Where are the revisionist scholars who aren't neo-nazis or anti-semites?

7 views
Skip to first unread message

Allan Matthews

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 2:13:24 AM6/5/01
to
Gee, you'd think that after many months of posting this at least one
revisionist who isn't a neo-Nazi or anti-Semite would have come forward
and said "Here I am!"

But, no. It appears that there just aren't any such revisionists
around.

Based on their past posting history, the few bozos who have bothered to
claim that they aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites were, upon examination
of their claims, found to be clearly lying. Of course, given the
general behavior of revisionists, this lack of honesty isn't surprising
in the least.

However, just in case some revisionist 'scholars' have missed my
question to date, here it is again:

Where are the revisionists who aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?

It's a fair question. Afterall, how can revisionsists hope to be taken
seriously if they all have such apparent biases, agendas and axes to
grind?

So, then, if Holocaust revisionism is an intellectually honest endevour,
where are the revisionists who aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?

allan
--
allan_m...@bigfoot.com
============================================
"The real purpose of Holocaust revisionism
is to make National Socialism an acceptable
political alternative again."
- some two-bit neo-Nazi
============================================
http://www2.shore.net/~matthews/

Waldo

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 4:32:25 AM6/5/01
to

Allan Matthews <allan_m...@bigfoot.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1586429dc...@news.ne.mediaone.net...

> Gee, you'd think that after many months of posting this at least one
> revisionist who isn't a neo-Nazi or anti-Semite would have come forward
> and said "Here I am!"

"Holocaust Revisionists", "anti-Semites"? I guess it kind of goes with the
territory, Allan.

One need not be an "anti-Semite" to question some of the outlandish and
illogical claims surrounding the "Holocaust" story, but it doesn't take long
to develop an "anti-Semitic" bent when looking into the details. . .
especially if one ventures into the likes of this group, and is met with the
warm welcome offered by the pack of Jews and Shabbos Goy hyenas that inhabit
these parts.

> But, no. It appears that there just aren't any such revisionists
> around.

You won't find many Bunko detectives that aren't "anti-Fraud" either.

> Based on their past posting history, the few bozos who have bothered to
> claim that they aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites were, upon examination
> of their claims, found to be clearly lying.

Ever wonder if they haven't been "converted" with the help of your
ankle-gnawing pro-Semite rat pack?

> Of course, given the
> general behavior of revisionists, this lack of honesty isn't surprising
> in the least.

Are you insinuating that you and the "Snip, Squeal, Dodge and Subterfuge"
gang are HONEST?

(Waldo chuckles)

> However, just in case some revisionist 'scholars' have missed my
> question to date, here it is again:
>
> Where are the revisionists who aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?

You mean "Jewish Holocaust revisionists" Allan. Get it straight.

You have no problem with anyone dissecting the relationship between
Eisenhower and McArthur regarding the Korean War.

You couldn't care less whether revisionists pick apart the details of the
Boer Wars, or the Spanish conquest of the Americas.

You and the Cockroach Clan are single minded in your efforts: To protect the
fabricated and "sanctified" image of Jewish suffering at the hands of the
Nazis during WWII, and to absolve Jews of any guilt regarding the atrocities
committed under Bolshevism and Communism.

There is much at stake, isn't there Allan?

If the general perception of the public were to change . . if people no
longer viewed Jews as the "poor, picked-on, innocent scapegoats" that they
have been portrayed to be . . . What would be the consequences?

Answer!

> It's a fair question. Afterall, how can revisionsists hope to be taken
> seriously if they all have such apparent biases, agendas and axes to
> grind?

Don't forget: You Jews provided the axe.

> So, then, if Holocaust revisionism is an intellectually honest endevour,
> where are the revisionists who aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?

Clearly, you make no apologies for being anti-Nazi, please demonstrate that
there is something inherently "wrong" with being an "anti-Semite".


Waldo

Observer at Large


Philip Mathews

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 12:40:42 PM6/5/01
to
>===== Original Message From "Waldo" <Wald...@hushmail.com> =====

>Allan Matthews <allan_m...@bigfoot.nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:MPG.1586429dc...@news.ne.mediaone.net...
>> Gee, you'd think that after many months of posting this at least one
>> revisionist who isn't a neo-Nazi or anti-Semite would have come forward
>> and said "Here I am!"
>
>"Holocaust Revisionists", "anti-Semites"? I guess it kind of goes with the
>territory, Allan.

Yup, it comes with the territory. You're hardly going to deny your obvious
antisemitism are you?

>One need not be an "anti-Semite" to question some of the outlandish and
>illogical claims surrounding the "Holocaust" story,

No one said one did. What was observed was the very high correlation between
people making idiotic claims about the Holocaust and neo-Nazi/antisemitic
motivations. A simple reading of this newsgroup proves it every day. In your
case for instance the idiotic claim is "outlandish and illogical claims".
And
yet in your time here you've shown none of those. In the face of such
unsupported tripe, and given your obvious hatred of Jews, you fit the
pattern
quite well.

but it doesn't take long
>to develop an "anti-Semitic" bent when looking into the details. . .

Oh look, the antisemite blames someone else for making him so! Now we've
never
heard that before.


>especially if one ventures into the likes of this group, and is met with the
>warm welcome offered by the pack of Jews and Shabbos Goy hyenas that inhabit
>these parts.

Why should you get a warm welcome from anyone, you anonymous piece of shit?
Try walking into a neighborhood gathering and uttering the crap you say here
and see what kind of a welcom you get.

>> But, no. It appears that there just aren't any such revisionists
>> around.
>
>You won't find many Bunko detectives that aren't "anti-Fraud" either.

So you're a Jew detective? I suppose you think that actually meant
something.

>> Based on their past posting history, the few bozos who have bothered to
>> claim that they aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites were, upon examination
>> of their claims, found to be clearly lying.
>
>Ever wonder if they haven't been "converted" with the help of your
>ankle-gnawing pro-Semite rat pack?

Why should we wonder about bigots looking for an excuse for their bigotry.

>> Of course, given the
>> general behavior of revisionists, this lack of honesty isn't surprising
>> in the least.
>
>Are you insinuating that you and the "Snip, Squeal, Dodge and Subterfuge"
>gang are HONEST?

>(Waldo chuckles)
>
>> However, just in case some revisionist 'scholars' have missed my
>> question to date, here it is again:
>>
>> Where are the revisionists who aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?
>
>You mean "Jewish Holocaust revisionists" Allan. Get it straight.

Getting it straight would mean "deniers of the Holocaust", most of whom are
neo-Nazis or antisemites.

>You have no problem with anyone dissecting the relationship between
>Eisenhower and McArthur regarding the Korean War.

Not analagous. We would have a problem with people saying there was no
Korean
War.

>You couldn't care less whether revisionists pick apart the details of the
>Boer Wars, or the Spanish conquest of the Americas.

But we would if someone denied there was a Boer War or Spanish conquest.


>You and the Cockroach Clan are single minded in your efforts: To protect the
>fabricated and "sanctified" image of Jewish suffering at the hands of the
>Nazis during WWII, and to absolve Jews of any guilt regarding the atrocities
>committed under Bolshevism and Communism.

See, you've proven why those examples are not analgous. You claim, without a
shred of evidence, that the Holocaust is fabricated, which is an entirely
different order of claim than that Eisenhower didn't get along with
MacArthur
during the Korean War. You then reveal that the true cause of your
"revisionism" is that the Holocaust involved Jews, who you then go on to
blame
for the sins of communism. I'd say you touched every base, Waldo old boy!

>There is much at stake, isn't there Allan?

Absolutely, like whether we can ever claim to know anything as proven as
long
as there are people willing to deny facts in the service of hatred.

>If the general perception of the public were to change . . if people no
>longer viewed Jews as the "poor, picked-on, innocent scapegoats" that they
>have been portrayed to be . . . What would be the consequences?
>
>Answer!

There you go, the Holocaust is not only fabricated, its the work of Jews who
now don't dare let the secret out because there would be bad consequences.
You're not even a very original Jew hater.

>> It's a fair question. Afterall, how can revisionsists hope to be taken
>> seriously if they all have such apparent biases, agendas and axes to
>> grind?
>
>Don't forget: You Jews provided the axe.

Bullshit, you grabbed the nearest weapon.

>> So, then, if Holocaust revisionism is an intellectually honest endevour,
>> where are the revisionists who aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?
>
>Clearly, you make no apologies for being anti-Nazi, please demonstrate that
>there is something inherently "wrong" with being an "anti-Semite".

LOL!

Thanks for finally admitting the truth.

--
Philip Mathews

Daedra Morrighan

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 2:27:55 PM6/5/01
to
Allan Matthews <allan_m...@bigfoot.nospam.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1586429dc...@news.ne.mediaone.net>...
> Gee, you'd think that after many months of posting this at least one
> revisionist who isn't a neo-Nazi or anti-Semite would have come forward
> and said "Here I am!"

I'm a revisionist (and not just regarding WWII), and certainly not a
neo-Nazi. Politically, I'm on the far left.

As for the "anti-Semite" label, I think it is time for you guys to
stop using outdated, inaccurate epithets to stifle debate.


>
> So, then, if Holocaust revisionism is an intellectually honest endevour,
> where are the revisionists who aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?

If the Holocaust Industry were an intellectually honest endeavor, why
is it that revisionism is illegal in many countries?

-- Daedra Morrighan
Founder: Black Vanguard
<http://www.pornonationalist.ws>

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

"As soon as society succeeds in abolishing the empirical essence of
Judaism, which is the huckster and the conditions that produce him,
the Jew will become impossible, because his consciousness will no
longer have a corresponding object."
- Karl Marx

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Black Vanguard Discussion Forums:
http://www.coolboard.com/myboards.cfm?oid=69719501014586
"A nice place on the 'Net for radical advocates of sexual freedom and
social justice and those interested to discuss relevant topics. Free
speech is respected here and only spam will be deleted."

Daedra Morrighan

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 2:46:04 PM6/5/01
to
"Waldo" <Wald...@hushmail.com> wrote...

>>Clearly, you make no apologies for being anti-Nazi, please demonstrate that
>>there is something inherently "wrong" with being an "anti-Semite".

Because it's inherently wrong to be against all Arabs, Akkadians, Assyrians,
Canaanites, Carthaginians, Aramaeans and Phoenicians on the basis of their
ethnicity.

Unfortunately, Jewish racists continue to hate Semites for no justifiable
reason.

Philip Mathews

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 3:04:18 PM6/5/01
to
>===== Original Message From Daedra Morrighan <nos...@newsranger.com> =====

>"Waldo" <Wald...@hushmail.com> wrote...
>>>Clearly, you make no apologies for being anti-Nazi, please demonstrate that
>>>there is something inherently "wrong" with being an "anti-Semite".
>
>Because it's inherently wrong to be against all Arabs, Akkadians, Assyrians,
>Canaanites, Carthaginians, Aramaeans and Phoenicians on the basis of their
>ethnicity.
>

Antisemitism has nothing to do with those people.

>Unfortunately, Jewish racists continue to hate Semites for no justifiable
>reason.

A canard used by Jew haters to pretend their despicable beliefs are someone
elses fault.

--
Philip Mathews

Daedra Morrighan

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 3:27:28 PM6/5/01
to
In article <3B57...@MailAndNews.com>, Philip Mathews says...

>
>>===== Original Message From Daedra Morrighan <nos...@newsranger.com> =====
>>"Waldo" <Wald...@hushmail.com> wrote...
>>>>Clearly, you make no apologies for being anti-Nazi, please demonstrate that
>>>>there is something inherently "wrong" with being an "anti-Semite".
>>
>>Because it's inherently wrong to be against all Arabs, Akkadians, Assyrians,
>>Canaanites, Carthaginians, Aramaeans and Phoenicians on the basis of their
>>ethnicity.
>>
>
>Antisemitism has nothing to do with those people.

"Anti-Semitism," as it is currently defined, is an etymologically dishonest term
used principally to stifle debate. The continued misuse of the term is unfair to
the real Semites, who are often victims of Jewish racism and violence.

