Auschwitz photographs
Blakely
fakes. There are 100's of pictures of the Loch Ness monster, so
we are supposed to believe in that also.
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
Orac
<patblakel...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>It took 48 years for the photos to surface? Almost certainly
>fakes.
Please prove that the photos are "almost certainly fakes." On what evidence do
you conclude that they are "almost certainly fakes"?
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"
CuriousGeorge613
"It took 48 years for the photos to surface? Almost certainly fakes. There are
100's of pictures of the Loch Ness monster, so
we are supposed to believe in that also."
Remember that for 48 years, Poland was under the iron heel of the Soviets, who
kept a tight hold on information concerning Auschwitz. Once the Soviet Union
fell apart, the Soviet archives were opened for scholars. Much of what was
found substantiates the allegations that had been in circulation for years
about the Holocaust.
John Morris
Hash: SHA1
nee...@trial.freedom.net writes:
> Sara <cata...@concentric.net> wrote in message
> news:catamont-190...@ts008d11.den-co.concentric.net...
> > Denial:
> > Where are the photos showing the ovens of Auschwitz? Where are the
> > pictures of the allegedly gassed victims there? Since such photos do not
> > exist, and never have, it is clear that there were never any murders
> > committed at Auschwitz-Birkenau.
> > Rebuttal:
> > Actually such photos do exist. Authenticated photographs taken by Nazis in
> > 1941 through 1945 at Auschwitz as well as pictures taken by Soviet troops
> > after the liberation of the camp in January 1945 are portrayed in the 1993
> > Indiana University Press book Auschwitz: A History in Photographs.
> How did the Soviet troops take photographs of the ovens at Auschwitz
> when all the ovens had been removed and the "gas chamber" had been
> converted to an air raid shelter?
Where does it say in the "rebuttal" that they did? AFAIK, the only
pictures of the crematory furnaces were "taken by Nazis in 1941
through 1945 at Auschwitz."
> Do you mean they took photographs
> of the two ovens they RECONSTRUCTED at Auschwitz when they
> converted the air raid shelter to a gas chamber with holes on the roof for
> pouring in the Zyklon B?
In fact, it is the other way around. The Auschwitz gas chamber was
converted to an air raid shelter for the SS hospital shortly after the
crematoria at nearby Birkenau were finished.
> They were originally *three* ovens at
> Auschwitz before the Germans converted the crematorium into an air
> raid shelter. Do these Russian photographs show three ovens at
> Auschwitz?
Again, what Russian photographs? The only Russian photographs I know
show a few liberated prisoners and several hundred bodies left behind
by SS when they marched the maid body of prisoners out of the camp.
> As for Birkenau, all the ovens had been removed by the
> time the Russians arrived, or if they weren't removed, they were blown
> up when the Germans allegedly destroyed the three remaining Kremas.
Again, you are confused. The SS construction office documented the
crematory project in photographs. Those are the photographs we have
of the Birkenau crematoria.
As for your question-begging statement about the destruction of the
crematoria, even Revisionists do not claim that crematoria were
destroyed by anyone other than the SS themselves. The aerial
reconaissance photo of January 16, 1945 shows quite clearly that the
crematory were already dismantled. What Revisionists dispute--and for
no reason other than to deny history--Revisionists dispute whether the
SS or the Russians dynamited the gas chambers at Kremas II and III.
But does the Revisionist explanation make any sense? Revisionists
would have us believe that the Russians found no evidence of mass
murder at Birkenau, so they made it look as if the Nazis had destroyed
the evidence to cover their tracks. Revisionists also falsely claim
that the Russians fabricated the evidence at Auschwitz and that they
further allowed no independent investigation at Auschwitz or
Birkenau. Now if all that were true, wouldn't it have been simpler
for the Russians to have left the Birkenau gas chambers intact and
fabricated evidence there, too?
If you insist on spreading falsehoods, I suggest you go to CODOH and
read what falsehoods other falsifiers are spreading. Otherwise, it
simply looks as if you don't know what you are talking about.
- --
John Morris <John....@UAlberta.CA>
at University of Alberta <Multi pertransibunt & augebitur scientia>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.5, an Emacs/PGP interface
Charset: noconv
iQA/AwUBOU5uiZQgvG272fn9EQItxACfenQ8fCG16HB+uQhwadbOrOXZxq4AoJ8Q
MsWKqrHBzCh697+/J6+xhQoc
=BF+n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Buck Turgidson
> It took 48 years for the photos to surface? Almost certainly
> fakes. There are 100's of pictures of the Loch Ness monster, so
> we are supposed to believe in that also.
Well, Don, I think you are even wrong about Nessie; I don't think there are
"100's" of her. But if we had as much evidence in her existence as we do about
Auschwitz, we would be compelled to believe in her.
As a for-instance: here is a URL to a photo.
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/auschwitz/images/burning-pit.jpg
This is the quite famous photo, taken by a SK, of a body being dragged to the
burning-pit at Auschwitz. The area is littered with corpses. It is consistent
with survivor testimony, Nazi testimony, Nazi documentation, forensic (i.e.
archaeological) evidence, and even the aerial photographs and maps. (Note the
forest and the electric fence.) This photo is widely accepted as factual.
Now--your job is to describe to me, in detail, why this photo is a fake and how
it was faked. No "certainly," no "probably," not "it may be so," no "it is
known," none of that. No fudging. I want hard solid proof that this photo has
been faked and evidence as to how. I want to know how the corpses got to be in
the state they are in. I want solid evidence that the smoke in the photo is
*not* coming from a burning pit, but from some fakery. I want a date, the people
involved, the location.
Can you do it? Can you debunk even this one photo with solid, dependable fact?
Give it a shot. If you can, we'll find another to work on. There are only a few
thousand after that.
-- --Dep
"Always tell the truth. It's the § "Truth is just...truth. You can't
easiest thing to remember." § have opinions about truth."
--David Mamet --Peter Schickele
Like short-haired women? Snotty comments? Penguins?
http://members.aol.com/deppitybob/shlu/PAGEONE.html
Ceacaa
>Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
>From: Buck Turgidson deppi...@mindspring.com
>Date: 6/19/00 9:43 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <394EF679...@mindspring.com>
>
>Blakely wrote:
>
>> It took 48 years for the photos to surface? Almost certainly
>> fakes. There are 100's of pictures of the Loch Ness monster, so
>> we are supposed to believe in that also.
>
>Well, Don, I think you are even wrong about Nessie; I don't think there are
>"100's" of her. But if we had as much evidence in her existence as we do
>about
>Auschwitz, we would be compelled to believe in her.
>
>As a for-instance: here is a URL to a photo.
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/auschwitz/images/burning-pit.jpg
>
>This is the quite famous photo, taken by a SK, of a body being dragged to the
>burning-pit at Auschwitz. The area is littered with corpses. It is consistent
>with survivor testimony, Nazi testimony, Nazi documentation, forensic (i.e.
>archaeological) evidence, and even the aerial photographs and maps. (Note the
>forest and the electric fence.) This photo is widely accepted as factual.
>Now--your job is to describe to me, in detail, why this photo is a fake and
>how
>it was faked. No "certainly," no "probably," not "it may be so," no "it is
>known," none of that. No fudging. I want hard solid proof that this photo has
>been faked and evidence as to how. I want to know how the corpses got to be
>in
>the state they are in.
[snip]
>Can you do it? Can you debunk even this one photo with solid, dependable
>fact?
>Give it a shot. If you can, we'll find another to work on. There are only a
>few
>thousand after that.
> [Ceacaa comments]
Why do you suppose that the photograph
has to be show to be a fake?
You believe in burning pits with
how many THOUSANDS of bodies in
them? 5,000, 10,000, 25,000?
You have a picture of 19 bodies, Dep.
19, I repeat.
Sort of blows a hole in YOUR claim.
Holocaust fanatic Mark Van Alstine
admitted as much but claimed that
the real pile of bodies was just out of
the picture!
Obviously people died at Auschwitz despite the efforts of the Germans,
particularly in the summer of 1942
during the great typhus outbreak.
It was the SS unsuccessful experience with "pit cremation" (smokey, messy,
expensive) in 1942 which lead to the
building of the expensive Kremas of
Birkenau in 1943.
You will notice how messy and smokey
the picture is.
If http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/auschwitz/images/burning-pit.jpg is
supposed
to be a picture of a "mass burning pit"
of Holocaust Myth then you are
about 4,981 bodies short Dep.
Ceacaa
>the state they are in. I want solid evidence that the smoke in the photo is
>*not* coming from a burning pit, but from some fakery. I want a date, the
>people
>involved, the location.
>
>Can you do it? Can you debunk even this one photo with solid, dependable
>fact?
>Give it a shot. If you can, we'll find another to work on. There are only a
>few
>thousand after that.
>
>
>-- --Dep
[Ceacaa comments]
Believers try to claim that
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/auschwitz/images/burning-pit.jpg
is "Proof" of the Holocaust which was
allegedly taken from the doorway
of Krema V
But go to
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/auschwitz/images/k5-cremation-pits.jpg
and compare the two views from a
doorway. The first question which should
spring to anyone's mind is,
What happened to the doorstep?
The next question should be,
What happened to the other 4,981
bodies which were supposed to have
been part of the "burn"?
Buck Turgidson
> Poor Dep has trouble with numbers.
>
> [snip]
> >Can you do it? Can you debunk even this one photo with solid, dependable
> >fact?
> >Give it a shot. If you can, we'll find another to work on. There are only a
> >few
> >thousand after that.
Typical Denier rubbish: if you can't produce every single corpse, there was no
Holocaust.
For lurkers: The photo in question was taken secretly by a Sonderkommando. It was
one of several that were hastily snapped before they could be discovered by Nazi
guards. Once outside the camp, only two of the photos could be developed, and
this was one of them. So we have to lay aside Mr. Allen's apparent belief that
the SK should have had the leisurely time to set up the camera, somehow frame it
as to encompass not only the burning pit and its contents but also all the other
collected corpses as well as the SKs, get a clear, steady photo, and still manage
to keep the whole exercise hidden, in order for it to be true.
What Mr. Allen cannot do, however, is prove that this is NOT a burning pit. He
cannot prove that the corpses on the ground are not Jews. He cannot prove that
the fence in the background, between the SKs and the forest, is not Auschwitz.
And ordinarily he might not have to go to such lengths, but in this case, the
photo is an illustration from real life that verifies survivor testimony, Nazi
accounts, Nazi documents, and aerial photographs. All those point to this
conclusion (that burning pits were used) to the exclusion of any argument that
they were not; and this photo confirms it.
That is what Mr. Allen cannot disprove.
Buck Turgidson
> Another Believer Myth popped
> >the state they are in. I want solid evidence that the smoke in the photo is
> >*not* coming from a burning pit, but from some fakery. I want a date, the
> >people
> >involved, the location.
> >
> >Can you do it? Can you debunk even this one photo with solid, dependable
> >fact?
> >Give it a shot. If you can, we'll find another to work on. There are only a
> >few
> >thousand after that.
> >
> >
> >-- --Dep
> [Ceacaa comments]
> Believers try to claim that
> http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/auschwitz/images/burning-pit.jpg
> is "Proof" of the Holocaust which was
> allegedly taken from the doorway
> of Krema V
>
> But go to
> http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/auschwitz/images/k5-cremation-pits.jpg
> and compare the two views from a
> doorway. The first question which should
> spring to anyone's mind is,
> What happened to the doorstep?
The first question in my mind is, what on earth are you talking about? I compared
the picture on the left to the picture on the right and found no significant
difference beyond the ravages of time. Perhaps Mr. Allen is failing to take into
account the difference in lighting in the photos and the differences in upkeep at
each time. Other than that, I am not sure what point he is trying to make here.
Buck Turgidson
> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
> >From: Buck Turgidson deppi...@mindspring.com
> >Date: 6/20/00 2:40 PM Pacific Daylight Time
> >Message-id: <394FE4C8...@mindspring.com>
> [Ceacaa comments]
> The doorway of Krema V has a
> solid concrete stoop which extends
> well beyond the doorway. This shows
> in both the photograph taken of
> the doorway's ruin and the plan
> of the "chambre a gaz nord".
> See where the lines from point 1 and 2
> cross, Dep?
>
> http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/auschwitz/images/k5-cremation-pits.jpg
>
> The doorway in the picture
> claimed to be taken from
> the same doorway has no stoop.
>
> All your babbling about "ravages of time"
> is usually used by Believers to explain
> why that one little old hole in Krema II
> isn't square Dep.
>
> It is pretty 'stooped' to allege that the
> "ravages of time" ADDED a solid
> concrete stoop of over a meter wide.
>
> Maybe little Revisionist elves in the woods came and did it?
This is what I am trying to tell you: it IS there. I can see it. The outline of
it is very faint, but that is to be expected in a black-and-white photo shot from
inside a darkened room to an outside with glaring light. Were I in the same room
with you, I would point at the outline so you could see it (or at least no longer
deny its presence), but it is definitely there. I didn't even have to strain to
see it. It was pretty plain.
Buck Turgidson
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:33:56 -0600, Buck Turgidson
> <deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> [..]
>
> >For lurkers: The photo in question was taken secretly by a
> >Sonderkommando. It was one of several that were hastily snapped
> >before they could be discovered by Nazi guards. Once outside the
> >camp, only two of the photos could be developed, and this was one
> >of them. So we have to lay aside Mr. Allen's apparent belief that
> >the SK should have had the leisurely time to set up the camera,
> >somehow frame it as to encompass not only the burning pit and its
> >contents but also all the other collected corpses as well as the
> >SKs, get a clear, steady photo, and still manage to keep the whole
> >exercise hidden, in order for it to be true.
> >
> >What Mr. Allen cannot do, however, is prove that this is NOT a
> >burning pit.
>
> Since you addressed lurkers:
>
> Your claim is no more "provable" than that of anyone else. You make
> a fool of yourself pretending your claim is somehow more believable
> simply because you say it is. You've got an old photo that may or may
> not be doctored. This photo does not support your claim of "thousands
> of bodies." You're blathering on and on that someone else should
> disprove a claim that you cannot prove to begin with. In a debate,
> you lose.
Not so. For in the one aspect you are right--this one photograph is not "proof,"
though it is apparent that something sinister is going on--corpses are lying
about and a person is dragging one toward some smoke. In the background is a
barbed wire fence and beyond that are trees. But here is why it *is* proof:
Maps from the time show the placement of the burning pit, the gas chamber, the
fence, and the forest in the same dimensions as can be seen in the photo. In
short, the maps and the photo portray the same area.
