NAFCASH's Greg Gerdes: murderer von Brunn a "true American hero", his victim a "giant simian"

This has already been mentioned by Jonathan here, but I think it deserves to be repeated and quoted. "NAFCASH" is a ridiculous pseudo-organization run by an ignorant, babbling neo-Nazi fanatic Greg Gerdes, who knows nothing about the topics on which he issues "challenges". It has been extensively covered by this blog. Below you can find excerpts from Gerdes' postings in just one thread at a neo-Nazi forum. Note that von Brunn was a Holocaust "revisionist", whose crazy ramblings had been approved for posting at CODOH before the shooting. Greg Gerdes' "NAFCASH" "challenge" has been joyfully embraced by the CODOH.

Teabagging nuts getting creepier by the day

It seems "Obama = Hitler" posters are just not enough for the far-right American activists. Now they're exploiting the bodies of victims of the Nazi brutality in their battle against the American healthcare reform. What a sad irony.

Think what you want about that reform, but this is just vomit-inducing behavior by a bunch of kooks.

Meet Robert Stacy McCain, a neo-Confederate wacko extraordinaire

[See my comment about McCain's reaction to this article at the bottom.
Also, after you read this article, be sure to read this old item at Eschaton.]

[Necessary clarification, 22.12.2009: note that in this posting I never characterize McCain as a "white supremacist". White supremacism is a very specific subset of racism and one doesn't need to be a white supremacist to be a racist. One can even be a white separatist without being a white supremacist. I hold no position on whether McCain is a white supremacist, and this posting is targeting his wacky neo-Confederate views. I also think that his words and certain actions (like publishing an article about "racial suicide" in an openly racist publication) show that he has at least a racist past.]

While our little blog is devoted mostly to debunking the specific arguments of Holocaust deniers, from time to time we write on the topics only casually related to the Holocaust and Holocaust denial.

After all, when you're dealing with the Holocaust denial, you're dealing with a great many topics at once - the historical and scientific methodologies, antisemitism, racism, conspirology, etc.

Thus, we've skewered a Stalinist professor for his Katyn denial, we've compared evolution deniers and Holocaust deniers, we've exposed a far-right author Robert Boatman, who was hiding behind his alleged support for Israel (at FrontPageMag, no less!), for the vile antisemite he was (sic; thankfully, he has died since).

And now we will fire a shot in the blogwar that has recently erupted over the former Washington Times assistant editor and popular conservative blogger Robert Stacy McCain.

But I guess an explanation is in order.

New evidence shows resettlement transports

New evidence found in the GARF in Moscow shows that transports carrying Jewish deportees left Treblinka in late 1942 and arrived some days later in Minsk, said German historian Wolfram Witte.

Read more!

You didn't believe this, did you?

Conspiraloons on Child Survivors of Auschwitz

Deniers are often so eager to create a Straw Man that they inadvertently expose their idiocy in the process. Here's a classic example. Deniers would like us to believe that, at Auschwitz, "According to the storyline, children, the sick, and the elderly were immediately 'gassed'". However, in the same article, they then reprint Soviet propaganda photographs showing Jewish children who were liberated at Auschwitz.

These Conspiraloon deniers therefore fabricate hoaxers who were both so impossibly clever that they could conceal their forgeries and machinations for over 60 years, and so improbably stupid that they would publish photographs of child survivors when they were in the process of creating a narrative in which the Nazis killed every child on arrival. In their desperation to create Straw Man history in which a genocide can only occur when there are no survivors, deniers thus prove that no such narrative was being constructed by the allies in 1945. The true narratives of the period were created by history itself, which is always complex and which rarely allows the schemes of tyrants to succeed without exceptions and ambiguities, necessitating that some survivors will indeed be left behind. In the case of Auschwitz, testimony shows that these exceptions came from the arbitrary power exercised by Mengele and other selectors, combined with the camp personnel's need for errand boys, sexual playthings, experimental subjects, and Kapo companions. Once again, in its ignorance of this history, we witness the unbearable stupidity of the Cesspit.