>
>>Unfortunately, Jewish racists continue to hate Semites for no justifiable
>>reason.
>
>A canard used by Jew haters to pretend their despicable beliefs are someone
>elses fault.

No, the "Holocaust" industry is a canard used by haters of the real Semites as
camouflage and propaganda.

Allan Matthews

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 3:46:16 PM6/5/01
to
In article <f15bff00.01060...@posting.google.com>,
vang...@antisocial.com says...

> Allan Matthews <allan_m...@bigfoot.nospam.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1586429dc...@news.ne.mediaone.net>...
> > Gee, you'd think that after many months of posting this at least one
> > revisionist who isn't a neo-Nazi or anti-Semite would have come forward
> > and said "Here I am!"
>
> I'm a revisionist (and not just regarding WWII), and certainly not a
> neo-Nazi. Politically, I'm on the far left.

Yeah, well, you also say you're a girl when you're a boy, so what you
claim about yourself is not to be looked on as dependable.

Besides, we all know you hate Jews.



> As for the "anti-Semite" label, I think it is time for you guys to
> stop using outdated, inaccurate epithets to stifle debate.

Except that, in your case, it is anything but outdated or inaccurate.

And as for stifling debate, it would appear that being called an anti-
Semite certainly seems to encourage you to shoot off your shit-filled
mouth.

[rest of the usual anti-Semitic blather snipped & newsgroup spamming
corrected for]

allan
--
allan_m...@bigfoot.com
============================================
"We'll finish the Holocaust,
which didn't happen"
- some neo-Nazi skinhead loser
============================================
http://www2.shore.net/~matthews/

Maimonides Jafar

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 3:49:14 PM6/5/01
to

"Daedra Morrighan" <nos...@newsranger.com> wrote in message
news:MN9T6.975$SQ2....@www.newsranger.com...

> Because it's inherently wrong to be against all Arabs, Akkadians,
Assyrians,
> Canaanites, Carthaginians, Aramaeans and Phoenicians on the basis of their
> ethnicity.

> Unfortunately, Jewish racists continue to hate Semites for no justifiable
> reason. -- Daedra Morrighan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Vexing 'Jewish Question': A Nineteenth-Century [Jewish] Scholar's View
by Goldwin Smith (Oxford, England)

... Jews in the Roman Empire

That Christian fanaticism at all events was not the sole source of the
unpopularity of the Jews might have been inferred from the fact that the
relation was no better between the Jew and the heathen races during the
period of declining polytheism, when religious indifference prevailed and
beneath the vast dome of the Roman Empire the religions of many nations
slept and moldered side by side.

Gibbon, well qualified to speak, for he was himself a citizen of the Roman
Empire in sentiment, after narrating the massacres committed by the Jews on
the Gentiles in Africa and Cyprus, has expressed in flamboyant phrase the
hatred of the Roman world for the Jews, whom he designates as the
"implacable enemies, not only of the Roman government but of human kind."
(Edward Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Chap. xiv.)

Tacitus speaks of the Jews as enemies of all races but their own (adversus
omnes alios hostile odium, in Histories, V, v), and Juvenal, in a well-known
passage, speaks of them as people who would not show a wayfarer his road or
guide the thirsty to a spring if he were not of their own faith. Those who
maintain that there is nothing in the character, habits, or disposition of
the Jew to provoke antipathy have to bring the charge of fanatical prejudice
not only against the Russians or against Christendom, but against mankind.
...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Daedra Morrighan

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 3:59:03 PM6/5/01
to
In article <MPG.15870121a...@news.ne.mediaone.net>, Allan Matthews
says...

>
>In article <f15bff00.01060...@posting.google.com>,
>vang...@antisocial.com says...
>> Allan Matthews <allan_m...@bigfoot.nospam.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1586429dc...@news.ne.mediaone.net>...
>> > Gee, you'd think that after many months of posting this at least one
>> > revisionist who isn't a neo-Nazi or anti-Semite would have come forward
>> > and said "Here I am!"
>>
>> I'm a revisionist (and not just regarding WWII), and certainly not a
>> neo-Nazi. Politically, I'm on the far left.
>
>Yeah, well, you also say you're a girl when you're a boy, so what you
>claim about yourself is not to be looked on as dependable.

Actually all progressive people consider transgendered women to be women. Ask
Susie Bright, Carol Queen, or even the Lesbian Avengers.

You are clearly filled with hatred against transgendered women. You make that
clear when you described me as "a boy." It is worth noting that your transphobic
bigotry is found a good deal on the political right, not the left.

Philip Mathews

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 6:08:30 PM6/5/01
to
In >Message-id: <AoaT6.1022$SQ2....@www.newsranger.com>

>Daedra Morrighan nos...@newsranger.com wrote:


>In article <3B57...@MailAndNews.com>, Philip Mathews says...
>>
>>>===== Original Message From Daedra Morrighan <nos...@newsranger.com> =====
>>>"Waldo" <Wald...@hushmail.com> wrote...
>>>>>Clearly, you make no apologies for being anti-Nazi, please demonstrate
>that
>>>>>there is something inherently "wrong" with being an "anti-Semite".
>>>
>>>Because it's inherently wrong to be against all Arabs, Akkadians,
>Assyrians,
>>>Canaanites, Carthaginians, Aramaeans and Phoenicians on the basis of their
>>>ethnicity.
>>>
>>
>>Antisemitism has nothing to do with those people.
>
>"Anti-Semitism," as it is currently defined, is an etymologically dishonest
>term
>used principally to stifle debate.

No it isn't. It's a term originally coined by a Jews hater to describe his
hate. It describes people like you perfectly.

The continued misuse of the term is unfair
>to
>the real Semites, who are often victims of Jewish racism and violence.

It is not being misused and has nothing to do with Semites.

>>>Unfortunately, Jewish racists continue to hate Semites for no justifiable
>>>reason.

>>A canard used by Jew haters to pretend their despicable beliefs are someone
>>elses fault.

>No, the "Holocaust" industry is a canard used by haters of the real Semites
>as
>camouflage and propaganda.

How can an industry be a canard? Any industry built up around the proven
historical event has nothing to do with Semites, real or imagined.

Try to come up with something a little better than this, will ya.

--
Philip Mathews

"Mankind have a great aversion to intellectual labor; but even supposing
knowledge to be easily attainable, more people would be content to be ignorant
than would take even a little trouble to acquire it." Samuel Johnson

tim gueguen

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 6:38:26 PM6/5/01
to

"Daedra Morrighan" <vang...@antisocial.com> wrote in message
news:f15bff00.01060...@posting.google.com...

> Allan Matthews <allan_m...@bigfoot.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:<MPG.1586429dc...@news.ne.mediaone.net>...
> > Gee, you'd think that after many months of posting this at least one
> > revisionist who isn't a neo-Nazi or anti-Semite would have come forward
> > and said "Here I am!"
>
> I'm a revisionist (and not just regarding WWII), and certainly not a
> neo-Nazi. Politically, I'm on the far left.
>
And yet you not only deny the Holocaust, which by its very nature is an
apologia for Nazism, you use racist terms such as kike.

tim gueguen 101867


Waldo

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 6:45:20 PM6/5/01
to

Allan Matthews <allan_m...@bigfoot.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15870121a...@news.ne.mediaone.net...

> In article <f15bff00.01060...@posting.google.com>,
> vang...@antisocial.com says...
> > Allan Matthews <allan_m...@bigfoot.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:<MPG.1586429dc...@news.ne.mediaone.net>...
> > > Gee, you'd think that after many months of posting this at least one
> > > revisionist who isn't a neo-Nazi or anti-Semite would have come
forward
> > > and said "Here I am!"
> >
> > I'm a revisionist (and not just regarding WWII), and certainly not a
> > neo-Nazi. Politically, I'm on the far left.
>
> Yeah, well, you also say you're a girl when you're a boy, so what you
> claim about yourself is not to be looked on as dependable.
>
> Besides, we all know you hate Jews.
>
> > As for the "anti-Semite" label, I think it is time for you guys to
> > stop using outdated, inaccurate epithets to stifle debate.
>
> Except that, in your case, it is anything but outdated or inaccurate.
>
> And as for stifling debate, it would appear that being called an anti-
> Semite certainly seems to encourage you to shoot off your shit-filled
> mouth.
>
> [rest of the usual anti-Semitic blather snipped & newsgroup spamming
> corrected for]
>
> allan

Nice dodge, Allan. How about answering the KEY question, (which you
snipped):

"If the Holocaust Industry were an intellectually honest endeavor, why
is it that revisionism is illegal in many countries?"

Waldo

Observer at Large


Philip Mathews

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 6:55:34 PM6/5/01
to
In >Message-id: <3b1d6115$0$2...@news.impulse.net>

>"Waldo" Wald...@hushmail.com wrote:

How about because Holocaust Denial is not an intellectually honest endeavor.

Revisionism, on the other hand, has no such problem.

jgarbuz

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 10:09:06 PM6/5/01
to
Since nearly all of those peoples have killed JEws, we Jews have the right
to hate them. We
only like people who don't kill Jews, such as Hindus for example.


"Daedra Morrighan" <nos...@newsranger.com> wrote in message
news:MN9T6.975$SQ2....@www.newsranger.com...

jgarbuz

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 10:13:20 PM6/5/01
to
Anti-semitism was the term coined by a German meaning dislike or hatred of
Jews. That was
at a time when there still weren't too many Arabs in Germany. Perhaps if
there had been
Arabs in Germany in those, days "judenhasse" might have been coined instead.


"Daedra Morrighan" <nos...@newsranger.com> wrote in message

news:AoaT6.1022$SQ2....@www.newsranger.com...

jgarbuz

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 10:17:34 PM6/5/01
to
All that you have demonstrated is that antisemitism is the oldest and most
persistent form
of racism that has ever existed, bar none. It also strongly reinforces the
need of a very strong
and united Jewish state impervious to attack, capable of striking back
decisively at any attacker.

Daedra Morrighan

unread,
Jun 5, 2001, 7:42:32 PM6/5/01
to
In article <3b1d6115$0$2...@news.impulse.net>, Waldo says...

I wouldn't hold your breath if I were you, Waldo. Unfortunately, he isn't likely
to give a meaningful answer to that -- ever.

He'll probably just go on about how you're "bigoted," "intolerant," ad nauseum,
ad infinitum.

But I'll say that an honest bigot is vastly better a person than a
*hypocritical* bigot like Allan Matthews.

Susan Cohen

unread,
Jun 6, 2001, 12:14:00 AM6/6/01
to

tim gueguen wrote:

> Braond Orr, trying to cover his bigotry with the victimhood of the truly
> transgendered by posting as "Daedra Morrighan" <vang...@antisocial.com>

Tim, this is the guy who says he's a woman, but never weears
women's clothing except for sex parties, doesn't have a woman's
name on his driver's license, birth certificate or social security card;
in fact, doesn't go by a woman's name anywhere but on Usenet;
& makes fun of other women's looks in exacty the same way a
male who hates women does.

He also admits to running a propaganda campaign against me,
but insists that he's a truthful person.

So don't expect any logic from him.

Susan

Daedra Morrighan

unread,
Jun 6, 2001, 12:20:24 AM6/6/01
to
In article <3B1DAE08...@hers.com>, Susan Cohen says...

>
>
>
>tim gueguen wrote:
>
>> Braond Orr, trying to cover his bigotry with the victimhood of the truly
>> transgendered by posting as "Daedra Morrighan" <vang...@antisocial.com>
>> wrote in message
>> news:f15bff00.01060...@posting.google.com...
>> > Allan Matthews <allan_m...@bigfoot.nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:<MPG.1586429dc...@news.ne.mediaone.net>...
>> > > Gee, you'd think that after many months of posting this at least one
>> > > revisionist who isn't a neo-Nazi or anti-Semite would have come forward
>> > > and said "Here I am!"
>> >
>> > I'm a revisionist (and not just regarding WWII), and certainly not a
>> > neo-Nazi. Politically, I'm on the far left.
>> >
>> And yet you not only deny the Holocaust, which by its very nature is an
>> apologia for Nazism, you use racist terms such as kike.
>>
>> tim gueguen 101867
>
>Tim, this is the guy who says he's a woman, but never weears
>women's clothing except for sex parties, ........blah

Liar.