Testimony about the burning pits abounds. Not only survivors, but Nazis
themselves testified (and documented, and journalized) about the burning pits.
There have been archaeological digs (Hydrokop comes to mind) in the areas of the
burning pits, coming up with core samples including human bone, human fat, hair,
and clothing.
All of this (and I am severely annotating here, you understand) points to one
conclusion and no other: that the photo is indeed of gas chamber victims being
taken to the burning pit. No other logical explanation can be made for the
photo. This is (thank you to John Morris) the "consilience of inductions." Not
only does the evidence point to this conclusion, it excludes all others.
What I have said is that Deniers cannot come up with an alternate explanation of
the photo, based on good solid evidence, that would *disprove* what I have said.
And you have not, "Cheryl." All you have done is once again assert that the
photo is not so.
Can you prove it is not so? Can you contradict all the other evidence that
demands that this photo be what historians claim it to be? If so, you would be
the first.
chery...@my-deja.com
<deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
[..]
>For lurkers: The photo in question was taken secretly by a
>Sonderkommando. It was one of several that were hastily snapped
>before they could be discovered by Nazi guards. Once outside the
>camp, only two of the photos could be developed, and this was one
>of them. So we have to lay aside Mr. Allen's apparent belief that
>the SK should have had the leisurely time to set up the camera,
>somehow frame it as to encompass not only the burning pit and its
>contents but also all the other collected corpses as well as the
>SKs, get a clear, steady photo, and still manage to keep the whole
>exercise hidden, in order for it to be true.
>
>What Mr. Allen cannot do, however, is prove that this is NOT a
>burning pit.
Since you addressed lurkers:
Your claim is no more "provable" than that of anyone else. You make
a fool of yourself pretending your claim is somehow more believable
simply because you say it is. You've got an old photo that may or may
not be doctored. This photo does not support your claim of "thousands
of bodies." You're blathering on and on that someone else should
disprove a claim that you cannot prove to begin with. In a debate,
you lose.
>-- --Dep
>
>"Always tell the truth. It's the § "Truth is just...truth. You
> easiest thing to remember." § can'thave opinions about truth."
> --David Mamet --Peter Schickele
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Ceacaa
Ceacaa
>From: chery...@my-deja.com
>Date: 6/20/00 5:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <8ip1em$4a0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
>
>On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:33:56 -0600, Buck Turgidson
><deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>[..]
>
>>For lurkers: The photo in question was taken secretly by a
>>Sonderkommando. It was one of several that were hastily snapped
>>before they could be discovered by Nazi guards. Once outside the
>>camp, only two of the photos could be developed, and this was one
>>of them. So we have to lay aside Mr. Allen's apparent belief that
>>the SK should have had the leisurely time to set up the camera,
>>somehow frame it as to encompass not only the burning pit and its
>>contents but also all the other collected corpses as well as the
>>SKs, get a clear, steady photo, and still manage to keep the whole
>>exercise hidden, in order for it to be true.
>>
>>What Mr. Allen cannot do, however, is prove that this is NOT a
>>burning pit.
>
>Since you addressed lurkers:
>
>Your claim is no more "provable" than that of anyone else. You make
>a fool of yourself pretending your claim is somehow more believable
>simply because you say it is. You've got an old photo that may or may
>not be doctored. This photo does not support your claim of "thousands
>of bodies." You're blathering on and on that someone else should
>disprove a claim that you cannot prove to begin with. In a debate,
>you lose.
>
>>-- --Dep
Dep is confused as usual...the photograph
is part of a series of 4 photographs.
Starting a photograph of with women
running along (allegedly into the
"gas chamber") and ending with the
picture of the 19 bodies comming out of
the gas chamber (and allegedly taken
from inside the gas chamber).
Dep's ommission compromises understanding the photographs. The
"story" behind the photographs is that
they are a complete series taken about
30 minutes apart.
There are questions about
Dep's "proof". The first being that
it doesn't show any "mass burning"
but seems to be of just 19 bodies
rather than the 2-5 thousand of the
Story.
The "excuse" given by Believers is
that the HUGE pile of bodies is just
a tiny bit out of range of the camera
and that the effort to take the atrocity
photograph just...didn't ...quite...
get the proof.....but if you close your
eyes and say, "I Believe, I Believe
it is almost as good.
Secondly it pretty clearly wasn't
taken from the doorway of
Krema V because the north facing
doorway of Krema V had a large
stoop.
One could also comment on the
conflict between the stories that
Sondercommandos at Krema V and
VI had to wear gas masks. Here
we have an odd collection of
unmasked men poking around the
19 bodies. None of the men are
wearing the familiar striped uniform
of Camp inmates. If anything they
look like they are civilians or SS
noncommissioned.
Pressac comments that the photographs
have been retouched by someone,
possibly the staff at the Auschwitz
State Museum and Tourist Promotion
Board.
Anyway, other than being the wrong
number of bodies, the wrong place,
the wrong method of dying to
support Holocaust Belief the
photograph may be a nice piece of
evidence that people actually did
die at Auschwitz. Except everyone
knew that already.
Ceacaa
>From: Buck Turgidson deppi...@mindspring.com
>Date: 6/20/00 10:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <39504D47...@mindspring.com>
>
>chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:33:56 -0600, Buck Turgidson
>> <deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>> [..]
>>
>> >For lurkers: The photo in question was taken secretly by a
>> >Sonderkommando. It was one of several that were hastily snapped
>> >before they could be discovered by Nazi guards. Once outside the
>> >camp, only two of the photos could be developed, and this was one
>> >of them. So we have to lay aside Mr. Allen's apparent belief that
>> >the SK should have had the leisurely time to set up the camera,
>> >somehow frame it as to encompass not only the burning pit and its
>> >contents but also all the other collected corpses as well as the
>> >SKs, get a clear, steady photo, and still manage to keep the whole
>> >exercise hidden, in order for it to be true.
>> >
>> >What Mr. Allen cannot do, however, is prove that this is NOT a
>> >burning pit.
>>
>> Since you addressed lurkers:
>>
>> Your claim is no more "provable" than that of anyone else. You make
>> a fool of yourself pretending your claim is somehow more believable
>> simply because you say it is. You've got an old photo that may or may
>> not be doctored. This photo does not support your claim of "thousands
>> of bodies." You're blathering on and on that someone else should
>> disprove a claim that you cannot prove to begin with. In a debate,
>> you lose.
>
[Ceacaa comments]
The obvious question to ask Dep is
why hasn't any Believer gone and
dug a little hole right to the north
of Krema V?
You mention the unreleased
Hydrokop Report...and mention
the finding of hair as proof of
a burning pit. I can only assume that
you are stoned or believe in Magic
Fireproof Holocaust hair? Please
tell us which.
You mention "survivor testimony"...
like the need for 'gas masks" when
removing bodies...see anygas masks being worn in your
big "proof"?
You still have not addressed the
question of the missing doorstoop.
You still have not addressed the
problem of missing 4,981 bodies.
You still have not addressed the
known fact that the typhus outbreak
of summer 1942 led to the use of
messy, smokey cremation pyres.
You make a typical brazen Believe
claim that "maps from the time show
the placement of the burning pit..."
What the heck are you babbling about?
Ceacaa
>Message-id: <39504A62...@mindspring.com>
>
>Ceacaa wrote:
>
>> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
>> >From: Buck Turgidson deppi...@mindspring.com
>> >Message-id: <394FE4C8...@mindspring.com>
>> >
>> >Ceacaa wrote:
>> >
>> >> Another Believer Myth popped
>> >>
>> >> of Krema V
>> >>
>> >> But go to
>> >>
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/auschwitz/images/k5-cremation-pits.jpg
>> >> and compare the two views from a
>> >> doorway. The first question which should
>> >> spring to anyone's mind is,
>> >> What happened to the doorstep?
>> >
>> >The first question in my mind is, what on earth are you talking about? I
>> >compared
>> >the picture on the left to the picture on the right and found no
>significant
>> >difference beyond the ravages of time. Perhaps Mr. Allen is failing to
>take
>> >into
>> >account the difference in lighting in the photos and the differences in
>> >upkeep at
>> >each time. Other than that, I am not sure what point he is trying to make
>> >here.
>>
>> [Ceacaa comments]
>> The doorway of Krema V has a
>> solid concrete stoop which extends
>> well beyond the doorway. This shows
>> in both the photograph taken of
>> the doorway's ruin and the plan
>> of the "chambre a gaz nord".
>> See where the lines from point 1 and 2
>> cross, Dep?
>>
>> http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/auschwitz/images/k5-cremation-pits.jpg
>>
>> The doorway in the picture
>> claimed to be taken from
>> the same doorway has no stoop.
>>
>> All your babbling about "ravages of time"
>> is usually used by Believers to explain
>> why that one little old hole in Krema II
>> isn't square Dep.
>>
>> It is pretty 'stooped' to allege that the
>> "ravages of time" ADDED a solid
>> concrete stoop of over a meter wide.
>>
>> Maybe little Revisionist elves in the woods came and did it?
>
>of
>it is very faint, but that is to be expected in a black-and-white photo shot
>from
>inside a darkened room to an outside with glaring light. Were I in the same
>room
>with you, I would point at the outline so you could see it (or at least no
>longer
>deny its presence), but it is definitely there. I didn't even have to strain
>to
>see it. It was pretty plain.
>
Well I will take this as an admission
that there was a stoop and as
proof of the power of Belief.
Dep, the stoop is on the same level as
the floor of the Krema V and extends
out beyond the doorway.
Whatever you see outlined is not at
the same level as the floor.
And, if you look at the photograph of
the ruins of the Krema V doorway you
can see that the poured in place
concrete stoop had a line down its
middle.
By the way...what to take a little look
up to the upper left hand part of the
doorway? See the block or beam end
in the doorway? Do you think that
would have made closing the
"gas chamber" door a little hard?
In fact, I can't see any sign of a
secure hold back 2,000 victim
door in the doorway. Do you
think the gas chamber didn't
really have a door?
Buck Turgidson
<snippage for bandwidth>
http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/auschwitz/images/k5-cremation-pits.jpg
So wait. First you were saying there was no stoop; now you are saying there was
one, but it is at a different level?
And no, I do not see a "line down the middle."
>
>
> By the way...what to take a little look
> up to the upper left hand part of the
> doorway? See the block or beam end
> in the doorway? Do you think that
> would have made closing the
> "gas chamber" door a little hard?
No. It doesn't seem to be part of the doorway. It's impossible to tell what it
really is: could be a brace on the open door (though I don't think so), some part
of the jamb, I am not sure. But to me, it doesn't look to be in a plane to
obstruct anything. One thing, though: take a look at the plan just above it and
you will see such a thing accounted for on the plan.
>
>
> In fact, I can't see any sign of a
> secure hold back 2,000 victim
> door in the doorway. Do you
> think the gas chamber didn't
> really have a door?
Picture's a little DARK, Mr. Allen. Such errors in composition and lighting are
likely to occur under the pressure of knowing that taking such a photo in secrecy
could get one tortured and killed.
-- --Dep
"Always tell the truth. It's the § "Truth is just...truth. You can't
easiest thing to remember." § have opinions about truth."
--David Mamet --Peter Schickele
Like short-haired women? Snotty comments? Penguins?
http://members.aol.com/deppitybob/shlu/PAGEONE.html
Buck Turgidson
> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
> >From: Buck Turgidson deppi...@mindspring.com
> >-- --Dep
> [Ceacaa comments]
> The obvious question to ask Dep is
> why hasn't any Believer gone and
> dug a little hole right to the north
> of Krema V?
Beats me. Maybe they have and I haven't read about it. If I had the money to go
to Poland and the permission to do so, I would certainly mount an expedition of
my own, just to prove you wrong, Mr. Allen. Luckily, I don't have to, regardless;
there is far more evidence to support the Holocaust than there is to question it.
>
>
> You mention the unreleased
> Hydrokop Report...and mention
> the finding of hair as proof of
> a burning pit. I can only assume that
> you are stoned or believe in Magic
> Fireproof Holocaust hair? Please
> tell us which.
*sigh*
Do you believe that in every fire in every place, that all material and all fuel
are consumed with an efficiency of 100%?
>
>
> You mention "survivor testimony"...
> like the need for 'gas masks" when
> removing bodies...see anygas masks being worn in your
> big "proof"?
I also don't see anyone "removing" bodies. The bodies have already been removed.
They are being dragged to the burning pit now, in the picture.
>
>
> You still have not addressed the
> question of the missing doorstoop.
Yes, I did. See the other post.
> You still have not addressed the
> problem of missing 4,981 bodies.
Let me ask you this: you're under pressure to take a photo.You have very little
time between tasks, perhaps only minutes. If you are caught taking this picture,
you will certainly be tortured and killed, and the photo will be confiscated,
never to be seen. Secrecy is therefore at the utmost. Now, you are inside a
building; the guards you want to avoid are outside the building. Do you:
a) Take your time and look the camera for the widest possible angle and the best
possible light, risking your life by going outdoors and, in what has to be
unnatural-looking behavior, maneuver yourself so that you can see the gas
chamber, the bodies, the burning pit, the SKs, and maybe some guards in the
photo; or
b) Take the first photo you have an opportunity to and hide the camera with all
possible haste.
Well? Which is it? The first one might get exactly the picture you are looking
for, Mr. Allen, but it also draws attention to yourself and exposes your daring
exercise to failure (and you to death). The second one, you have a chance of not
just liviing through your daring exercise but also in producing a documentary
image of one of the greatest crimes in all humanity.
Think REAL hard.
>
>
> You still have not addressed the
> known fact that the typhus outbreak
> of summer 1942 led to the use of
> messy, smokey cremation pyres.
I think it was more likely the regular cyanide outbreaks in the gas chambers.
>
>
> You make a typical brazen Believe
> claim that "maps from the time show
> the placement of the burning pit..."
> What the heck are you babbling about?
Go look at the map at the website. Compare it with aerial photographs--real and
unaltered ones. Compare that with blueprints. Compare that with Nazi and survivor
testimony. Compare that with Nazi documents.
Now. What have you done to prove the picture is NOT what I say it is? Not one
thing. Not a damned thing. Oh, sure, asked a couple of pointless questions, but
the heart of the matter is this: that is a picture of SOMETHING. If it is not
what I say it is, then what is it? In the absence of the accepted and supported
explanation of that photo, what reasoning do you have for its existence? And can
you prove what you claim?
Well?
chery...@my-deja.com
<deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
[..]
