowitz "claimed to have seen the floor of the gas chamber in its opened up state". Biskowitz mentioned nothing about "the floor in the opened state" and nowhere in his testimony it is implied. Indeed, to have seen the bodies in a supposed pit underneath a chamber through an already opened floor, Biskowitz would have to be near the gas chambers. However, he said that he saw the pit and the hollow "from a distance". This implies that he has interpreted what he thought he had seen to be two "levels" at once, i.e. a chamber and what is underneath a chamber, which would not imply that the "collapsing floor" had to be in an open state at that moment. Taken at face value, his testimony implies that the pit underneath a chamber was exposed and could be seen from the outside (he also mentions a little train that carried the bodies, implying that the bodies would have to be unloaded from the exposed pit). The "hollow" was supposed to be visible by itself, from a distance, with or without the flooor in the open state. Now, what he really did see we will probably never know. To repeat:
So he was there for a few seconds, he was at a distance from the gas chambers, in a state of great panic, and later misinterpreted what he had seen in these few moments as a hollow "underneath" the chambers. Big deal!
Possibly, it was a heap of corpses in some small pit near the chambers, which Biskowitz, in those few panicky moments, interpreted to have a "continuation" underneath the building. Or whatever. Anyway, Chicken Dahl, you fail again. And you did not even try to address the rest of it...

Is Juergen Graf an antisemitic Stalinist?

Well, OK. Maybe he is not a Stalinist. But then, why is he listed as a member of the Scientific Council of the "Institute of the Russian Civilization"? The "Institute" is run by Oleg Platonov, an Orthodox Christian Stalinist antisemite who promotes the ideas that the Blood Libel is not actually a libel and that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are actually authentic.



Oleg "Lemonface" Platonov

Indeed, on the website of the "Institute" one can download lots of Platonov's Jew-hatred-filled books and other conspiraloon treatises. E.g. in the section "Masonry" one can read The Mystery of Zion's Protocols, Mystery of Iniquity: Judaism and Masonry against Christian Civilization and Secret History of Masonry.

I have already quoted Platonov once. To repeat:
Stalin Iosif Vissarionovich [...], Georgian Bolshevik. Since late 1930-s - a Russian statesman, military leader of the Russian people during the Great Patriotic War.
Stalin's life consists of two mutually exclusive stages. In the first stage - late XIX century - 1st half of 1930s - Stalin is the active accomplice of the criminal activities of Lenin and the so-called Lenin's guard, Jewish Bolsheviks, who exterminated millions of Russian people; in the second stage, since the 2nd half of 1930s - a Russian statesman, through whose efforts, in effect, the national revolution was accomplished, which overthrew the power of the Jewish Bolsheviks, and significantly (although not completely) resurrected the former role of the Russian people.
Again, given that the "Institute" is nothing but a vehicle for publishing Platonov's and Platonov-approved works, the question to Juergen Graf still stands.

Sunday, June 10, 2007

Only the Grave Cures the Hunchback

Just to rub in the irony of Sergey's post below, the rant from the Revisionist Clarion wasn't actually the first time we've been noticed by the AAARGH empire. Indeed, their French counterpart Conseils de Révision managed to call us 'intéresant' and label us 'les antirévisionistes de deuxième génération'. We'll leave it for the genii at Revisionist Clarion to do the translations, since apparently we wouldn't understand what 'second generation' was in French. Maybe they might want to bother reading their fellow deniers' newsletters?

Anyway, since the Revisionist Clarion are such towering intellects, perhaps they can tell us what this German document means. Or these Russian testimonies. Or how German grammar works. Or if this excerpt got translated correctly (clue: Massenmord doesn't mean "resettlement").

Really, if this is what the opposition is reduced to, they might as well kill themselves now and save us the bother of making them look even more idiotic.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket


Because, as the Russian proverb goes, gorbatogo mogila ispravit.

Just another dead brain.

Some time ago we have been noticed by an author of The Revisionist Clarion, an electronic denier publication.

