tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post6505825987761032577..comments2024-03-17T20:28:40.281+00:00Comments on Holocaust Controversies: Viewer's Guide to "Auschwitz - The Surprising Hidden Truth" (Minutes 16 - 22) Nicholas Terryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14852758011968360596noreply@blogger.comBlogger34125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-3256284226676988682021-04-20T17:43:54.959+01:002021-04-20T17:43:54.959+01:00In Japan, there was an "Akashi Fireworks Fest...In Japan, there was an "Akashi Fireworks Festival Pedestrian Bridge Accident" on July 21, 2001, where the maximum crowd density was reported to be 13-15 people/m2.<br /><br />https://www.city.akashi.lg.jp/anzen/anshin/bosai/kikikanri/jikochosa/documents/honpen4.pdf<br /><br />The data is described on page 10-11 of this report.<br />It is in Japanese, so it may be difficult to understand, but please refer to it.<br /><br />Also, there is a paper as follows. It is also in Japanese, but records 14 persons/m2 (male university students only) as the experimental value.<br /><br />http://seisan.server-shared.com/593/593-72.pdf<br /><br />Based on the above, I think that the "3,000 people" that Hoess wrote about in his memoirs is correct.mht2040athttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13768582293041047359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-88188497621253426022013-10-17T16:51:56.379+01:002013-10-17T16:51:56.379+01:00Further smear & invective from psychopathic lu...Further smear & invective from psychopathic lunatic Carmelo "Blogbuster" Lisciotto has gone the way of its predecessors.Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-13691439744110908082013-10-17T09:51:05.400+01:002013-10-17T09:51:05.400+01:00«It does not come to a surprise that the only peop...«It does not come to a surprise that the only people who have been taking Lisciotto's smearing campaign seriously are extreme Holocaust deniers such as "Franz" and Greg Gerdes.»<br /><br />Don't forget Mattogno, Graf and Kues :-)Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-4088922498025359462013-10-16T17:45:50.835+01:002013-10-16T17:45:50.835+01:00An off topic comment by "Franz Holtzhäuser&qu...An off topic comment by "Franz Holtzhäuser" merely containing false and libelous claims on my person has been deleted.<br /><br />It does not come to a surprise that the only people who have been taking Lisciotto's smearing campaign seriously are extreme Holocaust deniers such as "Franz" and Greg Gerdes. Hans Metznerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07746792258730274681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-5888489024691600972013-10-16T14:38:29.111+01:002013-10-16T14:38:29.111+01:00Haters? How in the world can any Jewish person ac...Haters? How in the world can any Jewish person accuse ANYBODY of 'hate'; you've shown the entire world with lie after lie after lie - that hate is a Jewish value. Period.<br /><br />And you know that very well. So keep spewing the lies and the hate....it's not going to do you any good at all.<br /><br />You're fucking over...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15452052627351388862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-40185689220745110222013-10-16T10:27:29.855+01:002013-10-16T10:27:29.855+01:00Further mad (and of course completely off-topic) r...Further mad (and of course completely off-topic) ravings by compulsively lying psychopath Carmelo "Blogbuster" Lisciotto have been deleted.Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-48713679439574419732013-10-15T19:33:36.293+01:002013-10-15T19:33:36.293+01:00"Why else are they so desperate to prove they...<br /><br /> "Why else are they so desperate to prove they aren't!"<br /><br /> Come on, you claim - without evidence as usual - that Mike Petes has committed several crimes and then wonder why I am emphazising that we are not the same person? Not even you can be so dumb, so you must be manipulative.<br /><br /> If Carmelo Liscitto were not spamming the internet with his unfounded accusation towards Peters, I would not care whether somebody misidentifies me as him. But since it is known that if you just thrown enough dirt on somebody, some people will believe the defamation even if there are false, I do care about the misidentification and correct it accordingly.Hans Metznerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07746792258730274681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-86601992990574247502013-10-15T18:50:24.868+01:002013-10-15T18:50:24.868+01:00"6.Posting by Hans / Mike Peters from RODOH o...