>> Since you addressed lurkers:
>>
>>Your claim is no more "provable" than that of anyone else. You
>>make a fool of yourself pretending your claim is somehow more
>>believable simply because you say it is. You've got an old photo
>>that may or may not be doctored. This photo does not support your
>>claim of "thousands of bodies." You're blathering on and on that
>>someone else should disprove a claim that you cannot prove to begin
>>with. In a debate, you lose.
To begin with *you* addressed your comments to "lurkers" (me).
Then, as I have noticed is a trend with "believers," because my
reply doesn't follow exactly as you believe you immediately go on
the offensive and expect me to disprove an assertion you didn't
prove to begin with. I am neither a "revisionist" nor a "believer."
I was lurking and following a thread. I followed a link to a photo
and here we are.
>Not so. For in the one aspect you are right--this one photograph
>is not "proof," though it is apparent that something sinister is
>going on--corpses are lying about and a person is dragging one
>toward some smoke. In the background is a barbed wire fence and
>beyond that are trees. But here is why it *is* proof:
My reply was in response to your claim of 10,000 dead Jewish people
being burned. The photo obviously does not show ten thousand gassed
Jews being burned. What the photo does show is alive people burning
dead people. Cause of death of the dead is unknown. Whether or not
the dead are Jewish is unknown as well. Then there is the fact that
the validity of the photo itself is in dispute.
>Maps from the time show the placement of the burning pit, the gas
>chamber, the fence, and the forest in the same dimensions as can
>be seen in the photo. In short, the maps and the photo portray the
>same area.
>
>Testimony about the burning pits abounds. Not only survivors, but
>Nazis themselves testified (and documented, and journalized) about
>the burning pits.
With all the diseases that surely abounded in prison camps why will
you only accept the possibility of "gassed Jews?" What proof do
*you* have that the people being burned are even Jews? What
proof do *you* have that they were gassed? What proof do *you*
have to back up your assertion of 10,000 gassed Jews? What
proof do *you* have that the photo isn't doctored? What proof do
*you* have that the "testimony" of the Nazi's wasn't coerced? Why
is it impossible for you to believe that people held captive will
embellish the harshness of their treatment in hopes that their captors
will be punished more harshly? Why do *you* expect others to offer up
undeniable proof when *you* cannot offer up any?
>There have been archaeological digs (Hydrokop comes to mind) in the
>areas of the burning pits, coming up with core samples including
>human bone, human fat, hair, and clothing.
That's certainly to be expected in a prison camp. What proof can *you*
provide that the "human bone, human fat, hair," is that of Jews? What
proof can *you* provide that it was 10,000 gassed Jews?
>All of this (and I am severely annotating here, you understand)
>points to one conclusion and no other: that the photo is indeed
>of gas chamber victims being taken to the burning pit.
No it doesn't. It points to alive people burning dead bodies. Cause
of death unknown, religious faith unknown.
>No other logical explanation can be made for the photo.
Not when you won't consider anything but what you already believe.
>This is (thank you to John Morris) the "consilience of inductions."
>Not only does the evidence point to this conclusion, it excludes all
>others.
Only in the minds of people who already believe it's the *only*
explanation. Your mind is closed to anything that does not
parallel exactly what you already believe the facts to be.
>What I have said is that Deniers cannot come up with an alternate
>explanation of the photo, based on good solid evidence, that would
>*disprove* what I have said.
The photo itself disproves your assertion of ten thousand gassed
Jews being burned.
>And you have not, "Cheryl." All you have done is once again assert
>that the photo is not so.
I've explained what the photo shows. I can't help that what the photo
shows debunks your outlandish claims.
>Can you prove it is not so? Can you contradict all the other evidence
>that demands that this photo be what historians claim it to be? If so,
>you would be the first.
I don't have to "prove" that the photo does not show 10,000 gassed
Jews being burned, the photo does that for me. I didn't even mention
the fact that a good point is made about the "missing stoop." In one
message you claim the stoop is "clearly visible." In another message
you claim the stoop is not clearly visible but "very faint" because
the photo is taken from within a dark room and the light outside is
very bright.
My purpose is not to "deny" anything. My purpose is to point out that
*you* harm your own position by making outlandish assertions based
on flimsy (or no) evidence. And by expecting people to offer up proof
when you have none to offer.
The Nazi's killed Jews, they also killed a lot of other people. WWII
was a "holocaust" in and of itself. Jews do a disservice to their own
cause by declaring the death of Jews during WWII was somehow worse
than the death of Poles, Russians, Americans, British, and everyone
else. The others who died were just as important on this earth as the
Jews who died. Surely this "the life of Jew is more valuable than the
life of a Gentile" attitude is what leads to a lot of the anti-Semitism
in the world. Yet Jews always seem to accuse everyone else of "racism"
and\or "anti-Semitism." <shrug>
>-- --Dep
Buck Turgidson
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:06:24 -0600, Buck Turgidson
> <deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> [..]
>
> >> Since you addressed lurkers:
> >>
> >>Your claim is no more "provable" than that of anyone else. You
> >>make a fool of yourself pretending your claim is somehow more
> >>believable simply because you say it is. You've got an old photo
> >>that may or may not be doctored. This photo does not support your
> >>claim of "thousands of bodies." You're blathering on and on that
> >>someone else should disprove a claim that you cannot prove to begin
> >>with. In a debate, you lose.
>
> To begin with *you* addressed your comments to "lurkers" (me).
> Then, as I have noticed is a trend with "believers," because my
> reply doesn't follow exactly as you believe you immediately go on
> the offensive and expect me to disprove an assertion you didn't
> prove to begin with. I am neither a "revisionist" nor a "believer."
Excuse me, I have something caught in my throat.
>
> I was lurking and following a thread. I followed a link to a photo
> and here we are.
>
> >Not so. For in the one aspect you are right--this one photograph
> >is not "proof," though it is apparent that something sinister is
> >going on--corpses are lying about and a person is dragging one
> >toward some smoke. In the background is a barbed wire fence and
> >beyond that are trees. But here is why it *is* proof:
>
> My reply was in response to your claim of 10,000 dead Jewish people
> being burned.
I beg your pardon; I never mentioned 10,000 people of any kind being burned.
Where do you get the idea I did? And be specific.
> The photo obviously does not show ten thousand gassed
> Jews being burned.
Obviously not. It was taken from an aperture with limited perspective.
> What the photo does show is alive people burning
> dead people. Cause of death of the dead is unknown.
Except that they are lying right outside the building which, according to the
map, matches the placement of the gas chamber.
> Whether or not
> the dead are Jewish is unknown as well.
Nobody said they were Jewish. I have only said they were victims.
> Then there is the fact that
> the validity of the photo itself is in dispute.
Merely saying it "is in dispute" does not make it so. Who disputes this, outside
of Deniers? On what evidence? What contrary evidence exists to assert this is
not the photo that the converging evidence says it is?
>
>
> >Maps from the time show the placement of the burning pit, the gas
> >chamber, the fence, and the forest in the same dimensions as can
> >be seen in the photo. In short, the maps and the photo portray the
> >same area.
> >
> >Testimony about the burning pits abounds. Not only survivors, but
> >Nazis themselves testified (and documented, and journalized) about
> >the burning pits.
>
> With all the diseases that surely abounded in prison camps why will
> you only accept the possibility of "gassed Jews?"
You are again importing to me words that I did not speak. I know full well that
Jews, as well as Gypsies, priests, homosexuals, the disabled, etc, were murdered
under Hitler in many ways. There were the Einsatzgruppen, for obvious example.
And many, many inmates died of typhus. (Which is an issue Deniers never
touch--how is it that sending healthy people into a known "plague" environment
without medical care or proper sanitation is not murder?) The vast majority,
however, were killed by gas.
> What proof do
> *you* have that the people being burned are even Jews?
Never said they were.
> What
> proof do *you* have that they were gassed?
Given that they are right outside the gas *chamber*, that seems to be the likely
method of death. Unless you perhaps think they all walked up to the burning-pit
and conveniently died on the spot?
> What proof do *you*
> have to back up your assertion of 10,000 gassed Jews?
I made no such assertion.
> What
> proof do *you* have that the photo isn't doctored?
I don't have to prove it. Consilience of inductions: the converging of other
evidence conclusively determines the photo is actual. What proof can you offer
thas* been doctored?
After all, that is the burden of proof. That this photo is genuine is widely
accepted by historians and journalists worldwide. Yet you seem to feel it is a
doctored photo. Does it not occur to you that when one makes an assertion that
is contrary to accepted knowledge, it is incumbent upon you to prove your point?
> What proof do
> *you* have that the "testimony" of the Nazi's wasn't coerced?
See above.
> Why
> is it impossible for you to believe that people held captive will
> embellish the harshness of their treatment in hopes that their captors
> will be punished more harshly?
As far as I can tell, that was not an issue in this discussion. Why do you bring
it up?
> Why do *you* expect others to offer up
> undeniable proof when *you* cannot offer up any?
But you are wrong. The proof solidly rests on the side of history. As I have
said repeatedly, the weight of all evidence points in the direction that the
photo is true. Now, in addition to that, there is the complete and utter absence
of hard, physical proof that supports *any* claim that the photo is not true.
Can you offer any? Do you have any weight to your claims, or are you simply
spouting Denier propaganda?
>
>
> >There have been archaeological digs (Hydrokop comes to mind) in the
> >areas of the burning pits, coming up with core samples including
> >human bone, human fat, hair, and clothing.
>
> That's certainly to be expected in a prison camp. What proof can *you*
> provide that the "human bone, human fat, hair," is that of Jews? What
> proof can *you* provide that it was 10,000 gassed Jews?
You are once again putting words in my mouth. I am certain that not every victim
in the remains of the burning pits is a Jew. Are you asserting that other
victims of the Nazis were not worth considering? I certainly was not.
> >All of this (and I am severely annotating here, you understand)
> >points to one conclusion and no other: that the photo is indeed
> >of gas chamber victims being taken to the burning pit.
>
> No it doesn't. It points to alive people burning dead bodies. Cause
> of death unknown, religious faith unknown.
It shows corpses, outside a gas chamber, being burned.
> >No other logical explanation can be made for the photo.
>
> Not when you won't consider anything but what you already believe.
You've given not an iota of evidence that should cause me to change my mind.
Just grade-school "What if" questions.
> >This is (thank you to John Morris) the "consilience of inductions."
> >Not only does the evidence point to this conclusion, it excludes all
> >others.
>
> Only in the minds of people who already believe it's the *only*
> explanation. Your mind is closed to anything that does not
> parallel exactly what you already believe the facts to be.
There is no evidence to contradict it, and you certainly have not provided any.
<redundant rubbish snipped>
> Surely this "the life of Jew is more valuable than the
> life of a Gentile" attitude is what leads to a lot of the anti-Semitism
> in the world. Yet Jews always seem to accuse everyone else of "racism"
> and\or "anti-Semitism." <shrug>
And now we get to the heart of the matter. "The Holocaust never happened, but
the Jews deserved it." How like a Denier. You say you aren't one, but were I one
of them, I'd be sending you the Denier Membership Kit (complete with little
hakenkreuz lapel pin) posthaste.
Ceacaa
>Message-id: <395177C5...@mindspring.com>
The north facing door of Krema V
had (and has) a stoop level with the
Krema floor. The doorway of the
photograph in question does not
seem to.
>> By the way...what to take a little look
>> up to the upper left hand part of the
>> doorway? See the block or beam end
>> in the doorway? Do you think that
>> would have made closing the
>> "gas chamber" door a little hard?
>
>No. It doesn't seem to be part of the doorway. It's impossible to tell what
>it
>really is: could be a brace on the open door (though I don't think so), some
>part
>of the jamb, I am not sure.
[Ceacaa replies]
Not sure but still Believing? OK
let's proceed.
But to me, it doesn't look to be in a plane to
>obstruct anything. One thing, though: take a look at the plan just above it
>and
>you will see such a thing accounted for on the plan.
[Ceacaa comments]
I'll get back to when I have my
Pressac in front of me.
>
>>
>>
>> In fact, I can't see any sign of a
>> secure hold back 2,000 victim
>> door in the doorway. Do you
>> think the gas chamber didn't
>> really have a door?
>
>Picture's a little DARK, Mr. Allen. Such errors in composition and lighting
>are
>likely to occur under the pressure of knowing that taking such a photo in
>secrecy
>could get one tortured and killed.
>
>
>
>-- --Dep
[Ceacca comments]
Sounds like an admission you
can't see a door or door fixtures?
...and a pretty lame excuse at that.
See any gas masks on the "sondercommandos"?
How come the live people in the
picture aren't wearing the
stripped uniform of Sondercommandos?
Dep, you are aware that this is one
photograph of a series of 4? You
gave some missinformation on the
matter and I have not seen a correction.
When one trys to fit your "excuse" in
with the "story" of the 4 photographs
your excuse becomes even more lame.
Anyway, I will check my Pressac regarding the doorblocking object in the upper
righthand corner of the doorway...and
you see if you can see some faint, sunobscured gas masks, or even a
door, or a striped uniform.
Ceacaa
Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
>From: chery...@my-deja.com
>Date: 6/21/00 9:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <8is309$aav$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
[Ceacaa comments]
Holocaust Believers (like most believers)
tend to see "proof" of their beliefs where ever tehy look. Cheryl has
merely pointed out that the photograph
(if real) does not show anything which
would not be expected at a camp with
50,000 inmates, a typhus outbreak,
and a low cremation capacity.
The picture is missing many of the
necessary elements of the "Story" particularly
1. several thousand bodies, 2. Sondercommandos in stripped
suits,
3. people in gas masks
4. Any of the long "spoons" allegedly used
for dipping human fat over the bodies
5. Any door for the "gas chamber"
6. Any stoop which the Krema V doorway
has.
In short, Dep and the Believers, take the
macbre impact of the picture and try
to use it to prove something else.
Buck Turgidson
> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
I have already explained why you wouldn't see gas masks. These are not corpses in
the process of being taken out of the chamber. That has already been done. They
are now being taken to the pit.
But more importantly, Mr. Allen, is that you cannot come up with any explanation
for the existence of the picture--nothing specific, nothing that can be proven.
You cannot establish when the photograph was (according to you) "faked," you
cannot establish the place, the date, the photographer, the people in the
picture, nothing. On my side is evidence; on your side is, so far, not a thing.
Please offer an explanation for the existence of the photograph, Mr. Allen. And
be specific. If you insist it is a fake, please be specific as to how it was
faked, by whom, when, where, using what materials. It is not enough to simply
doubt. You must put the veracity of your claims beyond doubt. So far you do not
do that; you only ask the same questions repeatedly. Please do better.
Ceacaa
>Message-id: <3952F68D...@mindspring.com>
Here is typical Believer logic...