A quick look at the contents of this publication shows that it is nothing more than a low quality collection of articles and news items, mostly "revisionist" and/or antisemitic. (So much for Holocaust denial not being related to antisemitism.)

Here's a quote from issue 22 (fall 2006/winter 2007):
BULLSHIT

Holocaust Controversies

Some guys have set shop to attack revisionists. Good for them. The trouble is that, in a cursory glance, one can see that they do not read German, nor French. English maybe. How ignoramuses, Zimmerman style, can hope to be taken seriously ? They just do take the whole bullshit at face value !

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/
That's all. No logic. No counter-arguments. No reasoned defence of "revisionism". Yawn.

Another retarded denier loon. At least (s)he could've noticed that one of us is German, and another one is a professional historian whose thesis dealt with German occupation (hint: that means he necessarily knows German). Oh, and at least two of us "read French", but that's rather irrelevant: since when knowledge of French is needed to study the Holocaust and make mincemeat of deniers, as we do all the time?

Of course, because RC author's intelligence is rather limited, it's easier for him or her to simply dismiss us for bogus reasons, without ever addressing a single argument. We understand.

Saturday, June 09, 2007

If they're the best, what about the rest?

Here at Holocaust Controversies we have already provided lots of examples that establish that Carlo Mattogno and Juergen Graf are absolutely inept in their research and reasoning. Time to add to the collection of their blunders.

In their Treblinka... book Mattogno and Graf (M&G) make some absurd claims about the structure of gas chambers, and construct a silly conspiracy theory in chapter 5:

Thursday, June 07, 2007

Meet Karl Frenzel (2)

[Continued from Meet Karl Frenzel (1)]

II.2 The Defendant Karl Frenzel

II.2.1 Personal Data

Karl Frenzel was born in Zehdenick/Havel on 20 August 1911, the son of a railway interlocking manager. He had two brothers and a sister; both brothers were killed in World War II. After basic school he learned the trade of a carpenter, but found no employment in this trade and had to make out as an agricultural worker and driver for a meat store. In 1930 he became a member of the NSDAP and the SA, through which he obtained a job as auxiliary policeman with the gendarmerie in Grüneberg. In the autumn of 1933 he left the service and got a job in the Grüneberg munitions factory, where he worked until 1935. From 1 September 1935 until August 1939 he worked as a hired administrator at Castle Löwenberg/Mark. In October 1934 he married Sofie née Aum., with whom he had five children who, at the time of the judgment in 1966, were 25, 28, 29, 30 and 31 years old (so much for denierbud’s sentimental whining about "Frenzel's 5 children who had their dad taken away to prison", which gives the reader the impression that the "children" were toddlers at the time, or in their early teens at most). On 27 August Frenzel joined a construction battalion of the Reich Labor Service, from which he was released at the end of 1939 on account of being the father of five children. However, he immediately reported voluntarily at his local recruitment post to be again taken in, and when he was rejected he turned to his SA-unit asking them to make some pressure so that he would, despite his five children, be recruited anew. The SA suggested that Frenzel report at the Columbushaus in Berlin, where according to a circular from the Führer’s Chancellery reliable party members were being searched for a special service.

Webb/Lisciotto update

Those of you who have followed the ARC/deathcamps.org/death-camps.org tragicomic saga, may find the following letters by Carmelo Lisciotto and Chris Webb sent to German 1&1, to be of some comic relief. Some people (like the owners of the Axis History Forum) may even consider taking legal action, because this pair of lying thugs libels them - and many other people.

You will also note that Webb has had a book "published" with "Andy Schmidt" in 2005. Two facts are significant here: 1) Andy Schmidt is the very forgerer exposed by me, whose forgeries Chris Webb tried to peddle to the ARC group, and which caused the demise of ARC; 2) until Webb wrote this letter, nobody in ARC knew anything about his books (which, he claims, are based on the deathcamps.org site!), this fact being yet another clear testimony about the level of his honesty and integrity.