<i>"6.Posting by Hans / Mike Peters from RODOH on 11 October 2006"</i><br /><br />I asked ARC members Roberto and Sergey "can you give some more details about was going on and wrong in the ARC team?" which actually shows that I was not a member of ARC! <br /><br /><i>"7.Posting by Hans / Mike Peters from RODOH on 26 November 2007"</i><br /><br />This is further evidence I was not a member of the ARC team and not involved in the ARC feud. I ask RODOH members which of the two ARC duplicates is the good (Sergey, Roberto etc.) and which is the bad one (Lisciotto, Weber). Which I would have known, if I were a member of ARC. <br /><br /><i>"8.Posting on RODOH about Babi Yar"</i><br /><br />This posting has nothing to do with me. <br /><br /><i>"9.Posting on RODOH by Nick Terry on 30 December 2009"</i><br /><br />Nick says that I can "participate in sensible informed discussions" and (perhaps) that I would be "welcomed over at HC". How this compliment is evidence for ARC membership or that I am Mike Peters is beyond me. <br /><br /><i>"10.Posting by Mike Peters / Hans on RODOH on 29 June 2011"</i><br /><br />I point out that I am not Mike Peters. If anything, this posting suggests that I am not Mike Peters rather than the opposite.<br /><br />So let me summarize: I did not display any insider knowledge that could be interpreted as evidence for ARC membership (but not even this would be conclusive as such knowledge could have been also passed on from others). <br /><br />Instead, I only cited publicly available information with regards to ARC and actually showed ignorance at RODOH with regards what was going on at ARC. So the evidence actually points to the exact opposite direction that I was not a ARC member, as I have always mainainted and never claimed otherwise, which is also odd. There is no reason why I should have not been proud on ARC membership before it broke up. <br /><br />Moreover, the fact that Mike Peters was clearly focused on ARC camps, whereas I was from the beginning of my debate activities in 2001 at John Ball's forum largely focused on Auschwitz with only rudimentary interest in ARC camps. In fact, the number of times I posted about Treblinka, Belzec and Sobibor at RODOH is neglectable compared to the number of postings on Auschwitz.<br /><br />And if I were Mike Peters with his focus on ARC camps, how comes it that I did not contribute to the critique? <br /><br />Carmelo Lisciotto's thesis that I am Mike Peters is clearly entirely speculative, unfounded, unlikely and - if I check my passport - false. <br /><br />The reason he made up the story is because I critized Lisciotto for his bashing of HC members at the CODOH forum. Mentally disturbed as he is he immeaditely jumped to the claim I am Mike Peters simply because I am also a German. For the same reason, he claimed for example that RODOH poster dmitry is Sergey Romanov because they are both Russians, even though they have clearly a different educational background and cannot be the same persons.Hans Metznerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07746792258730274681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-38822297622969876762013-10-15T18:41:12.143+01:002013-10-15T18:41:12.143+01:00Holocaust Controversies Sucks said...:
"See ...Holocaust Controversies Sucks said...:<br /><br /><i>"See this link called<br /><br />Analysis proving HANS is Michael Peters!<br /><br />http://hateblogwatch.nazihunter.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=25"</i><br /><br />Okay, let's see whether this "analysis" stands any crutiny.<br /><br /><i>"1.Posting by Hans from deathcamps.org on the Axis History Forum on 22 December 2002"</i><br /><br />The fact that I was posting information from death-camps.org in the Third Reich Forum does not consist any evidence whatsoever that I was also a member of the deathcamps.org team. Since this was public information, any vistor googling or clicking through the site, could find and post it. <br /><br />Conversely, if the argument were valid, it would mean anybody accessing and citing the public information on deathcamps.org was also a member of the site. How many citations does ARC site has and many hundreds of "members" (and Mike Peters!) would this make?<br /><br /><i>"2. Posting by Hans / Mike Peters from RODOH on 17 September 2003"</i><br /><br />Holocaust denier "David Hebden" wondered if I was ARC member or supporter "Johannes F., Germany". <br /><br />Since Revisionist Hebden was obviously not involved at ARC, he could not have any idea about whether I was involved at ARC and merely speculated ("it's just a hunch") about this as I was occasionaly citing the site. In other words, he was committing the same fallacy as already done in point 1).