You're the bigot: you put all the blame on the Palestinians when you know well
that you racist Jews are the murderous occupiers.

I guess you're too much of a bigot to tell the truth about anything.

-- Daedra Morrighan
Founder: Black Vanguard
<http://www.pornonationalist.ws>

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

"As soon as society succeeds in abolishing the empirical essence of
Judaism, which is the huckster and the conditions that produce him,
the Jew will become impossible, because his consciousness will no
longer have a corresponding object."
- Karl Marx

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Black Vanguard Discussion Forums:
http://www.coolboard.com/myboards.cfm?oid=69719501014586
"A nice place on the 'Net for radical advocates of sexual freedom and social
justice and those interested to discuss relevant topics. Free speech is
respected here and only spam will be deleted."

"The Holocaust was an obscene period in our nation's history.
I mean in this century's history. But we all lived in this
century. I didn't live in this century."

-- Dan Quayle, 9/15/88

Brian Blank

unread,
Jun 6, 2001, 1:22:37 AM6/6/01
to
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001 15:45:20 -0700, "Waldo" <Wald...@hushmail.com>
wrote:

Firstly, revisionism is not illegal in many countries.
Secondly, do you consider that, for example, incitement to murder,
being illegal in most countries, is an intellectually honest endeavor?
>
>
>

Regards,

Brian Blank

Hugh Betcha

unread,
Jun 6, 2001, 5:27:12 PM6/6/01
to
Maimonides Jafar wrote:

> The Vexing 'Jewish Question': A Nineteenth-Century [Jewish] Scholar's View
> by Goldwin Smith (Oxford, England)

____________________________________________________________
The Associated Press
Zarqa, Jordan-

A Jordanian believed to be the Tel Aviv suicide bomber was
an observant Muslim who went to Israel for a better job,
his father said Sunday.

Saeed Hotary, 22, "was a devout Muslim who used to pray,
observed fasting and performed all his religious obligations
to the letter and spirit", his father Hassan said.

I am very happy and proud of what my son did, and I hope
all the men of Palestine and Jordan would do the same",
Hassan Hotary said with tears in his eyes.

He said his son was the suicide bomber who blew himself
up at the entrance of a Tel Aviv beachfront disco on
Friday night, killing 20 others and injuring at least
90-several of whom remained in critical condition.

Waldo

unread,
Jun 8, 2001, 3:21:55 AM6/8/01
to

Philip Mathews <pmat...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:3B55...@MailAndNews.com...

> >===== Original Message From "Waldo" <Wald...@hushmail.com> =====
> >Allan Matthews <allan_m...@bigfoot.nospam.com> wrote in message
> >news:MPG.1586429dc...@news.ne.mediaone.net...

> >> Gee, you'd think that after many months of posting this at least one
> >> revisionist who isn't a neo-Nazi or anti-Semite would have come forward
> >> and said "Here I am!"
> >
> >"Holocaust Revisionists", "anti-Semites"? I guess it kind of goes with
the
> >territory, Allan.
>
> Yup, it comes with the territory. You're hardly going to deny your obvious
> antisemitism are you?

Why should I? Jews are much more than a religion, they are very powerful as
a political force, and as such are fair game for open and public criticism.
They work to twist and manipulate the structure of any society that
tolerates their presence to their favor - at the expense of their Gentile
hosts.

Semitism is bigoted, ethnocentric and anti-Gentile by nature. Anti-Semitism
is a perfectly natural reaction to Semitism.

The saliva of the parasitic Vampire Bat contains an anesthetic which is
useful in preventing the victim from perceiving that he is under attack,
thus allowing the bat to feed unmolested.

Jews go one step further - and have managed to so brainwash the Gentile
public that, should one dare to point out the machinations of the Jews, he
will be immediately set upon by both Jews and their brainwashed Gentile
defenders and branded as a heretic: a Nazi, a Fascist, an anti-Semite.

> >One need not be an "anti-Semite" to question some of the outlandish and
> >illogical claims surrounding the "Holocaust" story,
>
> No one said one did. What was observed was the very high correlation
between
> people making idiotic claims about the Holocaust and neo-Nazi/antisemitic
> motivations. A simple reading of this newsgroup proves it every day. In
your
> case for instance the idiotic claim is "outlandish and illogical claims".

Interesting. Have you noticed that those DENYING those claims tend to be
Jews, Zionists and their apologists?

I state that some of the claims surrounding the "Holocaust" story are
outlandish and illogical. You call my statement "idiotic".

Nice demonstration, Gentile hater.

> And
> yet in your time here you've shown none of those. In the face of such
> unsupported tripe, and given your obvious hatred of Jews, you fit the
> pattern
> quite well.

I've had several debates with *you* in which we've discussed numerous
spurious aspects of the "Holocaust" tale, (gassing, sacks of hair with
traces of HCN, etc.) and yet here you are DENYING that any such discussions
took place.

You're not only a Goy Hater, you're a lying Goy hater.

> but it doesn't take long
> >to develop an "anti-Semitic" bent when looking into the details. . .
>
> Oh look, the antisemite blames someone else for making him so! Now we've
> never
> heard that before.

Of course, Jews could NEVER be responsible for ANY animosity others might
hold toward them, could they Phillip? Throughout ALL the ages, ALL of the
pogroms, ALL of the stereotypes, ALL of the expulsions, and even the Holy
Holocaust itself, Jews were completely innocent of ANYTHING that might have
provoked or incited these incidents, RIGHT?

Gee. That's some BAD LUCK you Jews have had. I mean, we're talking lottery
odds in reverse here. If this be the case, there's only one possible
explanation: YOUR GOD IS VERY PISSED OFF AT YOU, and has been beating you
like a foul-mouthed red-headed step-child for THOUSANDS OF YEARS.

Did you do something to piss your god off, Philip?

> >especially if one ventures into the likes of this group, and is met with
the
> >warm welcome offered by the pack of Jews and Shabbos Goy hyenas that
inhabit
> >these parts.
>
> Why should you get a warm welcome from anyone, you anonymous piece of
shit?

It's not just me, Philip. It's anyone who doesn't demonstrate IMMEDIATE
allegiance to the United Jew Defenders of alt.revisionism. I've seen you
drive the innocent and curious away: You attack like a swarm of ravenous
piranhas.

> Try walking into a neighborhood gathering and uttering the crap you say
here
> and see what kind of a welcom you get.

Hemorrhoids, syphilis and Jews are all facts of life, but are rarely
mentioned in polite company.

> >> But, no. It appears that there just aren't any such revisionists
> >> around.
> >
> >You won't find many Bunko detectives that aren't "anti-Fraud" either.
>
> So you're a Jew detective? I suppose you think that actually meant
> something.

Yes. What it means is that *any* Gentile who bothers to pay attention to
what has been and *is* happening in the world, and the curious part that
Jews have played eventually begins to smell the stench. The more you dig,
the worse it stinks.

> >> Based on their past posting history, the few bozos who have bothered to
> >> claim that they aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites were, upon examination
> >> of their claims, found to be clearly lying.
> >
> >Ever wonder if they haven't been "converted" with the help of your
> >ankle-gnawing pro-Semite rat pack?
>
> Why should we wonder about bigots looking for an excuse for their bigotry.

I know why you're bigoted Philip: Bigotry is at the fundamental core of the
religion and culture of your tribe, your heritage that stretches back over
millennia. You've been raised with it, and fed on it like mothers milk.
Ethnocentric bigotry and the disdain of Gentiles is the glue that holds
Judaism together.

> >> Of course, given the
> >> general behavior of revisionists, this lack of honesty isn't surprising
> >> in the least.
> >
> >Are you insinuating that you and the "Snip, Squeal, Dodge and Subterfuge"
> >gang are HONEST?
>
> >(Waldo chuckles)
> >
> >> However, just in case some revisionist 'scholars' have missed my
> >> question to date, here it is again:
> >>
> >> Where are the revisionists who aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?
> >
> >You mean "Jewish Holocaust revisionists" Allan. Get it straight.
>
> Getting it straight would mean "deniers of the Holocaust", most of whom
are
> neo-Nazis or antisemites.

Wrong, deceiver. You Jews and your Shabbos Goy defenders always try to spin
things as though anyone who you label as a "revisionist" outright denies
that the Jews suffered a horrible calamity during WWII. This is a LIE. What
is disputed is the magnitude, the methods and the motives of the calamity.

> >You have no problem with anyone dissecting the relationship between
> >Eisenhower and McArthur regarding the Korean War.
>
> Not analagous. We would have a problem with people saying there was no
> Korean
> War.

Lie. See above.

> >You couldn't care less whether revisionists pick apart the details of the
> >Boer Wars, or the Spanish conquest of the Americas.
>
> But we would if someone denied there was a Boer War or Spanish conquest.

More lies. See above, deceiver.

> >You and the Cockroach Clan are single minded in your efforts: To protect
the
> >fabricated and "sanctified" image of Jewish suffering at the hands of the
> >Nazis during WWII, and to absolve Jews of any guilt regarding the
atrocities
> >committed under Bolshevism and Communism.
>
> See, you've proven why those examples are not analgous. You claim, without
a
> shred of evidence, that the Holocaust is fabricated,

Another lie. I specifically said that the IMAGE was fabricated. Stop lying,
Pinocchio the stretching of your nose is making your glasses go out of
focus. Are you typing with your schnoz yet?

> which is an entirely
> different order of claim than that Eisenhower didn't get along with
> MacArthur
> during the Korean War.

Questioning the magnitude, method and motives under which Jews suffered
during WWII is ALSO an entirely different order of claim than your
accusation of denying that the so-called "Holocaust" ever happened. Show us
ONE noted revisionist, or ONE person who posts here regularly who"DENIES"
that the Jews suffered horribly under the Nazis during WWII. SHOW US.

(Attention Philip, you're in trouble here - time to SNIP!)

> You then reveal that the true cause of your
> "revisionism" is that the Holocaust involved Jews, who you then go on to
> blame
> for the sins of communism. I'd say you touched every base, Waldo old boy!

Both the "Holocaust" and the Jewish involvement in communism cry out for
historical review: The Holocaust story has grossly overstated the magnitude,
methods and motive of the Jews' suffering under the Nazis, and role of Jews
in the suffering and murder of tens of millions under Bolshevism/ Communism
has never been properly recognized.

But discussion of the "Holocaust" is off limits (and even ILLEGAL in some
countries), because we might "hurt Jewish feelings". And the role of
murderous Jews under Bolshevism/ Communism is off limits, because we fear
being labeled as anti-Semites.

In the mean time, Jews reap handsome benefits thanks to the "Holocaust"
tale, and walk away scott-free from their crimes under communism.

Aren't mass propaganda and political muscle cool, Philip?

> >There is much at stake, isn't there Allan?
>
> Absolutely, like whether we can ever claim to know anything as proven as
> long
> as there are people willing to deny facts in the service of hatred.

Yes. And it is the hatred of you and your tribe that is thwarting serious
inquiry that may resolve these issues, isn't it Philip?

> >If the general perception of the public were to change . . if people no
> >longer viewed Jews as the "poor, picked-on, innocent scapegoats" that
they
> >have been portrayed to be . . . What would be the consequences?
> >
> >Answer!
>
> There you go, the Holocaust is not only fabricated, its the work of Jews
who
> now don't dare let the secret out because there would be bad consequences.

Damn straight Philip. You pegged that one. Hit the nail on the head, you
did!

> You're not even a very original Jew hater.

You're right there. You, on the other hand can trace the lineage of your
hatred of the Goyim for 150+ generations! You're a VINTAGE Goy hater Philip!
A regular thoroughbred!

> >> It's a fair question. Afterall, how can revisionsists hope to be taken
> >> seriously if they all have such apparent biases, agendas and axes to
> >> grind?
> >
> >Don't forget: You Jews provided the axe.
>
> Bullshit, you grabbed the nearest weapon.