Note: Thanks again to KentFord9 of RODOH for help with source material.

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.

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!

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.

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.

And now for something not completely different...

[Update: see a full debunking of Furr's Katyn book.]

[Update (30.03.2007): the page with Katyn discussion is now here on Prof. Furr's site (the URL has been renamed). Prof. Furr emphasizes on his site that I have put our exchange online despite his objections - you should read the whole posting to see why (the relevant info is near the end). Basically, he does the same thing to other people, so the emphasis is, let's say, misleading.]

The reason the Holocaust denial is the most prominent example of historical pseudo-revisionism in Western world is prominence of the Holocaust itself in the West. But whenever there's an "inconvenient" past to deal with, there's also an attempted denial of that past, sometimes on a state level (the Armenian genocide), sometimes on the grassroots level, as is the case with the Katyn massacre "revisionism" in Russia.

"Katyn responsibility deniers", as they may be called, are usually Stalin-admirers, but not necessarily Communists. Quite a lot of non-Communist (but pro-Soviet) nationalists and "statists" (derzhavniki) - many of them Orthodox Christians - see Stalin as a symbol of the mighty Russian empire. Thus the need for apology of Stalin's crimes - either by justifying (e.g., the purges of 1930s are often seen as "good" purges of "Old Bolsheviks" and "Jews") or denying them.

Katyn "revisionists" basically repeat the Soviet "interpretation" of evidence, blaming the German Einsatzkommandos or other units for the massacre. The Soviet version is slightly modified for "revisionist" purposes - thus, it is claimed that there was some deliberate disinformation in the Soviet Katyn report, but it was necessary for political purposes. Namely, allegedly the Polish POWs were no longer POWs since spring 1940, actually they had been sentenced to 5 years without the right for correspondence (thus the absence of letters to families after May 1940 is explained) and were sent to labor camps near Smolensk, where they were captured by the Germans and murdered. The lie about them no longer being POWs was allegedly necessitated by a need to cover up the breach of international conventions in sentencing the POWs for labor in camps. "Conversion" of POWs into sentenced prisoners also "solves" the problem of absence of these Poles in POW-related Soviet documents (whenever they were mentioned after the massacre, they were described as "sent to UNKVD in April-May of 1940"). See how neatly everything is explained?

Savage rhetoric

No postings for some time, huh? Been busy. Still busy, actually, and it might take a couple of weeks before I return to full-scale blogging.

But I couldn't let this nasty piece of rhetoric go uncommented:

Hey George, let me tell you something, I don't have as much money as you. I have 50,000 times the influence that you do, you punk, lying, coward, Satanist, backstabbing freak. You're the people -- people like you give Jews a bad name, Soros. It's people like you who brought about the Holocaust, Soros. I stand by those words. I stand by those words. I would debate you tomorrow, Soros, on any platform, anywhere. I'll debate you anywhere. It's people like you who brought about the Holocaust, Soros. That's why I need you to shut your mouth and understand the damage you're doing to this world and to the Jewish people, George Soros.

I've already mentioned this shit-for-brains before. Apparently, he is crazy (literally). Basically, he blames "bad" Jews for the Holocaust. How nice. So maybe one should let the Nazis off the hook, if it were Jews like Soros who were responsible for the Holocaust?

Interestingly, Savage uses the "backstabbing" rhetoric, which, of course, was also succesfully used by the Nazis. And that "Satanist" epithet reminds one of "Satanic Jew" meme, which was also used by them, especially by a noted Nazi pundit Julius Streicher.

Come to think of it, shave Savage and you'll get a Streicher look-alike (he already is a Streicher "think-alike" and "talk-alike").

Mahmoud confirms his Moonbat status

Reuters:

Asked by Der Spiegel, in its cover story entitled "The man the world is afraid of", whether he stood by his earlier view the Holocaust was a myth, Ahmadinejad said: "I only accept something as the truth if I am truly convinced of it.