"I wish it to be 'proof' of the Holocaust
so prove it isn't".
Let's start with your repeated
"excuse" about the lack of gas masks.
You have made it before and it has
been smashed before.
In fact, the two photographs of 19
bodies are part of a series of 4 pictures
including one of naked women running
(allegedly into the "gas chamber".
The 4 pictures were all allegedly taken
within a 30 minute period.
That means (to help you along)
that the bodies ARE being just
taken out of the gas chamber.
That means (to help you along a little
more) there would have been gas
masks needed both by the
uniformless Sondercommando but
also by anyone going into the
"gas chamber".
Now I also looked at Pressac regarding
the rectangular object in the upper
righthand corner of the doorway...
the one that looks like it is blocking
the doorless doorway...
Pressac 'sees' it on the total outside of
the building and claims that it really
MUST be a exterior beam.
Personally I really think that your
perceptions are twisted by your
Holocaust Beliefs.
The picture lacks any of the distinguishing
attributes which would make it
"proof" of anything relating to the
Ugly Myth.
You have a small number of bodies
being cremated by noncommissioned
SS personal. We know that
happened in the summer of 1942.
As warped as I think your perception is,
Dep, I will post some real whoppers
of Believer analysis of this same
photograph which I think even you
will find too "Believerish"...
and
I will post Pressac on his expose'
of "tampering" with the photograph
Buck Turgidson
<bandwidth deletia>
> >> >
> >> >http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/auschwitz/images/k5-cremation-pits.jpg
> >> >
<more of the same>
>
>
> As warped as I think your perception is,
> Dep, I will post some real whoppers
> of Believer analysis of this same
> photograph which I think even you
> will find too "Believerish"...
> and
> I will post Pressac on his expose'
> of "tampering" with the photograph
You can post any number of interpretations, tales, silly questions, or meandering
diversions you like, but the reality is this: SOMETHING is in that photograph.
And you can't prove what it is. All you can do is go on about what you think it
isn't. That's not proof, Mr. Allen, that is simply avoidance. And if you cannot
refute ONE picture out of thousands with cold hard fact, what does that say about
your Unbelief?
Tell us. You seem convinced the picture is faked. Who faked it? Where? When?
Under what circumstances? With what materials? Come on, give me some hard
EVIDENCE. You have to have something other than disbelief, don't you?
chery...@my-deja.com
<deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
>Buck Turgidson <deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>
[..]
>> I am neither a "revisionist" nor a "believer."
>
>Excuse me, I have something caught in my throat.
Another distortion of the truth attempting to escape, no doubt.
[..]
>>My reply was in response to your claim of 10,000 dead Jewish
>>people being burned.
>
>I beg your pardon; I never mentioned 10,000 people of any kind being
>burned. Where do you get the idea I did? And be specific.
[see below]
>> The photo obviously does not show ten thousand gassed
>> Jews being burned.
>
>Obviously not. It was taken from an aperture with limited perspective.
Never mind your backpedal on the "10,000 gassed Jews" claim. Here
you claim *some number* of people can't be seen because of "limited
perspective." So just what is the number you are claiming? Be specific.
>> What the photo does show is alive people burning
>> dead people. Cause of death of the dead is unknown.
>
>Except that they are lying right outside the building which, according
>to the map, matches the placement of the gas chamber.
So the picture was taken from within the gas chamber! Wow. So
amazingly the picture takers escaped the gas chamber *and*
spirited this astounding photo out of the "death camp?"
>> Whether or not the dead are Jewish is unknown as well.
>
>Nobody said they were Jewish. I have only said they were victims.
Oh, so the Nazi's were just indiscriminately gassing everyone, not
just Jews? That's simply absurd. If there was some vast conspiracy
to kill Jews why would the Nazi's be wasting time and resources
gassing others as well? It would be a drain to just gas everyone
when your "plan" is to kill off a certain peoples as quickly as
possible. Your argument is totally illogical.
>>Then there is the fact that the validity of the photo itself is
>>in dispute.
>
>Merely saying it "is in dispute" does not make it so. Who disputes
>this, outside of Deniers? On what evidence? What contrary evidence
>exists to assert this is not the photo that the converging evidence
>says it is?
I see. Your exclaiming "it's real" is the ultimate proof of it's
authenticity.
[..]
>> With all the diseases that surely abounded in prison camps why will
>> you only accept the possibility of "gassed Jews?"
>
>You are again importing to me words that I did not speak.
So you admit that the picture is not of gassed Jews being burned. Just
what the hell is your point then?
>I know full well that Jews, as well as Gypsies, priests, homosexuals,
the
>disabled, etc, were murdered under Hitler in many ways.
So you admit there was no conspiracy to "rid the world of the Jews."
Again, what is your point? If the picture isn't of gassed Jews being
burned and the camp wasn't for the purpose of "gassing Jews"
why is the picture on a "Holocaust education" site and why are
you arguing about it in alt.revisionism?
>There were the Einsatzgruppen, for obvious example. And many, many
>inmates died of typhus. (Which is an issue Deniers never touch--how
>is it that sending healthy people into a known "plague" environment
>without medical care or proper sanitation is not murder?)
No, no, Buck, don't try to run from the point at hand. This thread is
about your inability to show that the picture in any way proves your
absurd claims. Why do "believers" always try to divert the conversation
when they are shown to be, at the very least, being loose with the
facts?
>The vast majority, however, were killed by gas.
How many, Buck? Include names, dates, times. As you like to say,
be specific, Buck.
>> What proof do *you* have that the people being burned are even Jews?
>
>Never said they were.
Then why are you ranting about it in alt.revisionism?
>> What proof do *you* have that they were gassed?
>
>Given that they are right outside the gas *chamber*, that seems to
>be the likely method of death. Unless you perhaps think they all
>walked up to the burning-pit and conveniently died on the spot?
No but you believe the people simply walked out of the "gas chamber"
alive. Kinda defeats the purpose of a "death camp," doesn't it, Buck?
["10,000" figure addressed above]
>> What proof do *you* have that the photo isn't doctored?
>
>I don't have to prove it.
Isn't that always the way. You want everyone else to "be specific" yet
you can't be. Little wonder your credibility is, well, lacking.
>After all, that is the burden of proof. That this photo is genuine
>is widely accepted by historians and journalists worldwide.
By who, Buck? Be specific.
>Yet you seem to feel it is a doctored photo.
I'm saying the photo in no way backs up *your* wild assertions. To the
contrary it seems to disprove your claims.
>Does it not occur to you that when one makes an assertion that is
>contrary to accepted knowledge, it is incumbent upon you to prove
>your point?
You squawking "it's real" does not constitute "accepted knowledge,"
Buck.
>>What proof do *you* have that the "testimony" of the Nazi's wasn't
>>coerced?
>
>See above.
Indeed.
>>Why is it impossible for you to believe that people held captive
>>will embellish the harshness of their treatment in hopes that their
>>captors will be punished more harshly?
>
>As far as I can tell, that was not an issue in this discussion. Why
>do you bring it up?
You brought it into the discussion as corroboration of the photo,
Buck. If you are telling the truth why do you feel the need to be
so dishonest?
>>Why do *you* expect others to offer up undeniable proof when *you*
>>cannot offer up any?
>
>But you are wrong.
Because you say so it must be fact, right Buck?
>The proof solidly rests on the side of history.
"I say so" isn't "history," Buck. Anything that disagrees with Bucks
World History you simply disregard as "lies" and\or "denier
propaganda." Quite convenient to say the least.
>As I have said repeatedly, the weight of all evidence points in the
>direction that the photo is true.
A picture of alive people burning dead people. What's your point? The
typhus outbreak during that period is well documented, they had to burn
them in an attempt to control the disease. Of course above you state
they were murdering people by sending them to a diseased environment.
So according to you if they are burning people in an attempt to control
the disease it's proof of something insidious yet if they don't control
the disease it's murder. You're amusing, Buck.
>Now, in addition to that, there is the complete and utter absence
>of hard, physical proof that supports *any* claim that the photo is
>not true. Can you offer any? Do you have any weight to your claims,
>or are you simply
The photo appears to show alive people burning dead people. That was
my claim. And that is exactly what it shows. You now admit it shows
nothing more than that. I merely *mentioned* the question of it's
authenticity. Because you are being so thoroughly thrashed concerning
your wild assertions you picked out a totally irrelevant fact and are
attempting to steer the whole thread it it's direction. Authentic or
not the photo does *not* back up your wild assertions of "gassed
people at a death camp being burned."
>spouting Denier propaganda?
Here we go. Buck is being destroyed based on the facts so he plays the
"your a denier" card in hopes that someone will come to his aid. Next
you'll be shouting from the rooftops that I'm an "anti-Semite" and any
other inflammatory phrase you can think of. As I said, "believers" and
their supporters only hurt their cause with such childish antics.
[..]
>>That's certainly to be expected in a prison camp. What proof can
>>*you* provide that the "human bone, human fat, hair," is that of
>>Jews? What proof can *you* provide that it was 10,000 gassed Jews?
>
>You are once again putting words in my mouth. I am certain that not
>every victim in the remains of the burning pits is a Jew.
How many are then, Buck? Be specific. Do you even know what you
are claiming?
>Are you asserting that other victims of the Nazis were not worth
>considering? I certainly was not.
Weak, Buck, very weak.
[..]
>> No it doesn't. It points to alive people burning dead bodies. Cause
>> of death unknown, religious faith unknown.
>
>It shows corpses, outside a gas chamber, being burned.
A "gas chamber" that the picture takers simply walked out of alive.
>> >No other logical explanation can be made for the photo.
>>
>> Not when you won't consider anything but what you already believe.
>
>You've given not an iota of evidence that should cause me to change
>my mind. Just grade-school "What if" questions.
Bucky, you're the one lashing out with labels and insinuation. Don't
get all flustered because you were proven wrong. You should be used
to it by now.
[..]
>> Only in the minds of people who already believe it's the *only*
>> explanation. Your mind is closed to anything that does not
>> parallel exactly what you already believe the facts to be.
>
>There is no evidence to contradict it, and you certainly have not
provided any.
You never gave any evidence to contradict, Buck.
><redundant rubbish snipped>
What Buck ran from replaced:
>>What I have said is that Deniers cannot come up with an alternate
>>explanation of the photo, based on good solid evidence, that would
>>*disprove* what I have said.
>
>The photo itself disproves your assertion of ten thousand gassed
>Jews being burned.
>
>>And you have not, "Cheryl." All you have done is once again assert
>>that the photo is not so.
>
>I've explained what the photo shows. I can't help that what the photo
>shows debunks your outlandish claims.
>
>>Can you prove it is not so? Can you contradict all the other evidence
>>that demands that this photo be what historians claim it to be? If so,
>>you would be the first.
>
>I don't have to "prove" that the photo does not show 10,000 gassed
>Jews being burned, the photo does that for me. I didn't even mention
>the fact that a good point is made about the "missing stoop." In one
>message you claim the stoop is "clearly visible." In another message
>you claim the stoop is not clearly visible but "very faint" because
>the photo is taken from within a dark room and the light outside is
>very bright.
>
>My purpose is not to "deny" anything. My purpose is to point out that
>*you* harm your own position by making outlandish assertions based
>on flimsy (or no) evidence. And by expecting people to offer up proof
>when you have none to offer.
/repost
>>Surely this "the life of Jew is more valuable than the life of a
>>Gentile" attitude is what leads to a lot of the anti-Semitism
>>in the world. Yet Jews always seem to accuse everyone else of
>>"racism" and\or "anti-Semitism." <shrug>
>
>And now we get to the heart of the matter. "The Holocaust never
>happened, but the Jews deserved it." How like a Denier. You say
>you aren't one, but were I one of them, I'd be sending you the
>Denier Membership Kit (complete with little hakenkreuz lapel pin)
>posthaste.
**Squawk - < anti-Semite > - Squawk**. Never saw that coming. Buck,
you do more to further the "denier" cause than I ever could.
Jeffrey G. Brown
>On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:40:19 -0600, Buck Turgidson
><deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
> [...deletia...]
>>>My reply was in response to your claim of 10,000 dead Jewish
>>>people being burned.
>>
>>I beg your pardon; I never mentioned 10,000 people of any kind being
>>burned. Where do you get the idea I did? And be specific.
>
>[see below]
You present no evidence 'below' that Mr. Turgidson made any claim
regarding "10,000 dead Jewish people being burned". Your "[see below]"
leads nowhere.
>>> The photo obviously does not show ten thousand gassed
>>> Jews being burned.
>>
>>Obviously not. It was taken from an aperture with limited perspective.
>
>Never mind your backpedal on the "10,000 gassed Jews" claim.
Mr. Turgidson never made that claim. You're lying -- and transparently, at that.
> [...deletia...]
>>> What the photo does show is alive people burning
>>> dead people. Cause of death of the dead is unknown.
>>
>>Except that they are lying right outside the building which, according
>>to the map, matches the placement of the gas chamber.
>
>So the picture was taken from within the gas chamber!
Mr. Turgidson never made that claim. You're lying -- and transparently, at that.
> [...deletia...]
>>Nobody said they were Jewish. I have only said they were victims.
>
>Oh, so the Nazi's were just indiscriminately gassing everyone, not
>just Jews?
Mr. Turgidson never made that claim. You're lying -- and transparently, at that.
> [...deletia...]
>>>Then there is the fact that the validity of the photo itself is
>>>in dispute.
>>
>>Merely saying it "is in dispute" does not make it so. Who disputes
>>this, outside of Deniers? On what evidence? What contrary evidence
>>exists to assert this is not the photo that the converging evidence
>>says it is?
>
>I see. Your exclaiming "it's real" is the ultimate proof of it's
>authenticity.
Evasion noted. Who disputes the validity of the photo, outside of Deniers?
On what evidence? What contrary evidence exists to assert this is not the
photo that the converging evidence says it is?
> [...deletia...]
>So you admit that the picture is not of gassed Jews being burned.
Mr. Turgidson made no such admission. You're lying -- and transparently,
at that.
> [...deletia...]
>>I know full well that Jews, as well as Gypsies, priests, homosexuals,
>>the disabled, etc, were murdered under Hitler in many ways.
>
>So you admit there was no conspiracy to "rid the world of the Jews."
Mr. Turgidson made no such admission. You're lying -- and transparently,
at that.
> [...deletia...]
>This thread is
>about your inability to show that the picture in any way proves your
>absurd claims.
Wrong. This thread is about your transparent lies ragrding Mr. Turgidson's
statements.
> [...deletia...]