Thankfully, German 1&1 didn't give much weight to their laughable "evidence".

Read more!


"Carmelo A. Lisciotto" wrote:

[1&1 official name omitted],

Our website is registered with the US office of copyright, the confirmation# is
U.S. Copyright Office Confirmation (ORD8368).
http://www.death-camps.org/links/ shows links to Axis History Forum ( a
neo-nazi website)
http://www.death-camps.org/arc/supporters.html <-- is a fraudulent support
page where people who donated to www.deathcamps.org ARC are listed as
donors to this counterfeit website with neo-nazi links.
In addition we've sent by email, fax and postal letters, over 10 pieces of
evidence that validate our authorship and ownership, we've asked what
supporting evidence was provided by the counterfeit website, we were given
no response by 1and1.

We've provided enough evidence to allow the counterfeit website to be
removed. Should the owner of the bogus site Stephan Their wish to contest
our copyright the onus is on him to pursue that in a court of law, 1and1
would be acting in accordance with acceptable use policy by removing this
fraudulent site.

Regrettably, 1and1, and it's German affiliates have handled this matter
poorly, and in direct contradiction to your own posted Terms of Service.

This matter is far from settled, we've sent DMCA notifications to 1and1, we
were ignored, this matter is being referred to our legal counsel for
arbitration in US courts, and EU courts. In addtion we have consulted with
our contacts at the BBC, USHMM, CNN and are making this story public.

By no means will ARC www.deathcamps.org consider this matter settled while a
counterfeit version of our website with links to neo-nazi groups and
fraudulent financial solicitations appears on your servers.

We are fully prepared to take this matter to great lengths until this matter
is brought to an acceptable resolution.

Thus far, 1and1 has by all measures appeared to be sympathetic to this
counterfeit website with nothing but anecdotal statements offered up by the
perpetrators.

We can not allow our supporters and contributors to be so rudely
disrepected.

Sincerley,

Chris Webb and Carmelo Lisciotto
ARC www.deathcamps.org


Von: Chris Webb
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. Mai 2007 16:08
Betreff: Re: C74876943 Re: 1and1 Germany appearing to be sympathetic to Neo-Nazi and Holocaust revisionists, and website counterfeiters...

Dear [1&1 official name omitted],

Thank you very much for your email.

We thought that we had sent you a plethora of proof, whilst the other party, in the shape of Mr. Their provided you with nothing, as confirmed by your own people.

I attach the catalogue record from the Wiener Library in London, of a book i produced from the ARC website, www.deathcamps.org and material culled from my own privatearchive collected over the past 35 years.

If you type in the online search on the Wiener Library online catalogue, you will see the book i produced on Treblinka, and you will note the link to deathcamps.org

I hope that this provides the sort of proof you are looking for.

We understand there is a natural tendency to support neighbours, but unless Mr. Thier can provide similiar evidence, it would seem to me, that the claims are justified, and you do sympathise with neo-nazis and holocuast revisionists, in the face of a mountain of counter evidence.

Once again we draw your attention to the dates, the original site established in 2002 with 1and 1 and the counterfeit site being established in 2006, this book was produced in 2005.

We rest our case, and we hope you will do the right thing, as outlined in Mr Lisciotto's earlier email.

We are very disappointed in 1and1de stance, but not surprised.

Regards,

Chris Webb

An apology

I took a leave of absence from blogging, and since some of the remaining Ugly Voice debunkings are my responsibility, we haven't published them yet - not that they constitute any difficulty for debunking whatsoever (just the opposite is true). My bad. Hopefully, they will be published soon (it's not as if the materials we have already published aren't enough to totally destroy any credibility of the "One Third of the Holocaust" movie).

Actually, I have quite a lot of new materials to blog about (like confirmation of gasoline gassing engine in Treblinka, more fresh examples of Mattogno & Graf's total ineptness as "researchers", some very interesting Soviet documents, etc.).

Saturday, June 02, 2007