"In Europe there are two opinions on it. One group of researchers who are by and large politically motivated say the Holocaust happened. There is another group of researchers who have the opposite view and are by and large in prison for that."

Yeah, as if that last group was not politically motivated and as if it is their imprisonment that has anything to do with historicity of the Holocaust, and not the substance of their "research".

This is clearly a person whose logical circuits are faulty. He is fit to be neither teacher, nor president.

PS: as usual, incompetent journalists get everything wrong.

Six million Jews were killed by the Nazis and their allies in concentration camps.

Such incompetence only feeds filthy neo-Nazis, who already react:

They stopped insulting the Einsatzgruppen.
A good progress.

"Dr." Rudolf?

Another point of similarity between evolution deniers and Holocaust deniers, though maybe not as strong as the others, is the use of fraudulent credentials.

Though it seems that this phenomenon is not as widespread among the "revisionists", there are two notable examples. The first is rather straightforward - Fred Leuchter misrepresented himself as an engineer.

The second is more interesting. Germar Rudolf did not manage to receive a doctorate from Max Planck Institute for Solid State Research. Apparently, the reason for not letting him defend his dissertation was political, but whatever it was, the fact is that he has no PhD.

It is well-known that Rudolf used many pseudonyms during his "revisionist" career. While the use of pseudonyms does not matter generally, he used pseudonyms with doctorates, later explaining it thus:

In spring and summer 1992 I was called by several defence lawyers as an expert witness in several trials imposed on Revisionists in Germany (see footnote 103 of the brochure mentioned). In these trials -- as in all trials against Revisionists -- the judges refused to accept any evidence presented by the defence, including all expert witnesses. I had to learn that a chemist (me) was being refused because he was neither a toxicologist nor a historian, an engineer (Leuchter) being refused because he was neither a chemist nor a historian, a historian (Prof. Haverbeck) being refused because he was neither a chemist nor an engineer. My conclusions were that one obviously had to be at the same time an engineer, a chemist, a toxicologist, a historian and a perhaps even an barrister to be accepted as an expert witness at a German court. The legal process being so perverted in Germany, we decided to mock it by inventing a person with all these features, but then we realized that this would be a bit unrealistic, so we split that person into many.

Hardly an excuse for such a fraudulent practice.

Anyway, if you google for "Dr Germar Rudolf" you will get quite lot a of hits. That this misrepresentation of Rudolf's credentials may be deliberate is clear from a recent Cesspit message (emphasis mine):

A institution I will not identify ( due to the fact anti revisionists read this board) is raising money and as part of the effort, they are selling bricks which people can have inscribed with a name or saying.

In honor of the great contributions to Revisionism that Germar Rudolf has provided to truth seekers everywhere, I have decide to buy and dedicate a brick to him.

Besides his name, I also have a few lines available where I can include a short saying.

Does anyone on the board have any ideas to pass along.

Also, would it be appropriate to use the word Dr. in the title.

I am also open to buying a brick for some other revisionist who has moved the cause along, living or dead.

This person obviously knows that Rudolf is not "Dr.", yet considers applying this title to him anyway.

Update: heh, they just can't stop digging.

"To Dr Germar Rudolf,
incarcerated for fighting against
the false dogmas of the new religion"

("called the 'holocau$t")

Update 2: and another one:

As for the Dr. title; it might not be legal to advertise him as a doctor for business, but I feel he very much deserves the title, so why not add the Dr. title. Plus, it might help remove suspicions.

How about:
Dr. Germar Rudolf – for your relentless search for the truth. Thank you!

Update 3: as is usual for the Cesspit, when a posting becomes too embarrassing, it disappears. The first quote is by "vincentferrer", the second - by "kk", the third - by "Sushicotto".

Dumbos try to tackle arguments, fail miserably.

CODOH gurus are being literally eviscerated at this blog. Pitiful Cesspit fauna cannot ignore this fact, but neither can it refute anything, so it has to do what it does best: lie or distort.