This is supposed to mean . . . what?

> >> So, then, if Holocaust revisionism is an intellectually honest
endevour,
> >> where are the revisionists who aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?
> >

> >Clearly, you make no apologies for being anti-Nazi, please demonstrate
that
> >there is something inherently "wrong" with being an "anti-Semite".
>

> LOL!
>
> Thanks for finally admitting the truth.

I think we've made good headway here, don't you Philip?

Let's do this again tomorrow - same time. And don't forget to bring your
mommy! (This kind of therapy works best in a family setting.)


Waldo

Observer at Large


Philip Mathews

unread,
Jun 8, 2001, 2:56:15 PM6/8/01
to
>===== Original Message From "Waldo" <Wald...@hushmail.com> =====
>Philip Mathews <pmat...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
>news:3B55...@MailAndNews.com...
>> >===== Original Message From "Waldo" <Wald...@hushmail.com> =====
>> >Allan Matthews <allan_m...@bigfoot.nospam.com> wrote in message
>> >news:MPG.1586429dc...@news.ne.mediaone.net...
>> >> Gee, you'd think that after many months of posting this at least one
>> >> revisionist who isn't a neo-Nazi or anti-Semite would have come forward
>> >> and said "Here I am!"
>> >
>> >"Holocaust Revisionists", "anti-Semites"? I guess it kind of goes with
>the
>> >territory, Allan.
>>
>> Yup, it comes with the territory. You're hardly going to deny your obvious
>> antisemitism are you?
>
>Why should I? Jews are much more than a religion, they are very powerful as
>a political force, and as such are fair game for open and public criticism.

Antisemtism is not mere criticism. It is a mindless animus directed to an
entire group of people. And it more often than not expresses itself in a
whole
host of lies about that group which belie the notion that it is based on
their
political power or views.

>They work to twist and manipulate the structure of any society that
>tolerates their presence to their favor - at the expense of their Gentile
>hosts.

Classic antisemitic crap.

>Semitism is bigoted, ethnocentric and anti-Gentile by nature. Anti-Semitism
>is a perfectly natural reaction to Semitism.

There is no such thing as semitism. There is nothing natural about
antisemitism; it is hateful, deceitful, and dangerous.


>The saliva of the parasitic Vampire Bat contains an anesthetic which is
>useful in preventing the victim from perceiving that he is under attack,
>thus allowing the bat to feed unmolested.

Ah, wrote for Geobbels I see.

>Jews go one step further - and have managed to so brainwash the Gentile
>public that, should one dare to point out the machinations of the Jews, he
>will be immediately set upon by both Jews and their brainwashed Gentile
>defenders and branded as a heretic: a Nazi, a Fascist, an anti-Semite.

In other words, you admit you're a tiny minority whose views are anathema to
decent people everywhere.


>> >One need not be an "anti-Semite" to question some of the outlandish and
>> >illogical claims surrounding the "Holocaust" story,
>>
>> No one said one did. What was observed was the very high correlation
>between
>> people making idiotic claims about the Holocaust and neo-Nazi/antisemitic
>> motivations. A simple reading of this newsgroup proves it every day. In
>your
>> case for instance the idiotic claim is "outlandish and illogical claims".
>
>Interesting. Have you noticed that those DENYING those claims tend to be
>Jews, Zionists and their apologists?

No, I notice that those denying those claims tend to be from all
backgrounds.
Those denying established historical fact hate Jews.

>I state that some of the claims surrounding the "Holocaust" story are
>outlandish and illogical. You call my statement "idiotic".
>
>Nice demonstration, Gentile hater.

Your inability to make an argument for your claim reveals its emptiness.

>> And
>> yet in your time here you've shown none of those. In the face of such
>> unsupported tripe, and given your obvious hatred of Jews, you fit the
>> pattern
>> quite well.
>
>I've had several debates with *you* in which we've discussed numerous
>spurious aspects of the "Holocaust" tale, (gassing, sacks of hair with
>traces of HCN, etc.) and yet here you are DENYING that any such discussions
>took place.

That fact that we've discussed them hardly makes them spurious. In fact,
your
best argument against gassing was that it would have been easier to
construct
sound proof shooting galleries than use gas chambers. Aside from the obvious
idiocy of that claim, it ignores the fact of gassing, as proven by the
evidence. The only thing supurious about that discussion was your argument.

>
>You're not only a Goy Hater, you're a lying Goy hater.

Well, that's a rather silly remark. Perhaps you'd like to present some
evidence for my hating "Goys". Absent such evidence it will be clear that
you're just attempting to create a specious "equivalency" argument with your
already admitted antisemitism.

>> but it doesn't take long
>> >to develop an "anti-Semitic" bent when looking into the details. . .
>>
>> Oh look, the antisemite blames someone else for making him so! Now we've
>> never
>> heard that before.
>
>Of course, Jews could NEVER be responsible for ANY animosity others might
>hold toward them, could they Phillip?

Precisely. How could an entire people, of different nationalities, different
political persuasions, different lifestyles be responsible for a hatefilled,
monolithic response to to their Jewishness?

>Throughout ALL the ages, ALL of the
>pogroms, ALL of the stereotypes, ALL of the expulsions, and even the Holy
>Holocaust itself, Jews were completely innocent of ANYTHING that might have
>provoked or incited these incidents, RIGHT?

Correct. There is no reason to assume that any one people are more likely to
offend than any other. Stereotyping and scapegoating, especially when it
enjoys the active involvement of the Church over centuries, becomes a
self-fulfilling and self-justifying belief system. No other group of people
have had to endure such abuse, and pointing to mistreatment as evidence of
its
justification is the excuse of the guilty.

>Gee. That's some BAD LUCK you Jews have had. I mean, we're talking lottery
>odds in reverse here. If this be the case, there's only one possible
>explanation: YOUR GOD IS VERY PISSED OFF AT YOU, and has been beating you
>like a foul-mouthed red-headed step-child for THOUSANDS OF YEARS.

I'm not Jewish.

And your childish outburst proves the point I'm making.

>Did you do something to piss your god off, Philip?
>
>> >especially if one ventures into the likes of this group, and is met with
>the
>> >warm welcome offered by the pack of Jews and Shabbos Goy hyenas that
>inhabit
>> >these parts.
>>
>> Why should you get a warm welcome from anyone, you anonymous piece of
>shit?
>
>It's not just me, Philip. It's anyone who doesn't demonstrate IMMEDIATE
>allegiance to the United Jew Defenders of alt.revisionism.

Nah, it just those who are mindless Jew haters such as yourself. You
represent
a tiny proportion of decent human beings, and you views are no longer
accepted
in decent company.

I've seen you
>drive the innocent and curious away: You attack like a swarm of ravenous
>piranhas.

Rubbish. The innocent and curious are by and large like most people. They
look
at you as a cancer on humanity, the embodiment of those uncontrolled
emotions
of hate that have been responsible the deaths of millions.


>
>> Try walking into a neighborhood gathering and uttering the crap you say
>here
>> and see what kind of a welcom you get.
>
>Hemorrhoids, syphilis and Jews are all facts of life, but are rarely
>mentioned in polite company.

Because you know you such a comparison would be odious to self respecting
people, so you spout it anonymously on usenet.

>> >> But, no. It appears that there just aren't any such revisionists
>> >> around.
>> >
>> >You won't find many Bunko detectives that aren't "anti-Fraud" either.
>>
>> So you're a Jew detective? I suppose you think that actually meant
>> something.
>
>Yes. What it means is that *any* Gentile who bothers to pay attention to
>what has been and *is* happening in the world, and the curious part that
>Jews have played eventually begins to smell the stench. The more you dig,
>the worse it stinks.

That's because the stench you smell is you. Try joining the human race.

>
>> >> Based on their past posting history, the few bozos who have bothered to
>> >> claim that they aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites were, upon examination
>> >> of their claims, found to be clearly lying.
>> >
>> >Ever wonder if they haven't been "converted" with the help of your
>> >ankle-gnawing pro-Semite rat pack?
>>
>> Why should we wonder about bigots looking for an excuse for their bigotry.
>
>I know why you're bigoted Philip:

Really. Then show my bigotry. You've admitted yours. Now you want to justify
it by claiming everyone else is too. You can't hide from your despicable
character that easily.

>Bigotry is at the fundamental core of the
>religion and culture of your tribe,

No it isn't.

your heritage that stretches back over
>millennia.

Who's heritage doesn't stretch back over millenia? Do you always resort to
just meaningless drivel when trying to justify your defects?

>You've been raised with it, and fed on it like mothers milk.
>Ethnocentric bigotry and the disdain of Gentiles is the glue that holds
>Judaism together.

No, bigotry and disdain is what motives you and your ilk. The fact that you
must express it anonymously shows you know you are beyond the pale.

>> >> Of course, given the
>> >> general behavior of revisionists, this lack of honesty isn't surprising
>> >> in the least.
>> >
>> >Are you insinuating that you and the "Snip, Squeal, Dodge and Subterfuge"
>> >gang are HONEST?
>>
>> >(Waldo chuckles)
>> >
>> >> However, just in case some revisionist 'scholars' have missed my
>> >> question to date, here it is again:
>> >>
>> >> Where are the revisionists who aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?
>> >
>> >You mean "Jewish Holocaust revisionists" Allan. Get it straight.
>>
>> Getting it straight would mean "deniers of the Holocaust", most of whom
>are
>> neo-Nazis or antisemites.
>
>Wrong, deceiver. You Jews and your Shabbos Goy defenders always try to spin
>things as though anyone who you label as a "revisionist" outright denies
>that the Jews suffered a horrible calamity during WWII.

Nope, we maintain that deniers, such as yourself, deny the Holocaust. You
all
prove it every day.

This is a LIE. What
>is disputed is the magnitude, the methods and the motives of the calamity.

Then you deny the Holocaust.

>> >You have no problem with anyone dissecting the relationship between
>> >Eisenhower and McArthur regarding the Korean War.
>>
>> Not analagous. We would have a problem with people saying there was no
>> Korean
>> War.
>
>Lie. See above.

Your point is not analagous.


>
>> >You couldn't care less whether revisionists pick apart the details of the
>> >Boer Wars, or the Spanish conquest of the Americas.
>>
>> But we would if someone denied there was a Boer War or Spanish conquest.
>
>More lies. See above, deceiver.

LOL!


>
>> >You and the Cockroach Clan are single minded in your efforts: To protect
>the
>> >fabricated and "sanctified" image of Jewish suffering at the hands of the
>> >Nazis during WWII, and to absolve Jews of any guilt regarding the
>atrocities
>> >committed under Bolshevism and Communism.
>>
>> See, you've proven why those examples are not analgous. You claim, without
>a
>> shred of evidence, that the Holocaust is fabricated,
>
>Another lie. I specifically said that the IMAGE was fabricated.

Tell us the difference.

Stop lying,
>Pinocchio the stretching of your nose is making your glasses go out of
>focus. Are you typing with your schnoz yet?

>> which is an entirely
>> different order of claim than that Eisenhower didn't get along with
>> MacArthur
>> during the Korean War.
>
>Questioning the magnitude, method and motives under which Jews suffered
>during WWII is ALSO an entirely different order of claim than your
>accusation of denying that the so-called "Holocaust" ever happened.

No it isn't. Method, motive and magnitude are part of the definition. You
are
Holocaust Denier, who when pressed to defend his denial, offers arguments
like
your sound proof shooting galleries. In other words, you can't make a fact
based argument for your denial.

Show us
>ONE noted revisionist, or ONE person who posts here regularly who"DENIES"
>that the Jews suffered horribly under the Nazis during WWII. SHOW US.

Suffering horribly during WWII is not the definition of the Holocaust.


>
>(Attention Philip, you're in trouble here - time to SNIP!)
>
>> You then reveal that the true cause of your
>> "revisionism" is that the Holocaust involved Jews, who you then go on to
>> blame
>> for the sins of communism. I'd say you touched every base, Waldo old boy!
>
>Both the "Holocaust" and the Jewish involvement in communism cry out for
>historical review: The Holocaust story has grossly overstated the magnitude,
>methods and motive of the Jews' suffering under the Nazis, and role of Jews
>in the suffering and murder of tens of millions under Bolshevism/ Communism
>has never been properly recognized.