<br /><br />Moreover, even if Hebden had any specific knowledge, the statement would actually contradict the claim that I was Mike Peters.<br /><br /><i>"3.Posting by Hans / Mike Peters from RODOH on 5 July 2003"</i><br /><br />The fact that I was quoting a guestbook entry by Mike Peters he made at the Holocaust History Project homepage does not consist "clearest evidence that Mike Peters and Hans are the same person". Frankly, it is no evidence at all that I am Mike Peters. It merely shows that I considered the guestbook entry interesting to share with RODOH members. If that's the "clearest" evidence you have, you have nothing indeed.<br /><br />In actual fact, Peters is displaying a different linguistic style than me. He says "re Treblinka photos" and "supportive" but not once in my numerous postings at the former RODOH forum (more than half a million of words, including quotes) I was using the expressions "re" and "supportive".<br /><br /><i>"4.Posting by Sergey Romanov on RODOH on 21 May 2005"</i><br /><br />The posting quoted here is not from Sergey Romanov, but from Holocaust denier David Hebden who speculated without having any knowledge whatsover that "Mr. Hans can use his connections with the ARFCI website". Again, his speculation is merely based on the fact that I quoted the supposed official Franke-Gricksch report from the ARC site.<br /><br />The fact that I ignored Hebden's remark and was not able to provide any additional information on file as requested by Hebden rather supports that I was not a ARC member. I never showed any insider knowledge with regards to ARC site at RODOH , which is odd if I was really a member.<br /><br /><i>"5.Posting by Hans / Mike Peters from RODOH on 14 January 2006"</i><br /><br />I was citing again the ARC cite on gas vans in Auschwitz and suggested that Sergey Romanov is a member of ARC. <br /><br />But I did not guess about Sergey's membership because of any ARC insider knowledge, but because the site stated that "our ARC member from Russia has found..." and what was found Sergey Romanov posted previosuly at the H-Net discussion site (http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=h-holocaust&month=0512&week=c&msg=/LFuzMGIZ2Mq34s8KZDX2Q&user=&pw=). <br /><br />So this was publicly available information that showed that Sergey Romanov was a member of ARC.Hans Metznerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07746792258730274681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-60910677271700183622013-10-15T17:03:44.013+01:002013-10-15T17:03:44.013+01:00"I didn't state that you did. Implying th...<i>"I didn't state that you did. Implying that I did, is a straw man as far as anyone (partisan yappers such as Nathan aside) is concerned."</i><br /><br />Your statement indeed suggested to the reader that I would share the claim that crematorium 4 and 5 were "supposed purpose built gas chamber/crematoriums (Kremas IV & V)", precisely because you did not specify who is making the statement and because you asked me to explain the supposed contradiction.<br /><br />If you did not mean to say so, thia does not free you from the straw man, as it matters what your argument is provoking among the reader, less what you actually meant but failed to speak out. Be more exact the next time.<br /><br /><br /><i>"Construction of K5 began November 20, 1942, whilst the 107,000 "corpses accumulated at the Bunker 1 and 2 killing sites" had all been exhumed (and presumably cremated) by the end of November 1942. Following Himmler's summer of 42 order to burn all the corpses, Eichmann's office sent cremation-in-pits guru Blobel to Auschwitz to take Hoess a crash-course on cremation at Chelmno. Hoess makes no mention of plans for building crematoria "intended to incinerate the corpses accumulated at the Bunker 1 and 2 killing sites"."</i><br /><br />Okay, I was obviusly too sloppy in my wording (as have you been above on crematoria 4 and 5). Actually I was refering to the <b>daily</b> accumulation of corpses at the Bunker sites. Given the capacity of the crematoria of 800 to 1600 corpses per day, they were sufficent to dispose the daily killings at the Bunker but not to dispose 100,000 corpses in short time.<br /><br /><i>"My original point about "the supposed purpose built gas chamber/crematoriums (Kremas IV & V)" was, clearly, in reference to this. Something Van Pelt has reiterated on numerous occasions. I though that would have been obvious to a professed Auschwitz expert such as yourself Hans."</i><br /><br />You did not referenced Van Pelt, which suggested I was sharing the view or it was some kind of a given fact. That's why I emphasized it is a straw man far as I am concerned.