>>Given that they are right outside the gas *chamber*, that seems to
>>be the likely method of death. Unless you perhaps think they all
>>walked up to the burning-pit and conveniently died on the spot?
>
>No but you believe the people simply walked out of the "gas chamber"
>alive.
Mr. Turgidson never made that claim. You're lying -- and transparently, at that.
> [...deletia...]
>>> What proof do *you* have that the photo isn't doctored?
>>
>>I don't have to prove it.
>
>Isn't that always the way.
Yes, it is. If you want to claim that the photo was altered in some way,
you have to provide the evidence to back up your claim.
> [...deletia...]
>>>Why do *you* expect others to offer up undeniable proof when *you*
>>>cannot offer up any?
>>
>>But you are wrong.
>
>Because you say so it must be fact, right Buck?
Read for comprehension. You're wrong in your assertion that Mr. Turgidson
expects others to offer up proof but does not offer any himself.
> [...deletia...]
>Buck is being destroyed based on the facts...
How can that be, when you do not present facts?
> [...deletia...]
>>It shows corpses, outside a gas chamber, being burned.
>
>A "gas chamber" that the picture takers simply walked out of alive.
Mr. Turgidson never made that claim. You're lying -- and transparently, at that.
> [...deletia...]
>Don't get all flustered because you were proven wrong.
You've 'proven' nothing. You're lying -- and transparently, at that.
JGB
=======================================================================
Jeffrey G. Brown jg_b...@my-deja.com
For centuries, philosophers and theologians have debated what it means
to be human. Perhaps the answer has eluded us because it is so simple.
To be human is to choose. - "The Outer Limits: Feasibility Study", 1997
Ceacaa
>Message-id: <3955A4F7...@mindspring.com>
You are a typical Believer, Dep.
The picture shows 19 bodies
being cremated by (what look like)
noncommissioned SS personal.
That happened at Auschwitz in
summer 1942.
The picture also shows that cremations
were smokey, messy, and unpleasant
which explains why the Germans
spent money to build 4 Kremas.
There is nothing more in the picture
which supports your Belief in vast
burning pits, fed by slave Sondercommandos in gas masks.
Nothing...you seem to have a
fixation that showing a body
"prooves" the Ugly Myth.
In fact, you spend most of your
time "explaining" why the photographer
missed the other 4,989 bodies, or
weren't
wearing gasmasks, etc.
Gord McFee
17:36:16 GMT, cea...@aol.com (Ceacaa) wrote:
[...]
> [Ceacaa replies]
> You are a typical Believer, Dep.
And you are a typical denier, Andrew.
> The picture shows 19 bodies
> being cremated by (what look like)
> noncommissioned SS personal.
How do you know who they were?
> That happened at Auschwitz in
> summer 1942.
On what do you base that?
> The picture also shows that cremations
> were smokey, messy, and unpleasant
> which explains why the Germans
> spent money to build 4 Kremas.
I see. Those Germans went out and spent money on things that were
smokey, messy and unpleasant. Goooood thinking.
> There is nothing more in the picture
> which supports your Belief in vast
> burning pits, fed by slave Sondercommandos in gas masks.
That is your belief, Andrew.
> Nothing...you seem to have a
> fixation that showing a body
> "prooves" the Ugly Myth.
Why were they burying bodies if they had all those Krema?
--
Gord McFee
I'll write no line before its time
Visit the Holocaust History Project
http://www.holocaust-history.org
Visit the Nizkor site
http://www.nizkor.org
Buck Turgidson
This "Cheryl," who claims to be neither revisionist not believer, sure has the
Denier patter down, nevertheless. If you were debating what I said, we'd debate
further. Instead, you feel free to add quotes I have not made (such as your
"10,000" assertion), twist my words like a pretzel, and pretend they mean things
they obviously don't. I have no interest in debating someone that dishonest.
But I'd like to include this passage first:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>Surely this "the life of Jew is more valuable than the life of a
>>Gentile" attitude is what leads to a lot of the anti-Semitism
>>in the world. Yet Jews always seem to accuse everyone else of
>>"racism" and\or "anti-Semitism." <shrug>
>
>And now we get to the heart of the matter. "The Holocaust never
>happened, but the Jews deserved it." How like a Denier. You say
>you aren't one, but were I one of them, I'd be sending you the
>Denier Membership Kit (complete with little hakenkreuz lapel pin)
>posthaste.
**Squawk - < anti-Semite > - Squawk**. Never saw that coming. Buck,
you do more to further the "denier" cause than I ever could.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
How perfectly like a Denier: say something antisemitic and then feign offense
when you're called an antisemite.
Of course, the entire strategy works two ways: either I can get mired in trying
to combat and extract my actual meanings from the brambles the Denier has thrown
it into, or I can (as I do) simply dispense with it all. The latter gives the
Denier the opportunity to claim a false victory, that I have run away. In other
words, they get you coming AND going. Some open-mindedness. But let me point
out: 'twas not I who added "alt.flame.niggers" to the list of newsgroups. That
would have been the open-minded "Cheryl."
<Preceding Denier drivel defenestrated without so much as a "gardyloo">
Ceacaa
(hic)
>Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
>From: Gord McFee gord....@sympatico.ca
>Date: 6/25/00 2:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <41uclssi209g7jdfa...@4ax.com>
>
>In <20000625133616...@ng-cs1.aol.com>, on 25 Jun 2000
>17:36:16 GMT, cea...@aol.com (Ceacaa) wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>> [Ceacaa replies]
>> You are a typical Believer, Dep.
>
>And you are a typical denier, Andrew.
[Ceacaa replies]
Thanks, Gord.
>
>> The picture shows 19 bodies
>> being cremated by (what look like)
>> noncommissioned SS personal.
>
>How do you know who they were?
[Ceacaa replies]
Uh, Gord, why don't you look at the
picture. Even you can see they are
not wearing inmate (Sondercomando)
striped uniforms which is how the
Ugly miniMyth of the "burning pits"
claim the vast fire pits were fed.
>
>> That happened at Auschwitz in
>> summer 1942.
>
>On what do you base that?
[Ceacaa replies]
During the typhus epidemic around
120 to 150 detainees died a day.
This exceeded the capacity of
Krema I. They were cremated.
>
>> The picture also shows that cremations
>> were smokey, messy, and unpleasant
>> which explains why the Germans
>> spent money to build 4 Kremas.
>
>I see. Those Germans went out and spent money on things that were
>smokey, messy and unpleasant. Goooood thinking.
[Ceacaa explains further to poor Gord]
No, Gord, the pit cremation in the
picture is smokey, messy, and expensive
in fuel. Please try to think rather than
natter.
>
>> There is nothing more in the picture
>> which supports your Belief in vast
>> burning pits, fed by slave Sondercommandos in gas masks.
>
>That is your belief, Andrew.
[Ceacaa replies]
Ahh, if you see any of the above in
the picture, please let us know, Gord.
Say, let's start with the long handled
"spoons" of your Myth. the ones
used to "spoon" boiling human fat over
the bodies...see any of those?
In fact, Gord, is there one thing in the
picture which distinguished the picture
as part of your Ugly Myth as opposed
to the cremation of 19 bodies?
>
>> Nothing...you seem to have a
>> fixation that showing a body
>> "prooves" the Ugly Myth.
>
>Why were they burying bodies if they had all those Krema?
[Ceacaa comments]
The belief in burying bodies is a
Holocaust Belief not a logical one,
Gord. You Believers claim that
the Germans buried bodies from
January 1942 until September 1942
(despite Krema I) and then dug them
all (everyone of them) up and burned
them in huge pits next to the Central
Sauna construction project.
Please try to keep your Beliefs staight.
(I know that it is hard since they are
wildly inconsistent in alleged purpose and
chronology)
chery...@my-deja.com
Brown) moaned thusly:
>chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>Buck Turgidson <deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
Snip -n- dodge noted.
>>>>My reply was in response to your claim of 10,000 dead Jewish
>>>>people being burned.
>>>
>>>I beg your pardon; I never mentioned 10,000 people of any kind being
>>>burned. Where do you get the idea I did? And be specific.
>>
>>[see below]
>
>You present no evidence 'below' that Mr. Turgidson made any claim
>regarding "10,000 dead Jewish people being burned".
I did mention his whine for help, and like an obedient little defender
of the myth you responded to his pleas with lightening speed.
He claimed 5000 gassed Jews, I misspoke. Of course you and he attempt
to give the illusion that he made no claim whatsoever. There is nothing
in the photo to back up 5000, 4000, 2000, or even 1000. In other words
Buck simply put forth some huge number for shock value...sorta like
6,000,000. Normal "believer" tactics.
Jeffrey G. Brown went on to repeatedly squawk:
>You're lying
>You're lying
>You're lying
Quite the conclusive proof you offer, Jeffy.
Everyone is lying. Paul Rassinier, a man held at Buchenwald and
Dora, a liar. Fred A. Leuchter, Jr., a renowned expert in the field
of gas chamber hardware, a liar. The mountains of evidence which
disprove the holocaust myth, all lies. Only you stand above the fray
holding the truth. Riiiiiiiiiiightttt!
Your "everyone but myself and those who believe like me are liars"
defense is quite humorous to say the least.
chery...@my-deja.com
<deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
Gord McFee
chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 17:12:25 -0600, Buck Turgidson
> <deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> ><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
>
> Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
> diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
> door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
See someone calling himself Cheryl who is too gutless to post under his
reaL name.
Ceacaa
>From: chery...@my-deja.com
>Date: 6/26/00 1:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <8j8d3e$scv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
>
>On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 17:12:25 -0600, Buck Turgidson
><deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
>
>Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
>diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
>door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
>
Cheryl's point was too simple and clear
for the Believers to obfuscate.
That is why they are limping away.
Jeffrey G. Brown
<d...@seark.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 13:53:54 GMT, jg_b...@my-deja.com (Jeffrey G.
>Brown) moaned thusly:
> [...deletia...]
>>You present no evidence 'below' that Mr. Turgidson made any claim
>>regarding "10,000 dead Jewish people being burned".
>
>I did mention his whine for help, and like an obedient little defender
>of the myth you responded to his pleas with lightening speed.
>
>He claimed 5000 gassed Jews, I misspoke. Of course you and he attempt
>to give the illusion that he made no claim whatsoever. There is nothing
>in the photo to back up 5000, 4000, 2000, or even 1000. In other words
>Buck simply put forth some huge number for shock value...sorta like
>6,000,000. Normal "believer" tactics.
>
>Jeffrey G. Brown went on to repeatedly squawk:
>
>>You're lying
>>You're lying
>>You're lying
>
>Quite the conclusive proof you offer, Jeffy.
But you did lie, Gutless. Mr. Turgidson did not, at any time, made any
claim regarding "10,000 dead Jewish people being burned". You haven't
cited a post in which he did so for a very good reason -- it doesn't
exist.
>Everyone is lying.
No, Donnie, everyone is not lying. But when you lie, and I notice it, I
will shove your face into the fact of your own dishonesty. Get used to it,
coward.
> [...deletia...]
>Your "everyone but myself and those who believe like me are liars"
>defense is...
Nonexistent. I have never made that claim. Your quote is a forgery.
Jeffrey G. Brown
<d...@seark.net> wrote:
> [...deletia...]
What happened to thundernet.org, Gutless?
Gord McFee
William Daffer
<snip>
> Fred A. Leuchter, Jr., a renowned expert in the field
> of gas chamber hardware, a liar.
LOL! Renowned by whom, Cheryl? The denier community?
As you say. Riiiiiiiiiiighttttt!
William
--
Ab hoc possum videre domum tuum.
Public Key: http://home.earthlink.net/~whdaffer/#PGP-public-key
Buck Turgidson
trying with all his energy to tell us what it is *not*, though he does not do so
very well; he may question certain aspects of the pictures, but there are
reasonable responses for each of his questions. The fact that he doesn't LIKE
those responses is not the same as falsification of them.
You have taken the stand, Mr. Allen, that this picture is a fake created to
perpetuate a hoax. Perhaps, then, you can tell us who took the picture? When?
How was a section of Auschwitz faked, where, and why did no one notice? Who
participated in the staging of this supposed fake?
Anyone can simply negate a claim without evidence. It takes a historian to
refute an established interpretation of an event with good, solid evidence. But
Mr. Allen does not have evidence--he has none whatsoever. He is not a historian,
but a Denier.
Once you give us some solid evidence--actual fact, not supposition--as to why we
should consider this photo a fake, we will move on to the next.
Buck Turgidson
> chery...@my-deja.com writes:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Fred A. Leuchter, Jr., a renowned expert in the field
> > of gas chamber hardware, a liar.
>
> LOL! Renowned by whom, Cheryl? The denier community?
>
> As you say. Riiiiiiiiiiighttttt!
Hey, William, it takes a special kind of "renowned expert" to have his opinion
tossed out of court as worthless and to have a judgment passed against him
requiring him to *never* claim again that he is an engineer! "Steady Freddie" is
a Denier kind of guy!
Buck Turgidson
> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
> >From: chery...@my-deja.com
> >Date: 6/26/00 1:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time
> >Message-id: <8j8d3e$scv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
> >
> >On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 17:12:25 -0600, Buck Turgidson
> ><deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >
> >><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
> >
> >Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
> >diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
> >door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
> >
> [Ceacaa comments]
> Cheryl's point was too simple and clear
> for the Believers to obfuscate.
> That is why they are limping away.
You still haven't given us any solid evidence about the supposedly faked
photograph in dispute. You haven't told us who did it, when, where, under what
circumstances, with what materials, or how it was done (that is, building a fake
Auschwitz section) without being noticed. You have not answered ONE of those
questions, and your repeated questions have been answered--you didn't like the
answers, of course, but that was to be expected.
Come on. You have stated your Belief that the photo was fake. Surely you must
have some *evidence*, some *fact* on which to base this? Or are you just....a
Believer?
William Daffer
> William Daffer wrote:
>
> > chery...@my-deja.com writes:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > Fred A. Leuchter, Jr., a renowned expert in the field
> > > of gas chamber hardware, a liar.
> >
> > LOL! Renowned by whom, Cheryl? The denier community?
> >
> > As you say. Riiiiiiiiiiighttttt!
>
> Hey, William, it takes a special kind of "renowned expert" to have
> his opinion tossed out of court as worthless and to have a judgment
> passed against him requiring him to *never* claim again that he is
> an engineer! "Steady Freddie" is a Denier kind of guy!
>
>
Yep. Not to mention the kind that bring a libel lawsuit in a country
where the laws greatly favor him and then lose in a slamdunk and be
labeled a anit-semitic holocaust denier who falsifies history in
order to further his personal and political agenda of exonerating
the Nazis of the crimes of the Holocaust. Those are the kind of
'experts' the deniers seem to love!