Not based on anything you or any other denier has been able to argue
intelligently. Why is that? Why is it that you waste all this time spewing
nonsense about Jews, and yet you can't make a coherent argument for the
overstatement of the magnitude, methods and motives of the Nazis?

>But discussion of the "Holocaust" is off limits (and even ILLEGAL in some
>countries),

Discussion of the Holocaust is not off limits in any country. "Stop lying,


Pinocchio the stretching of your nose is making your glasses go out of
focus. Are you typing with your schnoz yet?"

> because we might "hurt Jewish feelings". And the role of


>murderous Jews under Bolshevism/ Communism is off limits, because we fear
>being labeled as anti-Semites.

You do? That's news to me. And the discussion of Jews and communism goes on
here ad nauseum, with very little intelligence on the part of the Jew haters
who distort the issue.

>In the mean time, Jews reap handsome benefits thanks to the "Holocaust"
>tale, and walk away scott-free from their crimes under communism.

Jews and non Jews participated in communism. Mostly non Jews. The Jewish
participants no more got away with communism's crimes than their non Jewish
counterparts. One gets the impression your less concerned with the evil of
communism than with bashing Jews.

>Aren't mass propaganda and political muscle cool, Philip?
>
>> >There is much at stake, isn't there Allan?
>>
>> Absolutely, like whether we can ever claim to know anything as proven as
>> long
>> as there are people willing to deny facts in the service of hatred.
>
>Yes. And it is the hatred of you and your tribe that is thwarting serious
>inquiry that may resolve these issues, isn't it Philip?

I don't have a tribe. And you can't make a case that serious inquiry hasn't
been made. It must be very frustrating for you that you can only assert such
nonsense.

>> >If the general perception of the public were to change . . if people no
>> >longer viewed Jews as the "poor, picked-on, innocent scapegoats" that
>they
>> >have been portrayed to be . . . What would be the consequences?
>> >
>> >Answer!
>>
>> There you go, the Holocaust is not only fabricated, its the work of Jews
>who
>> now don't dare let the secret out because there would be bad consequences.
>
>Damn straight Philip. You pegged that one. Hit the nail on the head, you
>did!

I'm well acquainted with the cliches. A self respecting person would be
ashamed to utter them.


>
>> You're not even a very original Jew hater.
>
>You're right there. You, on the other hand can trace the lineage of your
>hatred of the Goyim for 150+ generations! You're a VINTAGE Goy hater Philip!
>A regular thoroughbred!
>
>> >> It's a fair question. Afterall, how can revisionsists hope to be taken
>> >> seriously if they all have such apparent biases, agendas and axes to
>> >> grind?
>> >
>> >Don't forget: You Jews provided the axe.
>>
>> Bullshit, you grabbed the nearest weapon.
>
>This is supposed to mean . . . what?
>
>> >> So, then, if Holocaust revisionism is an intellectually honest
>endevour,
>> >> where are the revisionists who aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?
>> >
>> >Clearly, you make no apologies for being anti-Nazi, please demonstrate
>that
>> >there is something inherently "wrong" with being an "anti-Semite".
>>
>> LOL!
>>
>> Thanks for finally admitting the truth.
>
>I think we've made good headway here, don't you Philip?
>
>Let's do this again tomorrow - same time. And don't forget to bring your
>mommy! (This kind of therapy works best in a family setting.)

--
Philip Mathews

Philip Mathews

unread,
Jun 8, 2001, 2:57:12 PM6/8/01
to

Jeffrey G. Brown

unread,
Jun 9, 2001, 1:04:40 PM6/9/01
to
In article <3b1c9930$0$2...@news.impulse.net>, "Waldo" <Wald...@hushmail.com>
wrote:

> Allan Matthews <allan_m...@bigfoot.nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1586429dc...@news.ne.mediaone.net...

> [...deletia...]

> > Based on their past posting history, the few bozos who have bothered to
> > claim that they aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites were, upon examination
> > of their claims, found to be clearly lying.
>
> Ever wonder if they haven't been "converted" with the help of your
> ankle-gnawing pro-Semite rat pack?

Grow up, little boy. You alone are responsible for your decision to hate.

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

Jeffrey G. Brown

unread,
Jun 9, 2001, 1:06:25 PM6/9/01
to
In article <3b1d6115$0$2...@news.impulse.net>, "Waldo" <Wald...@hushmail.com>
wrote:

> "If the Holocaust Industry were an intellectually honest endeavor, why
> is it that revisionism is illegal in many countries?"

Cite the *specific* countries in which you claim that "revisionism is illegal".

Cite the *specific* text of the laws in those countries that say that
"revisionism is illegal".

We'll judge for ourselves whether you have the facts to back up your claims,
liar.

Jeffrey G. Brown

unread,
Jun 9, 2001, 1:09:03 PM6/9/01
to
In article <3b207ec0$0$2...@news.impulse.net>, "Waldo" <Wald...@hushmail.com>
wrote:

> But discussion of the "Holocaust" is off limits (and even ILLEGAL in some
> countries)

Cite a single country in which 'discussion of the "Holocaust"' is illegal, liar.
Supply the text of the law in that country that states that 'discussion of the
"Holocaust"' is illegal.

Jeffrey G. Brown

unread,
Jun 9, 2001, 1:11:16 PM6/9/01
to
In article <3b207ec0$0$2...@news.impulse.net>, "Waldo" <Wald...@hushmail.com>
wrote:

> In the mean time, Jews reap handsome benefits thanks to the "Holocaust"


> tale, and walk away scott-free from their crimes under communism.

Name the *specific* Jews who committed "crimes under communism", and are today
"reap[ing] handsome benefits".

Run away, liar.

Waldo

unread,
Jun 10, 2001, 4:35:00 AM6/10/01
to

Philip Mathews <pmat...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:3B38...@MailAndNews.com...

Below I have *paraphrased* two quotes. Would you consider these statements
"anti-Semitic"?

1) "there are only two groups who are pushing for war in the Middle East:
These are Israeli Defense Ministry, and its supporters in the US."

2) An aide to a US President wrote in a memo to his boss: "you are caving in
to the pressures placed on you by the Jews"

Are these statements "anti-Semitic"? Why or why not?

> >They work to twist and manipulate the structure of any society that
> >tolerates their presence to their favor - at the expense of their Gentile
> >hosts.
>
> Classic antisemitic crap.

Snappy come-back!

> >Semitism is bigoted, ethnocentric and anti-Gentile by nature.
Anti-Semitism
> >is a perfectly natural reaction to Semitism.
>
> There is no such thing as semitism.

No such thing as Semitism? That's a relief.

An antithesis requires a thesis, does it not? If, as you say, there is no
such thing as Semitism, then there can be no such thing as anti-Semitism.
Why are you wasting your time battling a non-existent foe?

> There is nothing natural about antisemitism; it is hateful, deceitful, and
dangerous.

Really? Tell us how this thing that you claim does not exist is "hateful,
deceitful, and dangerous".

>
> >The saliva of the parasitic Vampire Bat contains an anesthetic which is
> >useful in preventing the victim from perceiving that he is under attack,
> >thus allowing the bat to feed unmolested.
>
> Ah, wrote for Geobbels I see.
>
> >Jews go one step further - and have managed to so brainwash the Gentile
> >public that, should one dare to point out the machinations of the Jews,
he
> >will be immediately set upon by both Jews and their brainwashed Gentile
> >defenders and branded as a heretic: a Nazi, a Fascist, an anti-Semite.
>
> In other words, you admit you're a tiny minority whose views are anathema
to
> decent people everywhere.

A tiny minority, you say? Galileo was only one man, a man who denied
"established facts" . . . and he was right.

> >> >One need not be an "anti-Semite" to question some of the outlandish
and
> >> >illogical claims surrounding the "Holocaust" story,
> >>
> >> No one said one did. What was observed was the very high correlation
> >between
> >> people making idiotic claims about the Holocaust and
neo-Nazi/antisemitic
> >> motivations. A simple reading of this newsgroup proves it every day. In
> >your
> >> case for instance the idiotic claim is "outlandish and illogical
claims".
> >
> >Interesting. Have you noticed that those DENYING those claims tend to be
> >Jews, Zionists and their apologists?
>
> No, I notice that those denying those claims tend to be from all
> backgrounds.
> Those denying established historical fact hate Jews.

So anyone who "denies" any so-called "established historical fact" is
necessarily a Jew hater? You are a curious fellow.

> >I state that some of the claims surrounding the "Holocaust" story are
> >outlandish and illogical. You call my statement "idiotic".
> >
> >Nice demonstration, Gentile hater.
>
> Your inability to make an argument for your claim reveals its emptiness.
>
> >> And
> >> yet in your time here you've shown none of those. In the face of such
> >> unsupported tripe, and given your obvious hatred of Jews, you fit the
> >> pattern
> >> quite well.
> >
> >I've had several debates with *you* in which we've discussed numerous
> >spurious aspects of the "Holocaust" tale, (gassing, sacks of hair with
> >traces of HCN, etc.) and yet here you are DENYING that any such
discussions
> >took place.
>
> That fact that we've discussed them hardly makes them spurious. In fact,
> your
> best argument against gassing was that it would have been easier to
> construct
> sound proof shooting galleries than use gas chambers.

Ha! Compare that to your argument that the efficiency conscious Nazis would
gas victims, drag the bodies through piles of shit, puke and piss, and
*then* shave their heads! You're a buffoon!

Actually, there is NO good argument that *supports* the ridiculous claims of
mass gassing. The evidence does not support this alleged "established
historical fact".

> Aside from the obvious
> idiocy of that claim, it ignores the fact of gassing, as proven by the
> evidence. The only thing supurious about that discussion was your
argument.

The evidence *always* fails. There is no *physical* evidence to support the
claim that anything other than lice were killed on a large scale by gassing.
Nada. Zip. Zilch. It always falls back to *testimonies* from vengeful Jews
frothing with hatred, or Nazis who've been coerced and tortured.

> >
> >You're not only a Goy Hater, you're a lying Goy hater.
>
> Well, that's a rather silly remark. Perhaps you'd like to present some
> evidence for my hating "Goys". Absent such evidence it will be clear that
> you're just attempting to create a specious "equivalency" argument with
your
> already admitted antisemitism.

Are you in denial or just lying?

> >> but it doesn't take long
> >> >to develop an "anti-Semitic" bent when looking into the details. . .
> >>
> >> Oh look, the antisemite blames someone else for making him so! Now
we've
> >> never
> >> heard that before.
> >
> >Of course, Jews could NEVER be responsible for ANY animosity others might
> >hold toward them, could they Phillip?
>
> Precisely. How could an entire people, of different nationalities,
different
> political persuasions, different lifestyles be responsible for a
hatefilled,
> monolithic response to to their Jewishness?

You tell me Philip, it has happened over and over and over again . . .
peoples in different nations, with different
political persuasions, different lifestyles, different religions, in
different centuries and even different millenia *always* seem to find
themselves at odds with this funny little tribe of people called Jews.

Wherever they go, trouble follows, yet you claim that it's NEVER the Jews
fault? How can this be, Philip?

> >Throughout ALL the ages, ALL of the
> >pogroms, ALL of the stereotypes, ALL of the expulsions, and even the Holy
> >Holocaust itself, Jews were completely innocent of ANYTHING that might
have
> >provoked or incited these incidents, RIGHT?
>
> Correct. There is no reason to assume that any one people are more likely
to
> offend than any other.

But there is plenty of evidence that Jews do INDEED offend, isn't there
Philip? Wherever they've gone and whatever they've done, Jews have always
remained JEWS: Ethnocentric, bigoted and despising the Goyim.

> Stereotyping and scapegoating, especially when it
> enjoys the active involvement of the Church over centuries,

Strange argument you have there Philip. First you claim the Jews are the
victims of scapegoating, then you use Christians as a scapegoat for the
suffering of the Jews! You have a twisted mind, Philip.