<br /><br />As far as I know, there is no conclusive evidence for the view that crematorium 4 and 5 have been designed as killing facilities from the scratch.<br /><br />Pressac mentions that a stove appears already on the very first blueprint of the morgue wing, but some crematoria literature does also specify heating equipment for morgues, so that is not a smoking gun.<br /><br /><i>"Please provide anything, anything at all; the testimony of a survivor made in the 21st century will do, that backs-up your fantasy about the kellers of K2 and K3 having been maintained in the design due to Nazi concerns about people screaming."</i><br /><br />Unjustified request, as I was not claiming that the crematoria 2 and 3 gassing sites were kept down because of such concerns.<br /><br />I argued in response to denierbud's argument "Why not have it be above ground?" that it is <b>possible</b> that such concerns did play a role. <br /><br />"Possible" means that there is at best indirect evidence providing some likelyhood to the explanation (namely, the fact that the noise of the victims was an issue in the crematorium in the Auschwitz main camp), but there is no direct evidence demonstrating or refuting it.<br /><br />That's a much weaker statement that does not require direct evidence, but only some plausible and reasonable consideration and lack of counter-evidence in order to be a valid explanation.Hans Metznerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07746792258730274681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-85561622937723398452013-10-14T21:27:11.333+01:002013-10-14T21:27:11.333+01:00"First of all, I did not say anything about &...<i>"First of all, I did not say anything about "purpose built" crematorium 4 and 5 for extermination. That's a straw man, as far as I'm concerned.</i> - Hans<br /><br />I didn't state that <b>you</b> did. Implying that <b>I did</b>, is a straw man as far as <b>anyone</b> (partisan yappers such as Nathan aside) is concerned.<br /><br /><i>"The memo of Fritz Ertl from 21 August 1942 that the ovens of crematoria 4 and 5 were to be "erected...at the 'bathing installations for special actions'" suggests (not conclusively though) that the crematoria may have been intended to incinerate the corpses accumulated at the Bunker 1 and 2 killing sites, and that gas chambers may have been implemented at a later stage."</i> - Hans<br /><br />Construction of K5 began November 20, 1942, whilst the 107,000 "corpses accumulated at the Bunker 1 and 2 killing sites" had all been exhumed (and presumably cremated) by the end of November 1942. Following Himmler's summer of 42 order to burn all the corpses, Eichmann's office sent cremation-in-pits guru Blobel to Auschwitz to take Hoess a crash-course on cremation at Chelmno. Hoess makes no mention of plans for building crematoria "intended to incinerate the corpses accumulated at the Bunker 1 and 2 killing sites".<br /><br /><i>"<b>Crematorium IV and V were the first buildings designed, from inception, to operate as killing machines, with gas chambers, a morgue, and a furnace hall arranged in a functional sequence</b>. Bunkers 1 and 2, crematorium I, and, as we shall see, crematoria II and III were all transformed into extermination centers."</i><br />- Van Pelt & Dwork, <i>Auschwitz 1270 to the Present</i>, p.321.<br /><br />My original point about "the supposed purpose built gas chamber/crematoriums (Kremas IV & V)" was, clearly, in reference to this. Something Van Pelt has reiterated on numerous occasions. I though that would have been obvious to a professed Auschwitz expert such as yourself Hans.<br /><br /><i>"So IF the sites were planned from the scratch for mass killing and IF crematorium 2 and 3 were kept half down to "dampen the screams of the victims", then it would simply indicate that the same was not realized at crematorium 4 and 5 because of resources/time concerns.</i> - Hans<br /><br />Please provide anything, anything at all; the testimony of a survivor made in the 21st century will do, that backs-up your fantasy about the kellers of K2 and K3 having been maintained in the design due to Nazi concerns about people screaming.<br />The Black Rabbit of Inléhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12083144769375557650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-27649957803642606772013-10-14T18:29:55.941+01:002013-10-14T18:29:55.941+01:00The Black Rabbit of Inlé said...:
"Holocaust...The Black Rabbit of Inlé said...:<br /><br /><i>"Holocaust inanity! You go on to admit that Krema II was not originally designed to be a Nazi death factory, but a crematorium and morgue, so here, your "possible technical reason" is completely irrelevant, and to Krema III of course (the only two semi-submerged "gas chambers" at Auschwitz)."</i><br /><br />You did not carefully read what I said how the possible technical reason may come into play as was in fact explained in the the next but one paragraph:<br /><br />"Of course, it would have been possible to move the basements on ground level. But only with additional efforts, time, costs (possible work for the underground site was already started) and with possible drawbacks such as more noise from the victims and that long term corpse storage in the crematorium in case of a stop of the extermination policy would be more difficult. In the sum, the SS obviously did not see a significant benefit from taken the basement on ground level. Indeed, the bottleneck of the extermination in Auschwitz was not bringing the victims down in the basement and the corpses up to ovens, but the body disposal in the oven room was the limiting step."<br /><br />http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.de/2013/09/viewers-guide-to-denierbuds-auschwitz.html<br /><br />The Black Rabbit of Inlé said...:<br /><br /><i>"Whilst the supposed purpose built gas chamber/crematoriums (Kremas IV & V) were built at ground level. How does that fit into your "possible technical reason for burying the execution sites under the earth - you dampen the screams of the victims."</i><br /><br />First of all, I did not say anything about "purpose built" crematorium 4 and 5 for extermination. That's a straw man, as far as I'm concerned. The memo of Fritz Ertl from 21 August 1942 that the ovens of crematoria 4 and 5 were to be "erected...at the 'bathing installations for special actions'" suggests (not conclusively though) that the crematoria may have been intended to incinerate the corpses accumulated at the Bunker 1 and 2 killing sites, and that gas chambers may have been implemented at a later stage.<br /><br />Crematoria 4 and 5 are clearly a light or pared down version of the large crematoria, which is indicative that the Auschwitz SS was bothered to save time or money for their construction. <br /><br />So IF the sites were planned from the scratch for mass killing and IF crematorium 2 and 3 were kept half down to "dampen the screams of the victims", then it would simply indicate that the same was not realized at crematorium 4 and 5 because of resources/time concerns.Hans_990https://www.blogger.com/profile/12329796637975664415noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-80039113067590367102013-10-14T18:05:07.693+01:002013-10-14T18:05:07.693+01:00- Holocaust inanity! You go on to admit that Krema...- Holocaust inanity! You go on to admit that Krema II was not originally designed to be a Nazi death factory, but a crematorium and morgue, so here, your "possible technical reason" is completely irrelevant, and to Krema III of course (the only two semi-submerged "gas chambers" at Auschwitz). Whilst the supposed purpose built gas chamber/crematoriums (Kremas IV & V) were built at ground level. How does that fit into your "possible technical reason for burying the execution sites under the earth - you dampen the screams of the victims."-<br /><br />The mind is a really wonderful thing if you know how to use it properly. So are the eyes. <br /><br />Hans wasn't talking about <b>all</b> of the Gas Chambers, nor was he laying out the "guidelines" followed by the Nazis about how to set them up; He was responding to the UV's babbling about the supposed impracticality of the <b>underground</b> Crematorium 2. This section that you quote appears <b> right after the UV's babbling about "Why underground?"</b>. The UV claimed that an underground Gas chamber doesn't make sense, Hans proposed a reason for why it makes sense. Nothing more. Your babbling about Kremas IV and V is irrelevant and little more than a straw man.<br /><br />- How does that fit into your "possible technical reason for burying the execution sites under the earth - you dampen the screams of the victims."-<br /><br />This reasoning only applies to Kremas II and III, which were underground to begin with, and setting up IV and V underground as well would've taken too much effort, even with the possible benefit Hans mentioned, so they didn't bother? Maybe they're not mutually exclusive? <br /><br />Seriously: the mind is a wonderful thing when you actually try to use it. <br /><br />No wonder you "responded" in this article instead of in the first one: the readers would be able to see right through the shit you're trying to pull over their eyes if they scrolled up and actually read it.