A notorious Cesspit clown "Carto's Cutlass Supreme" thinks he has me nailed down:

It's interesting because Romanov agrees that Pechersky's claims are not believable, and the way he tries to get around that is by saying the holocaust writers lied about what Pechersky said.

The problem is that Pechersky wrote his own book which had the problematic comments.

Hey, no big deal, it's just 10 men executed at a trial where Pechersky was lead prosecution witness. (1963 Kiev)

But of course, in the very posting which he cites, I never said that anybody lied or distorted Pechersky's text. That was a possibility offered by Mr. Blatt, based on his own bad experience with Miriam Novitch.

What is important in Mr. Blatt's reply is the point that Pechersky never claimed to have seen the process itself, indeed, that the Jewish Sobibor prisoners could have learned about the method only through hearsay. Only those people who operated the gas chambers could provide the reliable information about the methods used (and they did, after the war).

The second quote I provide - the quote from the book edited by Suhl - fully confirms Mr. Blatt's point about hearsay. Not only the method described is hearsay, it is second-hand hearsay, i.e. even Pechersky's source heard this from someone else. Witnesses' credibility is in no way impeached when they repeat hearsay, if they don't claim that this is what they have seen with their own eyes (and Pechersky did no such thing, of course), and especially if they explicitly identify hearsay as such (and this is what Pechersky did).

And Graf deceptively omitted the passages which identify Pechersky's information as second-hand hearsay.

This simple idea evidently flew right through CCS' empty head.

Finally, as a comic relief, you can read Jonnie "I am not Hannover" Hargis' hysterical argument-free "response" in the same thread. What can I say? Cesspit at its best!

Update: CCS continues to dig his grave even deeper.

Mazal has a whole library of holocaust books, but offers Romanov a book that he just discounted in the previous paragraph. The only way it could have been worse is if Mazal offered Romanov a Leon Uris book!

Romanov bolsters his position by quoting Mazal's email:

No Jew who was once inside the gas chamber in operation come out alive. The information about the gassing installation came from the accused Nazi testimonies in the court proceedings.

At the end of the day, CCS is even more clueless than he was in the beginning. It was Blatt who discounted the book, and it is Blatt whom CCS quotes - not Mazal. Reading skills of a kindergartner. Anyway, what is CCS' point in the first sentence? Is the imbecile unaware that it is the very same book that Graf quotes (just an English edition), and that's why it is this very book that had to be checked? CCS, why are you so dumb?

And then follows up with his own comment, "Makes sense, doesn't it."

Actually it doesn't make sense because Romanov is someone who has been posting daily for the holocaust cause for years, and who maybe is a second online persona of Andrew Mathis. Clearly he knows that most of the information about the gas chambers is from Jewish inmates.

This is obviously untrue in the case of Sobibor. What Sobibor Sonderkommandos survived?

So Romanov has never heard of Yankel Wiernik's Year in Treblinka? Or how about this book:

Filip Müller, Auschwitz Inferno: Testimony of a Sonderkommando, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London 1979.

So Romanov has never seen Shoah (1985) by Claude Lanzmann where Abraham Bomba talks about being inside the gas chamber on DVD disk 3 chapter 2?

Yes, Treblinka and Auschwitz to debunk a point about Sobibor. How clever! (A side note: in fact, the point is generally more or less true in case of all Aktion Reinhardt camps, even where Sonderkommandos survived. Because most of SKs were just dragging the bodies out of the gas chambers - which does not mean that they would have accurate information about the method itself, including all specifics. Many did get it right - that people were gassed with engine exhaust. But some of them (along even with several Nazis not directly involved in the procedure) (probably) incorrectly thought that the engine was diesel. Others thought that different methods (like sucking the air out of chamber or steaming) were used in the past. So, as I said, the point stands - as a rule, only the people most directly involved in the murder procedure would have non-hearsay, accurate information about the details).

Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis advertises our blog

Here.