> becomes a
> self-fulfilling and self-justifying belief system. No other group of
people
> have had to endure such abuse, and pointing to mistreatment as evidence of
> its
> justification is the excuse of the guilty.

Bullshit. You're little persecution ploy might be viable in a small area
over a short time span, but it doesn't work when spread over several
millennia and many continents. Besides, Jews were busy pissing their
neighbors and hosts off well before the Christian era.

> >Gee. That's some BAD LUCK you Jews have had. I mean, we're talking
lottery
> >odds in reverse here. If this be the case, there's only one possible
> >explanation: YOUR GOD IS VERY PISSED OFF AT YOU, and has been beating you
> >like a foul-mouthed red-headed step-child for THOUSANDS OF YEARS.
>
> I'm not Jewish.

Keep showing up with your matches on the Sabbath and maybe they'll make you
an honorary member.

> And your childish outburst proves the point I'm making.
>
> >Did you do something to piss your god off, Philip?
> >
> >> >especially if one ventures into the likes of this group, and is met
with
> >the
> >> >warm welcome offered by the pack of Jews and Shabbos Goy hyenas that
> >inhabit
> >> >these parts.
> >>
> >> Why should you get a warm welcome from anyone, you anonymous piece of
> >shit?
> >
> >It's not just me, Philip. It's anyone who doesn't demonstrate IMMEDIATE
> >allegiance to the United Jew Defenders of alt.revisionism.
>
> Nah, it just those who are mindless Jew haters such as yourself. You
> represent
> a tiny proportion of decent human beings, and you views are no longer
> accepted
> in decent company.

Of course you'd immediately label anyone who didn't either kick for your
team or cower to rebuff as a "Jew hater", wouldn't you Philip?

> I've seen you
> >drive the innocent and curious away: You attack like a swarm of ravenous
> >piranhas.
>
> Rubbish. The innocent and curious are by and large like most people. They
> look
> at you as a cancer on humanity, the embodiment of those uncontrolled
> emotions
> of hate that have been responsible the deaths of millions.

Yes, I suppose Jews have been responsible for the deaths of millions,
haven't they?

> >> Try walking into a neighborhood gathering and uttering the crap you say
> >here
> >> and see what kind of a welcom you get.
> >
> >Hemorrhoids, syphilis and Jews are all facts of life, but are rarely
> >mentioned in polite company.
>
> Because you know you such a comparison would be odious to self respecting
> people, so you spout it anonymously on usenet.
>
> >> >> But, no. It appears that there just aren't any such revisionists
> >> >> around.
> >> >
> >> >You won't find many Bunko detectives that aren't "anti-Fraud" either.
> >>
> >> So you're a Jew detective? I suppose you think that actually meant
> >> something.
> >
> >Yes. What it means is that *any* Gentile who bothers to pay attention to
> >what has been and *is* happening in the world, and the curious part that
> >Jews have played eventually begins to smell the stench. The more you dig,
> >the worse it stinks.
>
> That's because the stench you smell is you. Try joining the human race.

You mean I should convert to Judaism? (They don't consider Goyim to be fully
human. That includes you, by the way)

> >
> >> >> Based on their past posting history, the few bozos who have bothered
to
> >> >> claim that they aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites were, upon
examination
> >> >> of their claims, found to be clearly lying.
> >> >
> >> >Ever wonder if they haven't been "converted" with the help of your
> >> >ankle-gnawing pro-Semite rat pack?
> >>
> >> Why should we wonder about bigots looking for an excuse for their
bigotry.
> >
> >I know why you're bigoted Philip:
>
> Really. Then show my bigotry. You've admitted yours. Now you want to
justify
> it by claiming everyone else is too. You can't hide from your despicable
> character that easily.

Why should I have to show it, Philip? You do a fine job of that.

> >Bigotry is at the fundamental core of the
> >religion and culture of your tribe,
>
> No it isn't.

Ok then, let's just say that Bigotry is at the fundamental core of the
religion and culture of the Jewish tribe. Is that better?

> > your heritage that stretches back over
> > millennia.
>
> Who's heritage doesn't stretch back over millenia? Do you always resort to
> just meaningless drivel when trying to justify your defects?
>
> >You've been raised with it, and fed on it like mothers milk.
> >Ethnocentric bigotry and the disdain of Gentiles is the glue that holds
> >Judaism together.
>
> No, bigotry and disdain is what motives you and your ilk.

Is that so? Daedra Morrighan posted something earlier today that bears
repeating here:

Begin quote:

___________________________

Orthodox Jewish tradition holds that certain "races" are biologically and
culturally inferior.

The _Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion_ refers to Moses Maimonides as "the
symbol of the pure and orthodox faith." His _Guide of the
Perplexed_ is considered the greatest work of Jewish religious philosophy,
but
his view of Blacks was Hitlerian:

"[T]he Negroes found in the remote South, and those who resemble them from
among
them that are with us in these climes. The status of those is like that of
irrational animals. To my mind they do not have the rank of men, but have
among
the beings a rank lower than the rank of man but
higher than the rank of apes. For they have the external shape and
lineaments of
a man and a faculty of discernment that is superior tothat of the apes."[1]

Note that Maimonides describing what he saw as biological attributes; he was
not
condemning merely the "paganism" of the black Africans but
also what he claimed to be their physical and neural inferiority. Maimonides
also decreed that Jewish physicians should not save the life of a non-Jew
unless
not saving him would "cause the spread of hostility against the Jews."[2]
The
Jewish Talmud makes it clear that non-Jews exist to serve the Jews.[3] It
also
gives the option to execute anyone who denies the supremacy of "God's chosen
people."[4]

It should be no surprise then that Jews dominated the Transatlantic black
slave
trade and were generally opposed to abolitionism. As Rabbi Bertram W. Korn
puts
it, "Jews participated in every aspect and process of the exploitation of
the
defenseless blacks."[5]

Major Mordecai Manuel Noah (1785-1851), considered the most distinguished
Jewish
layman of his time, defended slavery by calling it liberty: "There is
liberty
under the name of slavery. A field negro has his cottage, his wife, and
children, his easy task, his little patch of corn and potatoes, his garden
and
fruit, which are his revenue and property. The house servant has handsome
clothing, his luxurious meals, his admitted privacy, a kind master, and an
indulgent and frequently fond mistress."

Regarding the slave trade, historian Seymour B. Liebman notes that "[slave]
ships were not only owned by Jews, but were manned by Jewish crews and
sailed
under the command of Jewish captains."[6]

Indeed, Dr. Marc Lee Raphael notes that "...Jewish merchants played a major
role
in the slave trade. In fact, in all the American colonies, whether French
(Martinique), British, or Dutch, Jewish merchants frequently dominated."[7]

It should not be surprising that Jews tended to harbor the same Talmudic
hatred
toward native Americans. Isaac Mayer Wise, the leader of the American Reform
Jews, described them as "very primitive and ignorant," and capable only of
"loafing and begging."

Jewish racism is rooted in the teachings of Judaism itself. In the _Fateful
Triangle_, Noam Chomsky refers to Jewish teachings as "genocidal" and
"racist."

The Torah, like the Talmud, draws sharp distinctions between Jews and
non-Jews.
"But against none of the children of Israel (the Jews) shall a dog move its
tongue, against man or beast, that you may know that Yahweh does make a
difference between the Egyptians and Israel." (Exodus 11:7) Genocide is
promoted
as a tool by which the "chosen" can obtain mastery of the earth. "When
YahwehGod brings you [the Jews] into the land which you go to possess, and
has cast
out many nations before you, . . . seven nations greater and mightier than
you
and when Yahweh God delivers them [these other ethnic groups] over to you,
you
shall conquer them and utterly destroy them, you shall make no covenant with
them nor show mercy to them." (Deut. 7:1-2) Jews are exalted as a divinely
chosen master race: "For you [the Jews] are a holy people to Yahweh God,
Yahweh
God has chosen you [the Jews] to be a people for himself a special treasure
above all peoples on the face of the earth." (Deut. 7:6)

Apologists for Jewish racism will often claim that being a Jew is strictly a
religious matter, with no racist aspects. This flies in the face of reality.
"In
Yahweh all the descendants of Israel [the Jews] shall be justified, and
shall
glory." (Isaiah 45:25) Jewish ancestry, in and of itself, makes one a Jew.
The
Jewish religion is a cover for an insidious and powerful tribalism.

Ethnic segregation and nationalism are mandated in Jewish scripture. "For
you
separated them [the Jews] from among all the peoples of the earth to be your
inheritance . . ." (I Kings 8:53)

"A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Yahweh even to his
tenth
generation shall he not enter into the congregation of Yahweh." (Deut. 23:2
KJV)


This word "bastard," which is only used in the King James Version of the
bible,
does not mean one born out of wedlock as other translations try to imply.
The
word is #4464 in Strongs Concordance of the Bible: "#4464, 'mamzer,' means
to
alienate, a mongrel born of Jewish father and gentile mother." Thus, this
word
means a child who is a mixed breed: Half Jew and half Gentile.

"An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter the assembly of Yahweh even to the
tenth
generation none of his descendants shall enter the assembly of Yahweh
forever."
(Deut. 23:3) "When Yahweh God brings you [the Jews] into the land which you
go
to possess, and has cast out many nations before you, . . . seven nations
greater and mightier than you and when Yahweh God delivers them [these other
ethnic groups] over to you, you shall conquer them and utterly destroy them,
you
shall make no covenant with them nor show mercy to them." (Deut. 7:1-2) Here
Yahweh is promoting ethnic genocide of seven different ethnic groups. Yahweh
"cast out" other ethnic groups from their own land to make way for his
"chosen."


Today, there is a major effort within all segments of the Jewish community
to
prevent intermarriage, based on the racist beliefs of Judaism (see, e.g.,
Abrams
1997; Dershowitz 1997). Commentator Earl Evleth refers to intermarriage
between
Jews and non-Jews as "ethnically destructive." In 1993, the then Israeli
Prime
Minister, Shimon Peres, reminded North American Jews of the dangers to
"Jewishidentity" and Israel posed by Jewish "assimilation" in North America.
Many North
American rabbis agreed with Peres and began to denounce "mixed marriages" as
"bedroom genocide".

References:

1. Maimonides, Moses, 1135-1204._The guide of the perplexed_. Translated
with an
introd. and notes by Shlomo Pines. With an introductory essay by Leo
Strauss.
[Chicago] University of Chicago Press [1963], Chapter 51, p. 618-19.

2. Maimonides, Mishneh Torah. Laws On Murderers 2,4,11.

3. Midrasch Talpioth, p. 255, Warsaw 1855

4. Coschen hamischpat 425 Hagah 425. 5

5. "Jews and Negro Slavery in the Old South, 1789-1865," in Abraham J. Karp,
The
Jewish Experience in America: Selected Studies from the Publications of the
American Jewish Historical Society (Waltham, Massachusetts, 1969), pp. 184,
189.
[Dr. Korn is a rabbi, historian; A.B., Cincinnati, 1939; Hebrew Union
College-Jewish Institute of Religion, Cincinnati, Ordination M.H.L. 1949;
Sr.
rabbi, Reform Congregation Keneseth Israel, Elkins Park, Pennsylvania,
1949-;
Chaplain, USNR, 1944-; Visiting professor, American Jewish History, Union
College-Jewish Institute of Religion, New York, 1962-; Honorary Overseer
Gratz
College of Pennsylvania; visiting professor, American Jewish History,
Dropsie
University of Pennsylvania; 1970-; Recipient Merit Award, American
Association
for State & Local History, 1969.]

6. New World Jewry 1493-1825: Requiem for the Forgotten (KTAV, New York,
1982),
pp. 170, 183. [Liebman is an attorney; LL.B., St. Lawrence University, 1929;
M.A. (Latin American history), Mexico City College, 1963; Florida chapter
American Jewish Historical Society, 1956-58; Friends of Hebrew University,
1958-59; American Historical Society Contributor to scholarly journals on
Jewish
history.