<br /><br />We've established before that you probably weren't paying attention in logic class. Obviously, you weren't paying attention in debate and reading comprehension class, either. But then, since when have idiots ever needed either logic, proper debate or reading skills? <br /><br />Seriously: <b>Don't think. You're not built to think.</b><br /><br />Again:<br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSvhkS-GuSsNathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02660486969581542489noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-68618338615134864252013-10-14T15:24:34.357+01:002013-10-14T15:24:34.357+01:00"First of all, there is actually a possible t...<i>"First of all, there is actually a possible technical reason for burying the execution sites under the earth - you dampen the screams of the victims. In fact, one of the concern with the gassings in the old crematorium in the main camp was the noise from the victims. Motor vehicles were started during the gassing operation to drown down the noise (see How Reliable and Authentic is the Broad Report?)"</i><br /><br />Holocaust inanity! You go on to admit that Krema II was not originally designed to be a Nazi death factory, but a crematorium and morgue, so here, your "possible technical reason" is completely irrelevant, and to Krema III of course (the only two semi-submerged "gas chambers" at Auschwitz). Whilst the supposed purpose built gas chamber/crematoriums (Kremas IV & V) were built at ground level. How does that fit into your <i>"possible technical reason for burying the execution sites under the earth - you dampen the screams of the victims."</i>The Black Rabbit of Inléhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12083144769375557650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-9981448748172422542013-10-14T12:55:56.376+01:002013-10-14T12:55:56.376+01:00And the same will happen to future posts by "...And the same will happen to future posts by "Franz Holtzhäuser" if related to anything other than the subject matter of the blog, which is the Auschwitz video produced by "denierbud".Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-88062353553648410552013-10-14T12:53:27.400+01:002013-10-14T12:53:27.400+01:00All "no hateblogs" manure posted under t...All "no hateblogs" manure posted under this blog by the psychopath Carmelo "Blogbuster" Lisciotto has been deleted.Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-63329119754774107322013-10-13T23:30:40.394+01:002013-10-13T23:30:40.394+01:00Wow, I think, just maybe you ought to seek some he...Wow, I think, just maybe you ought to seek some help, Mr. Rantbach.<br />Oh. And one more thing: stop flattering yourself - it only makes for a even sadder impression.<br />FRANZFranz Holtzhäuserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05516070246513838626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-28951130021729082002013-10-13T22:41:28.300+01:002013-10-13T22:41:28.300+01:00OUCH!! WOW!!! I seem to have struck a real nerve!!...OUCH!! WOW!!! I seem to have struck a real nerve!! :P LOL!!! HAHA!<br />You guys are desperate and your arguments are moot. How funny, you have not convinced anyone of your hateful conspiracy theories. Not even close. You should be ashamed, you have FAILED!! No wonder you hide behind aliases. I have a fairly open mind, and a scientific background, and all you trolls do is try and twist facts where there is a paucity of data...and try and defame those who so easily beat you. Just because there is no physical evidence or something doesn't make sense in your mind, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Nazis were dumb, they lost, they couldn't even complete the final solution in its entirety, letting 10's of 1000's of eyewitness victims survive and tell the world of this most abhorrent crime. I wish for one second you could be transported back in time to see and feel what it was like...you'd change your mind in a second, but maybe not, maybe you've been programmed to be prejudice and you're too far gone? Anyway, enjoy the "Jew free" Europa you have. How's your tolerance of Islam going? LOL! Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17704322414521431873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-36111563775586738682013-10-13T15:12:46.091+01:002013-10-13T15:12:46.091+01:00"Nor is anyone here other than your moron sup..."Nor is anyone here other than your moron supporters stupid enough to think that a real Holocaust historian like Mr. Lisciotto gives a shit about your smears or hate blogs."