Interestingly, he doesn't address a single argument, and only engages in ad hominem attacks on Andrew Mathis.

I understand - it's hard for Jonnie to argue with informed opponents when he can't edit, censor and delete their postings. Too bad!

Update: to clarify: "CODOH Watch" is our "meta blog" in which short announcements of our messages are posted for "Google" reasons, so to say. The links lead here. So it is funny that Jonnie did not choose to advertise the main blog.

Update 2: Poor Tommy Moron, deluded as always. Kudos to Obersto for being less cowardly/obtuse than the others and posting the link to the main blog. ;-)

Update 3: Two more deniers have chimed in with ad hominems. But where's the discussion of specific arguments? Why the dodging? And here I sit thinking that "revisionism", that intellectual adventure of the previous century, is all about debate... NOT!

Update 4: Here's Andrew's response.

The Cesspit Stirs

Never let it be said that our friends at The Cesspit are quick off the mark. Having noticed the existence of this blog on April 10, it's taken Johnny Hargis (57) and the gang until, what is it today? May 18 to realise that we have a mirror-site, which we deliberately called CODOH Watch in order to direct some Google traffic our way. All it consists of is Andrew placing links to every post on here and poking fun at Hannover et al in short one-liners. So now sit back and enjoy the overreaction:

-----------------------------------
Hannover
Thu May 18, 2006 11:37 am
Tinfoil Hat Mathis and The Nutjobs bring you CODOH Watch
-----------------------------------
Beautiful. A great indicator of the strength of our points.
You gotta see this wacko site. They're in a state of panic about the thorough debunking we're doing of the so called 'holocau$t'. Think of it, in their desperation they resort to building a site dedicated to attacking CODOH. Are they obsessed or what? You gotta love it.
see:CODOH Watch
Take note that Tinfoil Hat Mathis and The Nutjobs have been utterly demolished here at this forum.
- Hannover

In typical Hannover style, he then posts again, having pulled off his trusty list of links to past threads hallowing famous debating 'victories':

-----------------------------------
Hannover
Thu May 18, 2006 11:48 am
-----------------------------------
The CODOH Revisionist Forum has given Tinfoil Hat Mathis plenty of rope to hang himself and his 'holocau$t' lies. Take note that he is the same nutjob who specializes in threatening Revisionists.
Also remember, Tinfoil Hat Mathis is the premiere spokesman for the so called 'Holocau$t' History Project, talk about desperate. Read these and see just what a fool Mathis is.
- Hannover

'Holo. Hist. Proj. rep. attempts to intimidate Bradley Smith'

'Holo. Hist. Proj.'s Andrew Mathis humidity/gassing canard'

'holocaust' denial article by Andrew Mathis debunked here'

'Prof. Mc Nally dissects HHP's Andrew Mathis' bogus article'

'Holo. Hist. Proj.'s Andrew Mathis on Zyklon scent removal'

'Green, Mathis refuted / cyanide: lice, humans, & more'

'Believer org. spokesman, Andrew Mathis, demolished in debate'

'Holo. Hist. Proj.'s Andrew Mathis attempts damage control'

'Email from Andrew Mathis (The Holocaust History Project)'

'holocaust' History Project to unveil section on Treblinka'

This, by the way, is vintage Hargis: whereas deniers are allowed to reopen debates that have long been settled, everyone else is 'debunked' once and for all. The constant references to 'panic' and 'imminent shattering of the myth' are also vintage Hannover, betraying, as we've said before, a perhaps dim awareness of his own mortality (Johnny is 57) and the fact that though he rules supreme in the Führerbunker, aside from a handful of acolytes, no one takes him seriously. That's why we check in at his forum, so we can have a good laugh.

And then we have the comment of Friedrich Braun:

-----------------------------------
friedrich braun
Thu May 18, 2006 11:54 am
-----------------------------------
Andrew Mathis writes:
Wilhelm Stäglich Dies
CODOH hates it when I celebrate deaths of Holocaust deniers, but let me just say: This bastard should rot in hell.