Orac
<whda...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Buck Turgidson <deppi...@mindspring.com> writes:
>> Hey, William, it takes a special kind of "renowned expert" to have
>> his opinion tossed out of court as worthless and to have a judgment
>> passed against him requiring him to *never* claim again that he is
>> an engineer! "Steady Freddie" is a Denier kind of guy!
>>
>>
>
> Yep. Not to mention the kind that bring a libel lawsuit in a country
> where the laws greatly favor him and then lose in a slamdunk and be
> labeled a anit-semitic holocaust denier who falsifies history in
> order to further his personal and political agenda of exonerating
> the Nazis of the crimes of the Holocaust. Those are the kind of
> 'experts' the deniers seem to love!\
Of course they do, because when such deniers inevitably make fools of
themselves, they can then whine and complain and blame their misfortune
on the Jews.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"
Buck Turgidson
> Get off the Soapbox, Dep.
>
> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
> >From: Buck Turgidson deppi...@mindspring.com
> >Date: 6/27/00 12:22 AM Pacific Daylight Time
> >Message-id: <39585606...@mindspring.com>
> >
> >What Mr. Allen has not yet done, however, is tell us what the picture IS.
> [Ceacaa replies]
> It's a picture of what looks like 19
> bodies being cremated in a smokey
> fire.
>
> [Dep]
> > He
> >is
> >trying with all his energy to tell us what it is *not*, though he does not do
> >so
> >very well; he may question certain aspects of the pictures, but there are
> >reasonable responses for each of his questions. The fact that he doesn't LIKE
> >those responses is not the same as falsification of them.
> [Ceacaa replies]
> Dep, the picture has none (0) of the
> attributes which are unique to and
> a necessary part of the Holocaust Tale.
> Need to be reminded again?
> Missing
> 1. 4, 989 bodies
> 2. Sondercommandos in stripe suits
> 3. gas masks
> 4. Long handled "spoons" for scooping
> fat
> 5. A door on the gas chamber
> 6. A stoop on the doorway (like Krema V
> has)
>
> Your lame, pathetic, dishonest, laughable
> excuse that the "lighting wasn't right"
> is....well...lame, pathetic, dishonest, and laughable... and totally bogus
> besides.
>
> In short, you are a classic "Believer".
> You lack the ability to distinguish between
> what is "proof" of you specific Belief
> and what is a tragic but not uncommon
> scene.
"tragic but not uncommon"? Come along now, Mr. Allen; before, it was "fake."
Please keep your Denier stories straight.
> >
> >You have taken the stand, Mr. Allen, that this picture is a fake created to
> >perpetuate a hoax. Perhaps, then, you can tell us who took the picture? When?
> >How was a section of Auschwitz faked, where, and why did no one notice? Who
> >participated in the staging of this supposed fake?
> [Ceacaa replies]
> Sign. Dep, Pressac has a nice discussion of the 4 photographs of which
> this is a part. It is the source of all of
> my knowledge of the photograph.
Then, by your admission, you have no proof whatsoever that this is a fake. All
you have are the same empty questions reiterated to no purpose.
> >Anyone can simply negate a claim without evidence. It takes a historian to
> >refute an established interpretation of an event with good, solid evidence.
> >But
> >Mr. Allen does not have evidence--he has none whatsoever. He is not a
> >historian,
> >but a Denier.
> [Ceacaa replies]
> Dep, carefully get down off the soapbox.
> Your photograph has many odd features,
> as Pressac points out...but you entirely
> miss the point that the picture doesn't
> show what you "Believe" it does.
And you have been answered on those points. The problem was, you didn't like the
answers, so you repeated the questions. And you've now admitted that you have no
proof that the photo was a fake. All you have are the usual Denier dodges and
miscues.
> >Once you give us some solid evidence--actual fact, not supposition--as to why
> >we
> >should consider this photo a fake, we will move on to the next.
> >
> [Ceacaa inquires]
> Dare I ask? the next "what"?
Looks like we won't have to worry about it. You couldn't even answer this one.
Ceacaa
\
>
>You have taken the stand, Mr. Allen, that this picture is a fake created to
>perpetuate a hoax. Perhaps, then, you can tell us who took the picture? When?
>How was a section of Auschwitz faked, where, and why did no one notice? Who
>participated in the staging of this supposed fake?
[Ceacaa replies]
Sign. Dep, Pressac has a nice discussion of the 4 photographs of which
this is a part. It is the source of all of
my knowledge of the photograph.
>
>Anyone can simply negate a claim without evidence. It takes a historian to
>refute an established interpretation of an event with good, solid evidence.
>But
>Mr. Allen does not have evidence--he has none whatsoever. He is not a
>historian,
>but a Denier.
[Ceacaa replies]
Dep, carefully get down off the soapbox.
Your photograph has many odd features,
as Pressac points out...but you entirely
miss the point that the picture doesn't
show what you "Believe" it does.
>
David Gehrig
>
> In article <m3sntzu...@localhost.localdomain>, William Daffer
> <whda...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >Buck Turgidson <deppi...@mindspring.com> writes:
>
> >> Hey, William, it takes a special kind of "renowned expert" to have
> >> his opinion tossed out of court as worthless and to have a judgment
> >> passed against him requiring him to *never* claim again that he is
> >> an engineer! "Steady Freddie" is a Denier kind of guy!
And if you catch "Mr Death," you can hear the puzzlement in his voice
about why anyone would consider him an expert on gas chambers in the
first place.
> > Yep. Not to mention the kind that bring a libel lawsuit in a country
> > where the laws greatly favor him and then lose in a slamdunk and be
> > labeled a anit-semitic holocaust denier who falsifies history in
> > order to further his personal and political agenda of exonerating
> > the Nazis of the crimes of the Holocaust. Those are the kind of
> > 'experts' the deniers seem to love!\
>
> Of course they do, because when such deniers inevitably make fools of
> themselves, they can then whine and complain and blame their misfortune
> on the Jews.
Jews like Justice Gray. And Frank Sinatra.
@%<
David Gehrig
>
> In <8j8d3e$scv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, on Mon, 26 Jun 2000 20:06:21 GMT,
> chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> > <deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >
> > ><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
> >
> > Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
> > diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
> > door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
>
> reaL name.
Right. See the most transparent sock puppet to be introduced in months
pretend to be "Cheryl Nay."
@%<
Ceacaa
>Message-id: <395857C9...@mindspring.com>
>
>Ceacaa wrote:
>
>> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
>> >Date: 6/26/00 1:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>> >Message-id: <8j8d3e$scv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
>> >
>> ><deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
>> >
>> >Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
>> >diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
>> >door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
>> >
>> Cheryl's point was too simple and clear
>> for the Believers to obfuscate.
>> That is why they are limping away.
>
>You still haven't given us any solid evidence about the supposedly faked
>photograph in dispute.
Dep...no one says the photograph is
faked. It just doesn't show anything
that you Believers claim.
It shows 19 bodies being cremated in
a smokey outdoor fire.
Missing are 4,989 bodies, a doorway to
the gas chamber, the stoop, Sondercommados, long handled "spoons"
to scoop up boiling human fat, gas masks.
Understand now?
Ceacaa
>From: Gord McFee gord....@sympatico.ca
>Date: 6/26/00 3:27 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <54mfls4862ebpr7f1...@4ax.com>
>
>In <8j8d3e$scv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, on Mon, 26 Jun 2000 20:06:21 GMT,
>chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>> <deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>> ><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
>>
>> Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
>> diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
>> door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
>
>reaL name.
>
She is just reasonably afraid that you
might ask her on a date, Gord.
chery...@my-deja.com
>>
>> Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
>> diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
>> door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
>
>See someone calling himself Cheryl who is too gutless to post under
>his reaL name.
Why would my "true identity" matter to you? Unless of course you
were planning some sort of action against me for holding views that
differ from your own. Also, your assertion that I am not indeed who
I say I am are, to quote a friend of yours, "unsupported accusations,
liar."
chery...@my-deja.com
>>Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
>>From: chery...@my-deja.com
>>Date: 6/26/00 1:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>>Message-id: <8j8d3e$scv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
>>
>>On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 17:12:25 -0600, Buck Turgidson
>><deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>>><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
>>
>>Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
>>diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
>>door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
>>
> [Ceacaa comments]
>Cheryl's point was too simple and clear
>for the Believers to obfuscate.
>That is why they are limping away.
Amazingly my interjection was at the request of "Buck." Worse yet
is that it wasn't even a "believer" versus "denier" thing. I simply
pointed out the inconsistencies and impossibilities in Bucks claims.
If the believers can't explain something as simple as that it's little
wonder they can't explain the missing 6,000,000 bodies, the missing
"gas chambers," and all the other holes in the holocaust myth. Of
course the fact that I even dared point out these inconsistencies
and impossibilities had "Buck" labeling me an "anti-Semite" before
the end of the second cycle in the thread.
Now I have Gord McFee asking about my "real identity." Now just why
would Gord be concerned with my "real identity?" To find out who my
employer is? Find out where I live? Why would he want that information?
Is Gord planning retribution against me and\or my family because I
dared express my opinion openly in the United Sates of America?
chery...@my-deja.com
<whda...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>chery...@my-deja.com writes:
>
><snip>
>
>> Fred A. Leuchter, Jr., a renowned expert in the field
>> of gas chamber hardware, a liar.
>
> LOL! Renowned by whom, Cheryl? The denier community?
His expertise was counted on by most death penalty states
as well as the federal government. Of course his having the
audacity to dispute the "holocaust" myth automatically
discredits him in the eyes kooks such as yourself. Btw, why
did you snip and run from the rest of the message? If you reply
why not reply to all of it?
> As you say. Riiiiiiiiiiighttttt!
The greatest form of flattery.
>William
William Daffer
<snip>
> Jews like Justice Gray. And Frank Sinatra.
>
> @%<
Yep, those are some Wasscally Jooooosssss!
John Morris
Hash: SHA1
chery...@my-deja.com writes:
[snip]
> Amazingly my interjection was at the request of "Buck." Worse yet
> is that it wasn't even a "believer" versus "denier" thing. I simply
> pointed out the inconsistencies and impossibilities in Bucks claims.
> If the believers can't explain something as simple as that it's little
> wonder they can't explain the missing 6,000,000 bodies, the missing
> "gas chambers," and all the other holes in the holocaust myth. Of
> course the fact that I even dared point out these inconsistencies
> and impossibilities had "Buck" labeling me an "anti-Semite" before
> the end of the second cycle in the thread.
> Now I have Gord McFee asking about my "real identity." Now just why
> would Gord be concerned with my "real identity?" To find out who my
> employer is? Find out where I live? Why would he want that information?
> Is Gord planning retribution against me and\or my family because I
> dared express my opinion openly in the United Sates of America?
I know that it excites you to think of yourself as a martyr, Don,
but identifying you means that we can simply dismiss your opinions as
the inconsequential nonsense that they are. You are not even remotely
interested in the Holocaust. It's just that stalking Sara Salzman
doesn't offer you enough stimulation anymore.
- --
John Morris <John....@UAlberta.CA>
at University of Alberta <Multi pertransibunt & augebitur scientia>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.5, an Emacs/PGP interface
Charset: noconv
iQA/AwUBOVpf6ZQgvG272fn9EQKNRQCgzmH7/nB+FfB1b9Zx5SkUrSCOXTMAoJap
70e1q07xZgSfmB57W78/gO88
=FKhd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
John Morris
Hash: SHA1
chery...@my-deja.com writes:
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 04:54:13 GMT, William Daffer
> <whda...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >chery...@my-deja.com writes:
> ><snip>
> >> Fred A. Leuchter, Jr., a renowned expert in the field
> >> of gas chamber hardware, a liar.
> > LOL! Renowned by whom, Cheryl? The denier community?
> His expertise was counted on by most death penalty states
> as well as the federal government.
Not true at all, Don. In fact, Leuchter was never a consultant for
any death penalty state, nor for the federal government (the notion is
absurd on its face), nor has he ever installed a single piece of
execution equipment. One state official characterized him as a
"shakedown artist" for threatening to testify that their equipment was
dangerous and cruel if they didn't purchase his equipment.
[snip]
- --
John Morris <John....@UAlberta.CA>
at University of Alberta <Multi pertransibunt & augebitur scientia>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.5, an Emacs/PGP interface
Charset: noconv
iQA/AwUBOVpmdZQgvG272fn9EQKgSgCg5KoCPtusj3xpLUl44rr1r1zoEjoAn26c
X/K2v3p9OYl+4UT+TARNmgQ+
=3mO9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Jeffrey G. Brown
>On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 04:54:13 GMT, William Daffer
><whda...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>chery...@my-deja.com writes:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>> Fred A. Leuchter, Jr., a renowned expert in the field
>>> of gas chamber hardware, a liar.
>>
>> LOL! Renowned by whom, Cheryl? The denier community?
>
>His expertise was counted on by most death penalty states
>as well as the federal government.
False. At least two of Leuchter's claims to have worked with state
governments on execution chambers were proven false. See
<http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/l/leuchter-fred/leuchter-01.html>.
If you have other evidence to back up your claim, please present it.
Buck Turgidson
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2000 22:27:24 GMT, Gord McFee <gord....@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
> > chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >>Buck Turgidson <deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> ><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
> >>
> >> Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
> >> diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
> >> door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
> >
> >See someone calling himself Cheryl who is too gutless to post under
> >his reaL name.
>
> Why would my "true identity" matter to you? Unless of course you
> were planning some sort of action against me for holding views that
> differ from your own. Also, your assertion that I am not indeed who
> I say I am are, to quote a friend of yours, "unsupported accusations,
> liar."
Whatever you say, Donnie.
Say, what happened to Thundernet.org, Thundernut?
Buck Turgidson
> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
> >From: Buck Turgidson deppi...@mindspring.com
> >Date: 6/27/00 12:29 AM Pacific Daylight Time
> >Message-id: <395857C9...@mindspring.com>
> >
> >Ceacaa wrote:
> >
> >> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
> >> >From: chery...@my-deja.com
> >> >Date: 6/26/00 1:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time
> >> >Message-id: <8j8d3e$scv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
> >> >
> >> >On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 17:12:25 -0600, Buck Turgidson
> >> ><deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
> >> >
> >> >Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
> >> >diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
> >> >door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
> >> >
> >> [Ceacaa comments]
> >> Cheryl's point was too simple and clear
> >> for the Believers to obfuscate.
> >> That is why they are limping away.