7. Jews and Judaism in the United States a Documentary History (New York:
Behrman House, Inc., Pub, 1983), p. 14. Raphael is the editor of American
Jewish
History, the journal of the American Jewish Historical Society at Brandeis
University in Massachusetts.

______________________________

End quote.

Naaaaaw. Jews aren't bigots, are they Philip?

> The fact that you
> must express it anonymously shows you know you are beyond the pale.

Why do you claim that I post anonymously? I sign my "name", Waldo, to every
post I write. Is that less of a name than "Philip Matthews"? I have no
reason to believe that this is *your* real name, and frankly, I DON'T CARE.

If you are so anxious to become a "public person" why not end every post
with a link to a personal website? Post your address, telephone number,
photos of your wife and kids. Why not tell us what schools they attend, what
hours you work and where, draw us a diagram of your house and give us the
code for disabling your alarm system?

You're a moron, "Philip Matthews".

> >> >> Of course, given the
> >> >> general behavior of revisionists, this lack of honesty isn't
surprising
> >> >> in the least.
> >> >
> >> >Are you insinuating that you and the "Snip, Squeal, Dodge and
Subterfuge"
> >> >gang are HONEST?
> >>
> >> >(Waldo chuckles)
> >> >
> >> >> However, just in case some revisionist 'scholars' have missed my
> >> >> question to date, here it is again:
> >> >>
> >> >> Where are the revisionists who aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites?
> >> >
> >> >You mean "Jewish Holocaust revisionists" Allan. Get it straight.
> >>
> >> Getting it straight would mean "deniers of the Holocaust", most of whom
> >are
> >> neo-Nazis or antisemites.
> >
> >Wrong, deceiver. You Jews and your Shabbos Goy defenders always try to
spin
> >things as though anyone who you label as a "revisionist" outright denies
> >that the Jews suffered a horrible calamity during WWII.
>
> Nope, we maintain that deniers, such as yourself, deny the Holocaust. You
> all
> prove it every day.

Road apples.

> This is a LIE. What
> >is disputed is the magnitude, the methods and the motives of the
calamity.
>
> Then you deny the Holocaust.

Oh, so it's an all or nothing deal then, is it Philip. Dispute even the
slightest jot or tittle of the Sanctified Doctrine of the Church of the Holy
Holocaust and you're a heretic, a heathen, an infidel.

I made by debut into this group a few months back by posting "Holocaustism",
which compared "Holocaust Denial" to heresy under the Inquisition. Now we've
come full circle, and you have proven that I was correct from the start.

Thanks Philip.

> >> >You have no problem with anyone dissecting the relationship between
> >> >Eisenhower and McArthur regarding the Korean War.
> >>
> >> Not analagous. We would have a problem with people saying there was no
> >> Korean
> >> War.
> >
> >Lie. See above.
>
> Your point is not analagous.
> >
> >> >You couldn't care less whether revisionists pick apart the details of
the
> >> >Boer Wars, or the Spanish conquest of the Americas.
> >>
> >> But we would if someone denied there was a Boer War or Spanish
conquest.
> >
> >More lies. See above, deceiver.
>
> LOL!

You're bleeding diarrhea and you know it.

> >> >You and the Cockroach Clan are single minded in your efforts: To
protect
> >the
> >> >fabricated and "sanctified" image of Jewish suffering at the hands of
the
> >> >Nazis during WWII, and to absolve Jews of any guilt regarding the
> >atrocities
> >> >committed under Bolshevism and Communism.
> >>
> >> See, you've proven why those examples are not analgous. You claim,
without
> >a
> >> shred of evidence, that the Holocaust is fabricated,
> >
> >Another lie. I specifically said that the IMAGE was fabricated.
>
> Tell us the difference.

The IMAGE of the "Holocaust" as portrayed by Exterminationists has been
built up, blown out of proportion and spun for public consumption for the
purpose of eliciting pity for the Jews. It is portrayed as the epitome of
"man's inhumanity to man", while the crimes of communism (which make the
"Holocaust" look mild by comparison) are virtually IGNORED.

The IMAGE of the "Holocaust" is so skewed with what actually happened to the
Jews during WWII that it is practically a fairy tale.

> Stop lying,
> >Pinocchio the stretching of your nose is making your glasses go out of
> >focus. Are you typing with your schnoz yet?
>
> >> which is an entirely
> >> different order of claim than that Eisenhower didn't get along with
> >> MacArthur
> >> during the Korean War.
> >
> >Questioning the magnitude, method and motives under which Jews suffered
> >during WWII is ALSO an entirely different order of claim than your
> >accusation of denying that the so-called "Holocaust" ever happened.
>
> No it isn't. Method, motive and magnitude are part of the definition. You
> are
> Holocaust Denier, who when pressed to defend his denial, offers arguments
> like
> your sound proof shooting galleries. In other words, you can't make a fact
> based argument for your denial.

I'll go further. The mass gassings never happened. The building supposedly
used as gas chambers may have been used to gas commodities for lice
eradication, but were never used to gas humans.

The Kremas were real, and really were used to dispose of corpses (Jewish and
otherwise) who piled up quickly due to deaths from disease and malnutrition
(and limited executions).

There were rumors of gas chambers in the camps - rumors that became stories
that vengeful Jews soon swore to have witnessed first-hand (one woman claims
to have *survived* no less than THREE gassings, and you thought that the
story of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego was miraculous!)

But there were the OTHER stories from OTHER "credible" witnesses, like rooms
with HUGE metal floors on which Jews would be submerged chest-deep in water
and electrocuted, after which the water would be drained, and the same floor
would become a giant hot-plate, cooking the poor hapless Jews until nothing
remained but ash.

Or the stories of "flames leaping from the tops of the Krema chimneys", the
color of the flames telling whether fat or skinny Jews were being burned
that day.

Are we required to believe these stories as well, lest we risk being labeled
"Holocaust deniers"???

You're a sucker for a sob story, Philip.

> Show us
> >ONE noted revisionist, or ONE person who posts here regularly who"DENIES"
> >that the Jews suffered horribly under the Nazis during WWII. SHOW US.
>
> Suffering horribly during WWII is not the definition of the Holocaust.

Suppose YOU define the "Holocaust" for us Philip. Suppose you collaborate
with your Jew and Shabbos Goy buddies and lay down the TEN COMMANDMENTS of
the "Holocaust", the articles of faith one MUST believe in order to avoid
being branded a heretic, and faced with the rack, the Iron Maiden, the thumb
screws. or, (horror of all horrors) being labeled an ANTI-SEMITE . . . (god
forbid!)

> >(Attention Philip, you're in trouble here - time to SNIP!)
> >
> >> You then reveal that the true cause of your
> >> "revisionism" is that the Holocaust involved Jews, who you then go on
to
> >> blame
> >> for the sins of communism. I'd say you touched every base, Waldo old
boy!
> >
> >Both the "Holocaust" and the Jewish involvement in communism cry out for
> >historical review: The Holocaust story has grossly overstated the
magnitude,
> >methods and motive of the Jews' suffering under the Nazis, and role of
Jews
> >in the suffering and murder of tens of millions under Bolshevism/
Communism
> >has never been properly recognized.
>
> Not based on anything you or any other denier has been able to argue
> intelligently.

What? In order to be believed the "Holocaust Story", one must rely on sheer
ignorance or blind faith. Sounds like a religion to me.

> Why is that? Why is it that you waste all this time spewing
> nonsense about Jews, and yet you can't make a coherent argument for the
> overstatement of the magnitude, methods and motives of the Nazis?

The arguments have been made coherently and eloquently over and over again.
That you refuse to acknowledge this clearly shows that you are a faithful
adherent to the Church of the Holocaust. . . . Sheep.

> >But discussion of the "Holocaust" is off limits (and even ILLEGAL in some
> >countries),
>
> Discussion of the Holocaust is not off limits in any country. "Stop lying,
> Pinocchio the stretching of your nose is making your glasses go out of
> focus. Are you typing with your schnoz yet?"

You are quite correct Philip. I misspoke above. What I *should* have said is
that so-called "Holocaust Denial" is considered "inciting racial hatred",
and is ILLEGAL in some countries. "Discussion" of the "Holocaust is fine, so
long as you adhere to the "Simon Wiesenthal Approved" version of WWII
"History".

> > because we might "hurt Jewish feelings". And the role of
> >murderous Jews under Bolshevism/ Communism is off limits, because we fear
> >being labeled as anti-Semites.
>
> You do? That's news to me.

I don't. But thanks to Jewish spin-doctoring, being labeled and anti-Semite
is on par with being labeled a baby rapist in the PC eye of the media.

> And the discussion of Jews and communism goes on
> here ad nauseum, with very little intelligence on the part of the Jew
haters
> who distort the issue.

Translation: You can't deny it. The Bolshevik revolution was Jewish, and
Jews filled an massively disproportionate number of high and mid ranking
positions. For example, the jews killed at Jedwabne were NOT killed because
they were Jews, they were killed by enraged townspeople who HATED them
because they *collaborated* with the invading Russians. This is evidenced by
the fact that they were forced to drag a statue of *Lenin* to their place of
execution.

There's another example of "poor innocent Jews being persecuted for no good
reason".

Jews make their enemies the old fashioned way - they EARN them!

> >In the mean time, Jews reap handsome benefits thanks to the "Holocaust"
> >tale, and walk away scott-free from their crimes under communism.
>
> Jews and non Jews participated in communism. Mostly non Jews. The Jewish
> participants no more got away with communism's crimes than their non
Jewish
> counterparts. One gets the impression your less concerned with the evil of
> communism than with bashing Jews.

You cannot separate Soviet communism from Jews any more than you can
separate Nazism from Germans.

> >Aren't mass propaganda and political muscle cool, Philip?
> >
> >> >There is much at stake, isn't there Allan?
> >>
> >> Absolutely, like whether we can ever claim to know anything as proven
as
> >> long
> >> as there are people willing to deny facts in the service of hatred.
> >
> >Yes. And it is the hatred of you and your tribe that is thwarting serious
> >inquiry that may resolve these issues, isn't it Philip?
>
> I don't have a tribe.

If, as you claim, you're not Jewish, then I guess you DON'T have a tribe.
But don't worry, they'll continue to tolerate you so long as you work in
their service - preferably for free (unlike McVay, who is a
bought-n-paid-for kept woman)

> And you can't make a case that serious inquiry hasn't
> been made. It must be very frustrating for you that you can only assert
such
> nonsense.

You are a hoot, Philip. There is supposedly a MURDER investigation underway
at Jedwabne - yet the Jews REFUSE to allow the evidence to be examined! Why?
They KNOW their fabrication will be exposed, and they'll wind up looking
like FOOLS!

Their excuse: "THE GRAVES MUST NOT BE DESECRATED!" howl the rabbis! Suppose
that skeletal remains are discovered in the basement of an Israeli house.
Suppose these remains are identified as those of a Jewish child who, along
with 20 or 30 other Jewish children went missing some 50 years ago. Do you
suppose the rabbis would be decrying "the desecration of the grave", or
would they be demanding that a full investigation take place in hopes of
finding the perpetrator?

Jews are not interested in the discovery of facts regarding the so-called
"Holocaust", they're content with the story as it stands, and will fight
tooth and nail against anyone who wishes to make further inquiry without
their "blessings".

> >> >If the general perception of the public were to change . . if people
no
> >> >longer viewed Jews as the "poor, picked-on, innocent scapegoats" that
> >they
> >> >have been portrayed to be . . . What would be the consequences?
> >> >
> >> >Answer!
> >>
> >> There you go, the Holocaust is not only fabricated, its the work of
Jews
> >who
> >> now don't dare let the secret out because there would be bad
consequences.
> >
> >Damn straight Philip. You pegged that one. Hit the nail on the head, you
> >did!
>
> I'm well acquainted with the cliches. A self respecting person would be
> ashamed to utter them.

Nice dodge, Philip. Now, tell us about the consequences.

Jeffrey G. Brown

unread,
Jun 10, 2001, 9:21:50 AM6/10/01
to
In article <3b233183$0$2...@news.impulse.net>, "Waldo" <Wald...@hushmail.com>
wrote:

> Philip Mathews <pmat...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
> news:3B38...@MailAndNews.com...