<br /><br />Another straightforward lie. <br /><br />The site "http://hateblogwatch.nazihunter.net" dedicated to nothing else but smearing against Holocaust controversies was setup by no other than Carmelo Lisciotto himself: <br /><br />http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?p=17287&#p17287<br /><br />Note that the registration e-mail has been changed from admin@thirdreich.org (that is linked to Carmelo Lisciotto) to admin@nazihunter.net in the mean time to obfuscate this faux-pax. <br /><br />What a pity that an IT specialist like Lisciotto was committing such a beginner's mistake and used an e-mail address publicly linked to his real name to register his smear site!<br /><br />For the record and in case RODOH3 gets deleted one day, I save Bernard's posting (Tue Feb 26, 2013 4:01 am) of the relevant whois entries: <br /><br /><i>"Domain name: nazihunter.net<br /><br />Registrant Contact:<br />NA<br />Hate Blog Watch ()<br /><br />Fax:<br />NA<br />New York, NY 10010<br />US<br /><br />Administrative Contact:<br />NA<br />NA NA (Admin@THIRDREICH.ORG)<br />001.1111111<br />Fax: +1.0000000000<br />NA<br />New York, NY 10010<br />US<br /><br />Technical Contact:<br />NA<br />NA NA (Admin@THIRDREICH.ORG)<br />001.111-1111<br />Fax: +1.0000000000<br />NA<br />New York, NY 10010<br />US<br /><br />Status: Locked<br /><br />Name Servers:<br />dns1.name-services.com<br />dns2.name-services.com<br />dns3.name-services.com<br />dns4.name-services.com<br />dns5.name-services.com<br /><br />Creation date: 20 Feb 2003 03:47:04<br />Expiration date: 20 Feb 2013 03:47:00<br /><br /><br />Domain ID:D84661734-LROR<br />Domain Name:THIRDREICH.ORG<br />Created On:20-Mar-2002 04:40:01 UTC<br />Last Updated On:20-Feb-2012 09:33:22 UTC<br />Expiration Date:20-Mar-2013 04:40:01 UTC<br />Sponsoring Registrar:eNom, Inc. (R39-LROR)<br />Status:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED<br />Status:RENEWPERIOD<br />Registrant ID:3EA1600E42222ED0<br />Registrant Name:Carmelo Lisciotto<br />Registrant Organization:Lisciotto.com" </i>Hans Metznerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07746792258730274681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-91924637426805306482013-10-13T14:43:35.413+01:002013-10-13T14:43:35.413+01:00"I find it peculiar that 'Hans' simpl..."I find it peculiar that 'Hans' simply won't accept the invitation from the ARC group and prove them wrong.."<br /><br />'Franz' is slightly confused. The onus is not on me to prove that Carmelo Lisciotto's unsubstantiated assertions are wrong, but it is on him to prove that his assertions are correct.<br /><br />I asked him kindly to do so, he did not deliver. End of the story.Hans Metznerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07746792258730274681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-21636194813664064392013-10-13T14:32:05.336+01:002013-10-13T14:32:05.336+01:00As expected, there is no evidence whatsoever for t...As expected, there is no evidence whatsoever for the unfounded and defamatory claim that I engaged "smuggling and tax evasion from the German revenue dept". <br /><br />Hans Metznerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07746792258730274681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-23334011789072748162013-10-13T13:44:02.601+01:002013-10-13T13:44:02.601+01:00I find it peculiar that 'Hans' simply won&...I find it peculiar that 'Hans' simply won't accept the invitation from the ARC group and prove them wrong..<br />To lend a phrase from silly HC-underling Alan Rembach: “what have you got to hide”?<br />If 'Hans' is right we can all dance the macarena, aye.<br /><br /><i><br />A la tuhuelpa legria macarena <br /><br />Que tuhuelce paralla legria cosabuena <br /><br />A la tuhuelpa legria macarena Eeeh, macarena <br /><br />A-Hai!</i><br /><br />Yours,<br />Franz HoltzhäuserFranz Holtzhäuserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05516070246513838626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-38241500754562057132013-10-13T12:42:29.635+01:002013-10-13T12:42:29.635+01:00Please provide evidence for the claim that I was e...Please provide evidence for the claim that I was engaged in "smuggling and tax evasion from the German revenue dept" (for the record, the claim is patently false).<br /><br />If you ignore backing up your claim by actual evidence or fail to provide proper evidence, it is duly noted that the assertion is unfounded and defamatory.Hans Metznerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07746792258730274681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-24719788823455788122013-10-13T11:43:53.739+01:002013-10-13T11:43:53.739+01:00Note in particular that Lisciotto had apparently a...Note in particular that Lisciotto had apparently accused members of this fire arms forum of "child-abuse" and "of being NAMBLA members", i.e. the similar smear he is trying with the former member of Aktion Reinhard Camps website Mike Peters.