> >
> >You still haven't given us any solid evidence about the supposedly faked
> >photograph in dispute.
> [Ceacaa replies]
> Dep...no one says the photograph is
> faked.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 09:01:38 -0700
From: Blakely <patblakel...@hotmail.com.invalid>
Organization: http://www.remarq.com: The World's Usenet/Discussions Start Here
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
References: 1
It took 48 years for the photos to surface? Almost certainly
fakes. There are 100's of pictures of the Loch Ness monster, so
we are supposed to believe in that also.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> It just doesn't show anything
> that you Believers claim.
> It shows 19 bodies being cremated in
> a smokey outdoor fire.
> Missing are 4,989 bodies, a doorway to
> the gas chamber, the stoop, Sondercommados, long handled "spoons"
> to scoop up boiling human fat, gas masks.
>
> Understand now?
You've been told: it was taken secretly from an area with limited perspective;
people can and do move in and out of frame, so who knows if people with scoops
were there at that instant or not (and perhaps they were on the other side of
the pit, obscured by the smoke, for all you know); the pjotographer obviously
didn't have time to think, "I'd better get the widest possible angle I can and
get EVERYTHING into the shot, in case some Denier later says this isn't
true....so I will go out and take my sweet time setting up the shot out in the
open, where the guards can see me and my camera and confiscate it and kill me!";
the stoop is there; gas masks aren't necessary as they are not taking bodies out
of the gas chamber, but are taking bodies which *have* been taken out of the
chamber to the pit.
Now.
What you HAVEN'T done is told us, then, what the picture is. You don't like the
answers above? Swell. Tell us what the picture IS. Tell us who photographed it
and when. Where the location was. What the circumstances were.
This photo correlates to a map of Auschwitz, descriptions of Auschwitz,
testimonies by survivors and Nazis alike, physical evidence, documentary
evidence.... All you have to offer is "I don't THINK so." Come on, you Believing
Denier! Show me some hard proof! Don't tell me what that photo ISN'T--tell me
what it IS! And back that up!
Gord McFee
04:48:27 GMT, cea...@aol.com (Ceacaa) wrote:
> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
> >From: Gord McFee gord....@sympatico.ca
> >Date: 6/26/00 3:27 PM Pacific Daylight Time
> >Message-id: <54mfls4862ebpr7f1...@4ax.com>
> >
> >In <8j8d3e$scv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, on Mon, 26 Jun 2000 20:06:21 GMT,
> >chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 17:12:25 -0600, Buck Turgidson
> >> <deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> ><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
> >>
> >> Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
> >> diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
> >> door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
> >
> >See someone calling himself Cheryl who is too gutless to post under his
> >reaL name.
> >
> [Ceacaa replies]
> She is just reasonably afraid that you
> might ask her on a date, Gord.
No need to worry. I only date humans.
Gord McFee
chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jun 2000 22:27:24 GMT, Gord McFee <gord....@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
> > chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >>Buck Turgidson <deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> ><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
> >>
> >> Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
> >> diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
> >> door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
> >
> >See someone calling himself Cheryl who is too gutless to post under
> >his reaL name.
>
> Why would my "true identity" matter to you? Unless of course you
> were planning some sort of action against me for holding views that
> differ from your own. Also, your assertion that I am not indeed who
> I say I am are, to quote a friend of yours, "unsupported accusations,
> liar."
Thanks, Don.
Ceacaa
>From: jg_b...@my-deja.com (Jeffrey G. Brown)
>Date: 6/26/00 6:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <jg_brown-260...@cvg-165-102-127.cinci.rr.com>
>
>In article <8j8cut$s36$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, "Gutless Donnie Ellis"
><d...@seark.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 13:53:54 GMT, jg_b...@my-deja.com (Jeffrey G.
>>Brown) moaned thusly:
>
>> [...deletia...]
>
>>>You present no evidence 'below' that Mr. Turgidson made any claim
>>>regarding "10,000 dead Jewish people being burned".
>>
>>I did mention his whine for help, and like an obedient little defender
>>of the myth you responded to his pleas with lightening speed.
>>
>>He claimed 5000 gassed Jews, I misspoke. Of course you and he attempt
>>to give the illusion that he made no claim whatsoever. There is nothing
>>in the photo to back up 5000, 4000, 2000, or even 1000. In other words
>>Buck simply put forth some huge number for shock value...sorta like
>>6,000,000. Normal "believer" tactics.
>>
>>Jeffrey G. Brown went on to repeatedly squawk:
>>
>>>You're lying
>>>You're lying
>>>You're lying
>>
>>Quite the conclusive proof you offer, Jeffy.
>
>But you did lie, Gutless. Mr.
[Ceacaa comments]
Jeff Brown seems to scream rather than
discuss. Dep's "Big Proof" is
lacking at least 4,981 bodies along
with 1. A door to the "gas chamber"
2. Sondercommandos in striped uniforms
3. gas masks.
4. the stoop which Krema V's north facing
doorway has,
5. longhandled spoons to scoop up the
boiling human fat
In short, it takes a true Believer to
make the sort of wild claims about
the photograph that you do.
Ceacaa
>From: Buck Turgidson deppi...@mindspring.com
>Date: 6/27/00 12:25 AM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <395856D5...@mindspring.com>
>
>William Daffer wrote:
>
>> chery...@my-deja.com writes:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> > Fred A. Leuchter, Jr., a renowned expert in the field
>> > of gas chamber hardware, a liar.
>>
>> LOL! Renowned by whom, Cheryl? The denier community?
>>
>
>Hey, William, it takes a special kind of "renowned expert" to have his
>opinion
>tossed out of court as worthless and to have a judgment passed against him
>requiring him to *never* claim again that he is an engineer! "Steady Freddie"
>is
>a Denier kind of guy!
>
>
>
[Ceacaa comments]
Dep's ugly snickering at Leucther is
more a sign of his mentality than
anything else. Leucther was bumping
along through life until he published
his honest opinion of the gas chamber
myth.
The poor sob has been ruined and
prosecuted ever since.
Dep giggles at the fact.
Dep would have laughed at an accused
communist fired (in 1952)
Dep would snickered at a blackman
lynched (in 1932)
Dep is a bigot pig, a true Believer.
Ceacaa
picture?
>Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
>From: Buck Turgidson deppi...@mindspring.com
>Date: 6/28/00 7:04 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <395AAE94...@mindspring.com>
>
>Ceacaa wrote:
>
>> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
>> >From: Buck Turgidson deppi...@mindspring.com
>> >Date: 6/27/00 12:29 AM Pacific Daylight Time
>> >Message-id: <395857C9...@mindspring.com>
>> >
>> >Ceacaa wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
>> >> >From: chery...@my-deja.com
>> >> >Date: 6/26/00 1:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>> >> >Message-id: <8j8d3e$scv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
>> >> >
>> >> >On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 17:12:25 -0600, Buck Turgidson
>> >> ><deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
>> >> >
>> >> >Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
>> >> >diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
>> >> >door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
>> >> >
[Ceacaa pleads]
Stop, stop, you're killing me. You're
claiming the photos (there were two
you might know) were taken at
the precise moment that all the
sondercommandos got out of their
stripped suits, the gas masks were
all put away, the men with the "spoons"
ran to the other side of the smoke,
and the missing 4,989 bodies were
just out of range of the camera...
oh yes...and the sunlight hit
the door of the gas chamber just
perfectly to make it invisible.
What about the missing stoop?
the pjotographer obviously
>didn't have time to think, "I'd better get the widest possible angle I can
>and
>get EVERYTHING into the shot, in case some Denier later says this isn't
>true....so I will go out and take my sweet time setting up the shot out in
>the
>open, where the guards can see me and my camera and confiscate it and kill
>me!";
>the stoop is there; gas masks aren't necessary as they are not taking bodies
>out
>of the gas chamber, but are taking bodies which *have* been taken out of the
>chamber to the pit.
[Ceacaa comments]
No stoop...unless you close your eyes
and say, "I do Believe, I do Believe" and
click your heels three times together.
>
>Now.
>
>What you HAVEN'T done is told us, then, what the picture is. You don't like
>the
>answers above? Swell. Tell us what the picture IS. Tell us who photographed
>it
>and when. Where the location was. What the circumstances were.
[Ceacaa replies]
If real the picture was probably taken
in summer 1942 during the typhus
outbreak....The Germans (not having
planned any mass killings) had only
Krema I. Since the dead numbered
over 120 per day, groups of typhus
victims had to be cremated in
outdoor pits.
>
>This photo correlates to a map of Auschwitz, descriptions of Auschwitz,
>testimonies by survivors and Nazis alike, physical evidence, documentary
>evidence.... All you have to offer is "I don't THINK so." Come on, you
>Believing
>Denier! Show me some hard proof! Don't tell me what that photo ISN'T--tell me
>what it IS! And back that up!
[Ceacaa comments]
You are making it up that the photograph
correlates with physical evidence.
It doesn't. There is no stoop in the
picture and there is a beam in the
door way.
Of course, the easiest way to prove
the matter is to go right outside the
northfacing doorway of Krema V and
dig a little hole. Right?
Sure to find lots of teeth, bones, and
remains of vast pyres, right?
Or did they all magically disappear?
Don't debate...excavate!
chery...@my-deja.com
wrote:
>cea...@aol.com (Ceacaa) wrote:
>> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
>> >From: chery...@my-deja.com
>> >Date: 6/26/00 1:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>> >Message-id: <8j8d3e$scv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
>> >
>> >
>> >><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
>> >
>> >Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
>> >diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
>> >door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
>> >
>> [Ceacaa comments]
>> Cheryl's point was too simple and clear
>> for the Believers to obfuscate.
>
A devastating ad hominem attack, now there's a surprise.
chery...@my-deja.com
Brown) wrote:
>In article <8j8cut$s36$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, "Gutless Donnie Ellis"
><d...@seark.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 13:53:54 GMT, jg_b...@my-deja.com (Jeffrey G.
>>Brown) moaned thusly:
>
>> [...deletia...]
>
>>>You present no evidence 'below' that Mr. Turgidson made any claim
>>>regarding "10,000 dead Jewish people being burned".
>>
>>I did mention his whine for help, and like an obedient little defender
>>of the myth you responded to his pleas with lightening speed.
>>
>>He claimed 5000 gassed Jews, I misspoke. Of course you and he attempt
>>to give the illusion that he made no claim whatsoever. There is
nothing
>>in the photo to back up 5000, 4000, 2000, or even 1000. In other words
>>Buck simply put forth some huge number for shock value...sorta like
>>6,000,000. Normal "believer" tactics.
>>
>>Jeffrey G. Brown went on to repeatedly squawk:
>>
>>>You're lying
>>>You're lying
>>>You're lying
>>
>>Quite the conclusive proof you offer, Jeffy.
>
>But you did lie, Gutless. Mr. Turgidson did not, at any time, made
>any claim regarding "10,000 dead Jewish people being burned". You
>haven't cited a post in which he did so for a very good reason --
>it doesn't exist.
Nice of you to skip the entire message to continue whining about
something I already cleared up. The fact that you "gutlessly" ran
from the subject after my clarification has been noted.
>>Everyone is lying.
>
>No, Donnie, everyone is not lying. But when you lie, and I notice
>it, I will shove your face into the fact of your own dishonesty.
>Get used to it, coward.
You are an obsessed little psycho, Jeffy. This Don Ellis must have
really harmed your pride.
>> [...deletia...]
>
>>Your "everyone but myself and those who believe like me are liars"
>>defense is...
>
>Nonexistent. I have never made that claim. Your quote is a forgery.
Jeffy, it's quite obvious that you snipped your "everyone but myself
and those who believe like me are liars" diatribe [see above]. I've
noticed you're quite the "[...deletia...]" fanatic when things aren't
going your way. Snip it and act like it never happened, eh, stain.
You're a clown.
>JGB
>
>==========================================================
>Jeffrey G. Brown jg_b...@my-deja.com
> [...deletia...] LIAR!! ANTI-SEMITE!! is my calling card.
>Disagree with my truths and you will recieve the same
>treatment to my horrific trademarked [...deletia...].
>Help me! Don Ellis is in the bushes!
chery...@my-deja.com
wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>chery...@my-deja.com writes:
>
>[snip]
>
>> Amazingly my interjection was at the request of "Buck." Worse yet
>> is that it wasn't even a "believer" versus "denier" thing. I simply
>> pointed out the inconsistencies and impossibilities in Bucks claims.
>> If the believers can't explain something as simple as that it's
little
>> wonder they can't explain the missing 6,000,000 bodies, the missing
>> "gas chambers," and all the other holes in the holocaust myth. Of
>> course the fact that I even dared point out these inconsistencies
>> and impossibilities had "Buck" labeling me an "anti-Semite" before
>> the end of the second cycle in the thread.
>
>> Now I have Gord McFee asking about my "real identity." Now just why
>> would Gord be concerned with my "real identity?" To find out who my
>> employer is? Find out where I live? Why would he want that
information?
>> Is Gord planning retribution against me and\or my family because I
>> dared express my opinion openly in the United Sates of America?
>
>I know that it excites you to think of yourself as a martyr, Don,
>but identifying you means that we can simply dismiss your opinions
>as the inconsequential nonsense that they are. You are not even
>remotely interested in the Holocaust. It's just that stalking Sara
>Salzman doesn't offer you enough stimulation anymore.
"Don Ellis is hiding under my bed...you stalker."
Man, that is just too ironically amusing. It seems every one of you
believers is an utter kook. I'm just sorry I missed what this Don
person did to you fools that caused you to become so completely
obsessed with him. I must search deja.
Gord McFee
chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
Sorry, little boy, you don't qualify for an ad hominem attack.
William Daffer
<snip>
> >Like Andrew Allen, "Cheryl" is indeed simple.
>
> A devastating ad hominem attack, now there's a surprise.
Do you even understand what an 'ad hominem' is?
Jeffrey G. Brown
>On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 01:56:09 GMT, jg_b...@my-deja.com (Jeffrey G.
>Brown) wrote:
>
>>In article <8j8cut$s36$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, "Gutless Donnie Ellis"
>><d...@seark.net> wrote:
> [...deletia...]
>>>Your "everyone but myself and those who believe like me are liars"
>>>defense is...
>>
>>Nonexistent. I have never made that claim. Your quote is a forgery.
>
>Jeffy, it's quite obvious that you snipped your "everyone but myself
>and those who believe like me are liars" diatribe [see above].
It's impossible for me to have snipped what I did not write.
Get a new lie, coward.
> [...deletia...]
>>LIAR!! ANTI-SEMITE!! is my calling card.