Now, how psychologically twisted and morally depraved do you have to be to do a little dance while high-fiving each other and yelping with joy because someone died? Did Stäglich participate in some "war crimes"? NO. All he ever did is write books exposing the endless lies of the holocau$t industry...and that's enough to to earn him eternal enmity.
Mathis has always struck me as both a creep and an asshole.
What kind of a man hates with such blind passion?

And thank you for overreacting precisely in the way Andrew hoped for - poor ol' Herr Braun does not seem to realise he has been comprehensively wound up.

A short while later, another specimen of pond-life, Vali, chimes in wondering why CODOH Watch hasn't met the NAFCASH 'Treblinka Challenge':

-----------------------------------
vali
Thu May 18, 2006 12:51 pm
CODOH Watch and NAFCASH
-----------------------------------
I notice that the mentally retarded/ill cowards and liars at CODOH Watch have yet to make any comments on the NAFCASH site, much less accept any of the NAFCASH challenges. What does it say about an issue when the Jews give it the silent treatment?
By the way, if you haven't visited the - http://www.nafcash.com/ - site lately, The Treblinka CSI Challenge is up to $210,000.00 and the NAFCASH Forensic Challenge is up to $25,000.00.
I wonder what that idiot - loser Mathis is waiting for?

Such rage. Such coherence. Such a shame Vali is projecting so badly onto us that one might wonder whether he might not be a cousin of Celtic Patriot.

Denier-baiting: fun for all the family...

Update:
Friedrich Braun sneers:

Oops, I almost forgot. That would be Mathis "PhD" of course.
In the cognitively demanding field of... English lit. -- and from a second rate place. A trained, one-lobed monkey can get a grad. degree in English lit....it's not exactly particle physics.

We look forward to seeing Herr Braun's own qualifications. A Habilitation perhaps?
- Nick Terry, PhD in History, King's College London

WWND?

WingNutDaily:

And he [Bush] will be lying, again, just as he lied when he said: "Massive deportation of the people here is unrealistic – it's just not going to work."

Not only will it work, but one can easily estimate how long it would take. If it took the Germans less than four years to rid themselves of 6 million Jews, many of whom spoke German and were fully integrated into German society, it couldn't possibly take more than eight years to deport 12 million illegal aliens, many of whom don't speak English and are not integrated into American society.

This has been written by Vox Day, the moonbat of epic proportions, whom Orac fisks here.

What is ironic about Vox Day's comments is that earlier he wrote:

But I have to admit, I've never seen a single piece of evidence for the 6 million figure, which seems strange to me given the German predilection for copious record-keeping.

(No, he is not a denier, just an ignoramus.)

Update: just to show that such a deportation is not possible in a civilized way, here's one of the Nazi deportation reports. Very illuminating.

What's with the IQ and stuff?

White supremacists are obsessed with IQ. Why, then, most of them are mumbling imbeciles, with apparent IQs of chimps?

Here's an excellent example from the Stormfront forum. Some "Celtic_Patriot" learns of the recent news about Germany updating the list of the German Jews killed in the Holocaust. His conclusion? Holocaust is a hoax, what else!

Being a Jew, you'd like only Jews to speak for the whole World, only problem is, China and Germany don't care about the Jews anymore, the 50 years of mourning is up and it's on with regular business, after all it was only, it turns out, 150,000 Jews, not 6,000,000. Oh well, time to shut down the Hoax museums, big deal.

When it is pointed out to him that the report speaks about the German Jews only, and thus even in principle cannot "disprove" the total accepted approximate figure of the Holocaust victims, this yahoo stubbornly goes on and on, digging himself even deeper into manure of his own making.


Celtic_Patriot, apparently an high-IQ specimen
Enjoy the thread!

PS: Later the freak says:

Whites are smarter than Jews.

Bwahahahaha!

Update: he's still at it. Please, tell me, where are such retards born? Surely near some nuclear plant?