<br /><br />It is clear from Lisciotto's history of stalking and smearing that this is a pathological issue not originally triggered by the ARC feud. Sergey, Nick, Roberto and Mike Peters only had the bad luck that Carmelo dropped his obsession with the fire arms guys or considered them a more useful target for acting out his disorder at the time.<br /><br />And my bad luck was that I dared to defended Nick, Sergey and Roberto against Lisciotto's hate campaign at the CODOH Forum, which suddenly turned him mad on me too, falsely identifying me as Mike Peters.<br /><br />Thanks for your support, Nathan and Alan. But be aware that this may cause Lisciotto targetting and smearing you too.Hans Metznerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07746792258730274681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-47063782404259661502013-10-13T07:17:31.479+01:002013-10-13T07:17:31.479+01:00It is instructive that pretty much the same stalki...It is instructive that pretty much the same stalking and smearing Carmelo Lisciotto is doing these days on Holocaust controversies, he already did back in 2005 on members of a weapon forum, e.g.: <br /><br /><i>"Re: Carmelo update and options<br /><br />OPTIONS (one or more of these in combination):<br /><br />1. Send a letter to Pega.com with a copy of the offending threads and explaining the following:<br /><br />a. C. uses his website solely for the purpose of defamation.<br />b. C. hijacked Drummond Lindsey's AR account and therefore cannot be trusted with computer security (crimnial violation).<br />c. C. has hacked/attacked AR, Mike's home computer, my photobucket account and others probably as well (criminal violation).<br />d. C. is using company time and/or equipment to engage in this conduct. Now that the company is aware of the problem, if it does not take action to solve it then the company will face joint liability with Carmelo for the defamation as a distributor of defamatory material.<br /><br />[...]<br /><br />2. Send a similar letter to wankerworld's web host which appears to be dotster.com<br /><br />[...]<br /><br />3. Send a similar letter to the Chicago police department's cyber crimes unit requesting a criminal investigation.<br /><br />[...]<br /><br /><br />4. Send a similar letter to the FBI, Chicago field office, requesting a criminal investigation. It is unlikely that either the FBI or the Chicago cops would investigate as this situation does not involve a large amount of money or breach of security of a sensitive computer system (a bank, for example).<br /><br />[...]<br /><br /><br />5. File a defamation lawsuit against Carmelo. Once that process is started it is extremely hard to back out of, and very expensive.<br /><br />[...]<br /><br />6. Strike a truce with Carmelo (removal of the offensive material and a promise that there will be no repeat or we will take the steps outlined above).<br /><br />[Erik:]Option 6 would have to also include IMO, a "public" appology on AR to all of use, where he retracts each and every one of the accusations against us, and promises that he will better his ways, and seek professional medical help. And stay off both AR and NE.<br />[/Erik]<br /><br />[...]<br /><br /><br /><br />The idea of a truce never entered my mind because C. has been so insane in the past.<br /><br />What do you guys want to do? If we perform steps 1-4, then it is all out war. I don't think anyone is interested in step 5, although it sounds like Carmelo is not in a position to pay counsel for his defense.<br /><br /><br /><br />ErikD<br /><br />1-4 is what Carmen definatly deserves. But, we must ask ourselves if getting the guy fired (even though he deserves to be) is the right thing to do, taking into consideration that he has a wife and kids to support (If that's true, and not just something he said to Don to make Don feel sorry for him).<br /><br />Jeez, it sounds like I'm all sensitive.<br /><br />[...]<br /><br /><br />On the otherhand, he has had so many opportunities to stop digging the hole he's in that he doesn't really deserve a second (or is it 50th?) chance. The recent outburst that he had with the pimp/nazi/child-abuse crap came out of the blue, and was totally unprevoked. He hasn't been the topic of discussion on AR for some time, so he had no good reason to "retaliate" against us. And lets not forget the time when we were all accused of being NAMBLA members, and God knows what else. I'm sure John or others have copies of those posts too."</i><br /><br />http://forums.nitroexpress.com/printthread.php?Board=doubles&main=43875&type=postHans Metznerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07746792258730274681noreply@blogger.com