>>Disagree with my truths and you will recieve the same
>>treatment to my horrific trademarked [...deletia...].
>>Help me! Don Ellis is in the bushes!
Interesting. In which post did I write this? Kindly cite the deja.com archive.
Buck Turgidson
> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
> >From: Buck Turgidson deppi...@mindspring.com
You mean "persecuted." Funny a lawyer doesn't know the difference between the
two. But yes, "bumping" through life is one way to describe Leuchter: he had his
B.A. in history, I believe it was, and then went on to forge a career as a scam
artist--presenting himself as the engineer he never was, threatening to testify
in court that a prison's execution facilities were unsafe unless they contracted
for *his* services. That's called a shakedown.
If he were an actual engineer, a Canadian court (where he lied on the stand)
would not have thrown out his report as useless ("he is not capable of giving
that opinion") and would not have been barred from calling himself an engineer in
the state of, I believe, Massachusetts. (Anyone is free to add or correct info
here.) The point is, "Steady Freddie" chose a career of dishonesty and
rapaciousness, and it finally bit him on the ass when he came into the spotlight.
>
> Dep giggles at the fact.
> Dep would have laughed at an accused
> communist fired (in 1952)
> Dep would snickered at a blackman
> lynched (in 1932)
>
> Dep is a bigot pig, a true Believer.
That is a horrendous, ugly thing to say. Snide comments about a man who has
caused his own downfall are not even remotely close to supporting Communist witch
hunts or, far worse, lynchings. I am demanding you withdraw that statement. If
you do not, you are not honestly debating--in fact, you would be no better than
Don Ellis and his hateful screeds.
You have an opportunity to do the right thing here, Mr. Allen. I suggest you take
it.
Buck Turgidson
No "probablies," Mr. Allen. I want to see the "facts" that you Deniers are so
loquacious about providing.
> The Germans (not having
> planned any mass killings) had only
> Krema I. Since the dead numbered
> over 120 per day, groups of typhus
> victims had to be cremated in
> outdoor pits.
Are you actually stating that the extant ovens could not have handled 120 bodies
per day?!
>
>
> >
> >This photo correlates to a map of Auschwitz, descriptions of Auschwitz,
> >testimonies by survivors and Nazis alike, physical evidence, documentary
> >evidence.... All you have to offer is "I don't THINK so." Come on, you
> >Believing
> >Denier! Show me some hard proof! Don't tell me what that photo ISN'T--tell me
> >what it IS! And back that up!
> [Ceacaa comments]
> You are making it up that the photograph
> correlates with physical evidence.
> It doesn't. There is no stoop in the
> picture and there is a beam in the
> door way.
The beam is not in the doorway. If anything, it seems to be part of the door.
There is a stoop. Put the picture into an image manipulation app, such as
Photoshop, and lower the brightness while upping the contrast. It becomes more
evident. (And before you go off on a tangent about how this is somehow false, be
forewarned that exactly this simple a procedure is now being used to find
ancient, almost-vanished cave drawings in North America. True story.)
>
> Of course, the easiest way to prove
> the matter is to go right outside the
> northfacing doorway of Krema V and
> dig a little hole. Right?
> Sure to find lots of teeth, bones, and
> remains of vast pyres, right?
> Or did they all magically disappear?
>
> Don't debate...excavate!
Why don't you fund an expedition for that purpose? Send me and a Denier there,
just for balance. I'll find your freaking evidence. Put your money where your
mouth is.
Ceacaa
>Message-id: <395C3DCB...@mindspring.com>
>
>Ceacaa wrote:
>
>> >Subject: Re: Auschwitz photographs
>> >From: Buck Turgidson deppi...@mindspring.com
Both prosecuted and persecuted apply
to Leucther...althought I did mean
presecuted.
And your comments about Mr. Leutcher
are far more than just "snide remarks".
You obviously have great hatred for
Leucther and delight in his troubles
for no valid personal reason except
that he voiced his opinion on Revisionism.
And you didn't like his opinion.
I believe that this is a great big
step toward being a bigot, ie.
Hatred of a person based on his politics.
Do you agree with that?
I also believe that you distort and twist
the events of his life to smear him
again
based on his being a Revisionist.
.
What would you call that?
Why the persecution Leucther
suffered is any less the result
of bigotry than that which accused
or "real" communists suffered in the
1950's is something that you
don't explain. I assume that
you are so blinded by your own
hate that you don't even think about
it. (another sign of bigotry)
In fact, you even blame Leutcher as
a man "who has caused his own downfall".
That echos the writings of Hitler.
I agree with you that Revisionists
haven't been lynched by Believers...
firebombed, beaten up, and jailed yes.
Will you blame the
victims in all these events too?
Old Professor Faurisson viciously attacking the fists and clubs of the young
men with his nose?
The IHR deliberately leaving their
books out to be firebombed?
Let's put it this way to you, Dep,
has there ever been an attack, criminal
charge, or dispute involving a Revisionist
which you would say wasn't the
fault of the Revisionist?
Let's make it even simpler, Dep.
Don't you think that ALL Revisionists
are really secret anti-semites?
Don't you think that Revisionism is
really a secret agenda of crypto-Nazis?
You have called me on saying your
writtings show you are a bigot...let's put your true
beliefs out on the table.
Ceacaa
>From: Gord McFee gord....@sympatico.ca
>Date: 6/28/00 6:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <to9llsgv91evqepcl...@4ax.com>
>> >Date: 6/26/00 3:27 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>> >Message-id: <54mfls4862ebpr7f1...@4ax.com>
>> >
>> >In <8j8d3e$scv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, on Mon, 26 Jun 2000 20:06:21 GMT,
>> >chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
>> >
>> >> <deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> ><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
>> >>
>> >> Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
>> >> diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
>> >> door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
>> >
>> >reaL name.
>> >
>> She is just reasonably afraid that you
>> might ask her on a date, Gord.
>
>No need to worry. I only date humans.
>
>--
>Gord McFee
Why, Gord?...your mom obviously didn't.
Gord McFee
Andrew Allen achieves the summit of "revisionist debate".
chery...@my-deja.com
<whda...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>chery...@my-deja.com writes:
>
>
> <snip>
>
>> >Like Andrew Allen, "Cheryl" is indeed simple.
>>
>> A devastating ad hominem attack, now there's a surprise.
>
> Do you even understand what an 'ad hominem' is?
I know the definition. To imagine what "believers" might claim it
means boggles the mind.
Buck Turgidson
No. I don't hate Fred Leuchter. I think he has conspired in one of the most
transparent shams attempted by a group of wackos since aluminum siding was
invented, and I think he needs to be exposed as the charlatan he is so that no
one takes his uninformed, bastardized "science" seriously. But I don't hate the
MAN. He should live a good life and be healthy, good luck to him. I don't hate
anyone.
>
>
> I also believe that you distort and twist
> the events of his life to smear him
> again
> based on his being a Revisionist.
> .
> What would you call that?
I'd call it pissing you off by telling the truth about a charlatan.
>
>
> Why the persecution Leucther
> suffered is any less the result
> of bigotry than that which accused
> or "real" communists suffered in the
> 1950's is something that you
> don't explain.
Because he is not part of a persecuted group. Because he is a charlatan, a liar,
a faker, a con artist, and that all of these things have been proven beyond
doubt--to anyone without a pro-Denier bias, that is. He obtained samples
illicitly, misinstructed a lab on how to process them, misled them purposely on
his intentions, and then published his useless results in an effort to deny
history. Previous to that, he led a life of a charlatan, offering expertise in a
field where he had none, knowledge where he had not studied, opinion where he was
not informed, and he did so in order to promote his own interests.
Communists were persecuted in the 50's because they believed, or had once
believed, or had once supported people who believed, in a particular political
system which some bad elements in our government deemed highly un-American. These
were people whowere truly persecuted for political beliefs and actions.
Fred Leuchter was not persecuted for political beliefs. He was "persecuted" (if
you wish to call it that, and I do not) for lying, scamming, manipulating,
misrepresenting, and extorting. He is a LIAR, Mr. Allen, not a political martyr.
> I assume that
> you are so blinded by your own
> hate that you don't even think about
> it. (another sign of bigotry)
You assume incorrectly. It is plain to see that your fanatic devotion to the
Denier cause colors your perceptions.
>
> In fact, you even blame Leutcher as
> a man "who has caused his own downfall".
> That echos the writings of Hitler.
Coming from the guy who thinks I would laugh at a lynching, that means not a
thing.
>
> I agree with you that Revisionists
> haven't been lynched by Believers...
> firebombed, beaten up, and jailed yes.
> Will you blame the
> victims in all these events too?
Oh yeah....like the mysterious "firebombing" of Grosvenor's home? The one where a
poorly-lit Molotov cocktail fell into his flowerbed and fizzled out--but was
somehow loud enough to rouse him from his sleep? Yeah, you guys are regular
martyrs. Why don't you go explain it to the kids shot up by Buford Furrow? Or the
widow of Ricky Byrdsong?
>
> Old Professor Faurisson viciously attacking the fists and clubs of the young
> men with his nose?
Right....the ones that nobody saw but him, isn't that it?
>
> The IHR deliberately leaving their
> books out to be firebombed?
> Let's put it this way to you, Dep,
> has there ever been an attack, criminal
> charge, or dispute involving a Revisionist
> which you would say wasn't the
> fault of the Revisionist?
I don't have a stack of cases here so I can make that presumption. I know about
Faurisson's hysterical response to an attack that may have never happened, and I
know Grosvenor's "firebomb" was suspiciously impotent and quickly-found. Anything
other than that, show me some cases and we can talk.
>
>
> Let's make it even simpler, Dep.
>
> Don't you think that ALL Revisionists
> are really secret anti-semites?
>
> Don't you think that Revisionism is
> really a secret agenda of crypto-Nazis?
>
> You have called me on saying your
> writtings show you are a bigot...let's put your true
> beliefs out on the table.
So your definition of bigotry includes not believing in the absolute honesty and
irreproachable motives of Holocaust Revisionists? Why not let's include my
dislike for hominy and okra in that too--making me a vegetable bigot? And we can
toss in my disagreement with the entire literary world on the value of James
Joyce--making me a Joyce bigot. Or if we are going to go on matters of belief
alone, since I don't believe in the strict interpretation of Creation as told by
fundamentalist Christians, I suppose that makes me a bigot against fundamentalist
Christians.
You've set up a straw man of no small proportion; fortunately, the bigger they
are, the more whining they do as they fall. And you are certainly whining here,
Mr. Allen.
And all because you can't prove a photograph is what you say it is.
Ceacaa
>Message-id: <395DC093...@mindspring.com>
>
>Ceacaa wrote:
[snip]
>> Let's make it even simpler, Dep.
>>
>> Don't you think that ALL Revisionists
>> are really secret anti-semites?
>>
>> Don't you think that Revisionism is
>> really a secret agenda of crypto-Nazis?
>>
>> You have called me on saying your
>> writtings show you are a bigot...let's put your true
>> beliefs out on the table.
>So your definition of bigotry includes not believing in the absolute honesty
>and
>irreproachable motives of Holocaust Revisionists?
No...it means classifying based on
irrelevant data, and often hating them
for the "classification".
Everyone is a bigot in some ways...
it really implys lack of thought.
The serious part is the hate.
[Dep drones on]
> Why not let's include my
>dislike for hominy and okra in that too--making me a vegetable bigot? And we
>can
>toss in my disagreement with the entire literary world on the value of James
>Joyce--making me a Joyce bigot. Or if we are going to go on matters of belief
>alone, since I don't believe in the strict interpretation of Creation as told
>by
>fundamentalist Christians, I suppose that makes me a bigot against
>fundamentalist
>Christians.
>
>You've set up a straw man of no small proportion; fortunately, the bigger
>they
>are, the more whining they do as they fall. And you are certainly whining
>here,
>Mr. Allen.
>
>And all because you can't prove a photograph is what you say it is.
>-- --Dep
[Ceacaa replies]
You didn't answer the question which
was not about your personal likes
or dislikes but on your classifications
of a group of people.
and 2,
you are the one who sees so many
things in the photograph or
comes up lame excuses why
so many other things are missing.
I only see what is in the picture,
which is 19 bodies being cremated,
taken from
from a doorway without a door or
a stoop.
William Daffer
> On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 20:54:50 GMT, William Daffer
> <whda...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >chery...@my-deja.com writes:
> >
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >> >Like Andrew Allen, "Cheryl" is indeed simple.
> >>
> >> A devastating ad hominem attack, now there's a surprise.
> >
> > Do you even understand what an 'ad hominem' is?
>
> I know the definition. To imagine what "believers" might claim it
> means boggles the mind.
State the definition.
Ceacaa
>From: Gord McFee gord....@sympatico.ca
>Date: 6/30/00 5:57 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <ndgqlskit1jqstb30...@4ax.com>
>
>In <20000630204150...@ng-cc1.aol.com>, on 01 Jul 2000
>00:41:50 GMT, cea...@aol.com (Ceacaa) wrote:
>
>> >From: Gord McFee gord....@sympatico.ca
>> >Date: 6/28/00 6:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>> >Message-id: <to9llsgv91evqepcl...@4ax.com>
>> >
>> >In <20000628004827...@ng-cv1.aol.com>, on 28 Jun 2000
>> >04:48:27 GMT, cea...@aol.com (Ceacaa) wrote:
>> >
>> >> >From: Gord McFee gord....@sympatico.ca
>> >> >Date: 6/26/00 3:27 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>> >> >Message-id: <54mfls4862ebpr7f1...@4ax.com>
>> >> >
>> >> >In <8j8d3e$scv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, on Mon, 26 Jun 2000 20:06:21 GMT,
>> >> >chery...@my-deja.com wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 17:12:25 -0600, Buck Turgidson
>> >> >> <deppi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ><snipped: lots of twisting, distorting, and lying>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Of course. See Buck snip...See Jeffy G. Brown create a
>> >> >> diversion in another reply while Buck limps out the back
>> >> >> door...See Cheryl chuckle at the believer ineptitude...
>> >> >
>> >> >See someone calling himself Cheryl who is too gutless to post under his
>> >> >reaL name.
>> >> >
>> >> [Ceacaa replies]
>> >> She is just reasonably afraid that you
>> >> might ask her on a date, Gord.
>> >
>> >No need to worry. I only date humans.
>> >
>> >--
>> >Gord McFee
>> [Ceacaa inquires]
>> Why, Gord?...your mom obviously didn't.
>
>Andrew Allen achieves the summit of "revisionist debate".
>
>--
>Gord McFee
Having Gord McFee's banal insults
blow-up in his own face is pretty
standard fare on this thread, Gord.