> [...deletia...]

> > Aside from the obvious
> > idiocy of that claim, it ignores the fact of gassing, as proven by the
> > evidence. The only thing supurious about that discussion was your
> > argument.
>
> The evidence *always* fails. There is no *physical* evidence to support the
> claim that anything other than lice were killed on a large scale by gassing.
> Nada. Zip. Zilch.

False. We have contemporary documentary evidence from the Nazis themselves that
the gas chambers were built. We have contemporary documentary evidence from the
Nazis themselves that the gas chambers were used. We have the physical evidence
of the gas chambers themselves.

> It always falls back to *testimonies* from vengeful Jews
> frothing with hatred, or Nazis who've been coerced and tortured.

Which *specific* Nazis were "coerced and tortured", and what were they "coerced
and tortured" into saying?

Oh, and don't forget to provide the evidence that these individuals were
"coerced and tortured".

> [...deletia...]

> Yes, I suppose Jews have been responsible for the deaths of millions,
> haven't they?

Which "millions", little worm? And which *specific* Jews were directly
responsible for those deaths? You imbeciles never seem to get around to
answering questions that involve personal responsibility. This may be because
you have no understanding of the concept.

> [...deletia...]

> Why do you claim that I post anonymously? I sign my "name", Waldo, to every
> post I write.

It's a psuedonym. You're afraid to sign your real name, because you fear having
your lies associated with your name in the real world.

> [...deletia...]

> > Nope, we maintain that deniers, such as yourself, deny the Holocaust. You
> > all prove it every day.
>
> Road apples.

But then, the little worm who cowers behind the pseudonym "Waldo" goes on to do
exactly that:

> [...deletia...]

> I'll go further. The mass gassings never happened. The building supposedly
> used as gas chambers may have been used to gas commodities for lice
> eradication, but were never used to gas humans.
>
> The Kremas were real, and really were used to dispose of corpses (Jewish and
> otherwise) who piled up quickly due to deaths from disease and malnutrition
> (and limited executions).
>
> There were rumors of gas chambers in the camps - rumors that became stories
> that vengeful Jews soon swore to have witnessed first-hand (one woman claims
> to have *survived* no less than THREE gassings, and you thought that the
> story of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego was miraculous!)
>
> But there were the OTHER stories from OTHER "credible" witnesses, like rooms
> with HUGE metal floors on which Jews would be submerged chest-deep in water
> and electrocuted, after which the water would be drained, and the same floor
> would become a giant hot-plate, cooking the poor hapless Jews until nothing
> remained but ash.
>
> Or the stories of "flames leaping from the tops of the Krema chimneys", the
> color of the flames telling whether fat or skinny Jews were being burned
> that day.

And there's not a single fact in there that argues against the accuracy of the
normative historical account of the Holocaust, little worm. Mr. Mathews was
right.

> [...deletia...]

> You are quite correct Philip. I misspoke above. What I *should* have said is
> that so-called "Holocaust Denial" is considered "inciting racial hatred",
> and is ILLEGAL in some countries. "Discussion" of the "Holocaust is fine,

You've recently claimed that discussion of the Holocaust is illegal in some
countries.

Can't keep your lies straight, can you, worm?

> [...deletia...]

> There is supposedly a MURDER investigation underway
> at Jedwabne - yet the Jews REFUSE to allow the evidence to be examined!

False. The exhumation was opposed by several Jewish groups, but proceeded in any
event. At least two hundred bodies have been discovered in the grave, along with
spent shell casings of the type used by Nazi troops at the time.

Didn't want to talk about that part, didja, little worm?

Philip Mathews

unread,
Jun 10, 2001, 12:20:17 PM6/10/01
to
In >Message-id: <3b233183$0$2...@news.impulse.net>

>Waldo" Wald...@hushmail.com wrote:

(snip)

>> >Semitism is bigoted, ethnocentric and anti-Gentile by nature.
>Anti-Semitism
>> >is a perfectly natural reaction to Semitism.
>>
>> There is no such thing as semitism.
>
>No such thing as Semitism? That's a relief.
>
>An antithesis requires a thesis, does it not? If, as you say, there is no
>such thing as Semitism, then there can be no such thing as anti-Semitism.
>Why are you wasting your time battling a non-existent foe?

Antisemitism is not anti-semitism. It meaning has nothing to do with Semites.

>> There is nothing natural about antisemitism; it is hateful, deceitful, and
>dangerous.
>
>Really? Tell us how this thing that you claim does not exist is "hateful,
>deceitful, and dangerous".

Ah, you claimed it doesn't exist.

>> >The saliva of the parasitic Vampire Bat contains an anesthetic which is
>> >useful in preventing the victim from perceiving that he is under attack,
>> >thus allowing the bat to feed unmolested.
>>
>> Ah, wrote for Geobbels I see.
>>
>> >Jews go one step further - and have managed to so brainwash the Gentile
>> >public that, should one dare to point out the machinations of the Jews,
>he
>> >will be immediately set upon by both Jews and their brainwashed Gentile
>> >defenders and branded as a heretic: a Nazi, a Fascist, an anti-Semite.
>>
>> In other words, you admit you're a tiny minority whose views are anathema
>to
>> decent people everywhere.
>
>A tiny minority, you say? Galileo was only one man, a man who denied
>"established facts" . . . and he was right.

You are not Galileo, Waldo.

>> >> >One need not be an "anti-Semite" to question some of the outlandish
>and
>> >> >illogical claims surrounding the "Holocaust" story,
>> >>
>> >> No one said one did. What was observed was the very high correlation
>> >between
>> >> people making idiotic claims about the Holocaust and
>neo-Nazi/antisemitic
>> >> motivations. A simple reading of this newsgroup proves it every day. In
>> >your
>> >> case for instance the idiotic claim is "outlandish and illogical
>claims".

>> >Interesting. Have you noticed that those DENYING those claims tend to be
>> >Jews, Zionists and their apologists?

>> No, I notice that those denying those claims tend to be from all
>> backgrounds.
>> Those denying established historical fact hate Jews.

>So anyone who "denies" any so-called "established historical fact" is
>necessarily a Jew hater? You are a curious fellow.

We're talking about the Holocaust remember. You'd do better to spend your time
trying to say something meaningful.

>> >I state that some of the claims surrounding the "Holocaust" story are
>> >outlandish and illogical. You call my statement "idiotic".
>> >
>> >Nice demonstration, Gentile hater.
>>
>> Your inability to make an argument for your claim reveals its emptiness.
>>
>> >> And
>> >> yet in your time here you've shown none of those. In the face of such
>> >> unsupported tripe, and given your obvious hatred of Jews, you fit the
>> >> pattern
>> >> quite well.
>> >
>> >I've had several debates with *you* in which we've discussed numerous
>> >spurious aspects of the "Holocaust" tale, (gassing, sacks of hair with
>> >traces of HCN, etc.) and yet here you are DENYING that any such
>discussions
>> >took place.

>> That fact that we've discussed them hardly makes them spurious. In fact,
>> your
>> best argument against gassing was that it would have been easier to
>> construct
>> sound proof shooting galleries than use gas chambers.

>Ha! Compare that to your argument that the efficiency conscious Nazis would
>gas victims, drag the bodies through piles of shit, puke and piss, and
>*then* shave their heads! You're a buffoon!

Well, there is a difference of course. Gassing, cremation, and head shaving
happened, as the evidence shows. Your theory is a figment of your highly
selective imagination. And by the way, the Nazis didn't drag the victims. In
fact, they didn't have to touch them. Presumably under your sound proofed
shooting gallery the bodies would have dragged themselves to the crematoria.

>Actually, there is NO good argument that *supports* the ridiculous claims of
>mass gassing.

There is evidence, and there is nothing ridiculous about the claims.

The evidence does not support this alleged "established
>historical fact".

Oh, but it most certainly does, to your chagrin.

>> Aside from the obvious
>> idiocy of that claim, it ignores the fact of gassing, as proven by the
>> evidence. The only thing supurious about that discussion was your
>argument.
>
>The evidence *always* fails.

An empty lie.

There is no *physical* evidence to support the
>claim that anything other than lice were killed on a large scale by gassing.

There is no evidence that anything other than humans entered the homicidal gas
chambers whose walls contain traces of HCN. Physical evidence is but one form
of evidence. There is no physical evidence for the battle of Gettysburg.

>Nada. Zip. Zilch. It always falls back to *testimonies* from vengeful Jews
>frothing with hatred, or Nazis who've been coerced and tortured.

No it doesn't. It includes documentary evidence, physical evidence, as well as
the admissions of Nazis and others who worked in the crematoria. An open and
shut case, as any case in which the perpetrator admits he did it and witnesses
testify they saw him do it would be.

>> >You're not only a Goy Hater, you're a lying Goy hater.
>>
>> Well, that's a rather silly remark. Perhaps you'd like to present some
>> evidence for my hating "Goys". Absent such evidence it will be clear that
>> you're just attempting to create a specious "equivalency" argument with
>your
>> already admitted antisemitism.

>Are you in denial or just lying?

Waldo admits his remark was silly.

>> >> but it doesn't take long
>> >> >to develop an "anti-Semitic" bent when looking into the details. . .
>> >>
>> >> Oh look, the antisemite blames someone else for making him so! Now
>we've
>> >> never
>> >> heard that before.
>> >
>> >Of course, Jews could NEVER be responsible for ANY animosity others might
>> >hold toward them, could they Phillip?
>>
>> Precisely. How could an entire people, of different nationalities,
>different
>> political persuasions, different lifestyles be responsible for a
>hatefilled,
>> monolithic response to to their Jewishness?

>You tell me Philip, it has happened over and over and over again . . .

Illogical. That doesn't mean the fault lies with the victim. Only the guilty
offer that excuse for their actions.

>peoples in different nations, with different
>political persuasions, different lifestyles, different religions, in
>different centuries and even different millenia *always* seem to find
>themselves at odds with this funny little tribe of people called Jews.

They find themselves at odds with the lies perpetrated against Jews by the most
powerful institutions in society, including the church, who sought to scapegoat
Jews for religious or other reasons. In a way it is more understandable that
people living in a much more hierarchical society with the antisemitic message
coming from those in authority would succumb to it than for a piece of filth
like yourself, whose views are despised by authorities of all kinds today. In a
sense Hitler's Germany and the Tsar's Russia were a throwback to the days when
someone was needed to point the finger at, either to blame or to rally the
masses. The fact that peoples of all kinds commit atrocities doesn't excuse the
atrocities.

>Wherever they go, trouble follows, yet you claim that it's NEVER the Jews
>fault? How can this be, Philip?

Because it's the fault of those who attack Jews, Waldo. Grow up and accept the
consequences of your beliefs. Your hatred is yours, don't try to blame anyone
else for it.

>> >Throughout ALL the ages, ALL of the
>> >pogroms, ALL of the stereotypes, ALL of the expulsions, and even the Holy
>> >Holocaust itself, Jews were completely innocent of ANYTHING that might
>have
>> >provoked or incited these incidents, RIGHT?
>>
>> Correct. There is no reason to assume that any one people are more likely
>to
>> offend than any other.

>But there is plenty of evidence that Jews do INDEED offend, isn't there
>Philip?

No.

(snip)

>> Stereotyping and scapegoating, especially when it
>> enjoys the active involvement of the Church over centuries,

>Strange argument you have there Philip. First you claim the Jews are the
>victims of scapegoating, then you use Christians as a scapegoat for the
>suffering of the Jews! You have a twisted mind, Philip.

The actions of the Church with respect to Jews is well documented, and has been
largely admitted by them. They do not think they are being scapegoated, but
perhaps you know better.

>> becomes a
>> self-fulfilling and self-justifying belief system. No other group of
>people
>> have had to endure such abuse, and pointing to mistreatment as evidence of
>> its
>> justification is the excuse of the guilty.
>
>Bullshit. You're little persecution ploy might be viable in a small area
>over a short time span, but it doesn't work when spread over several
>millennia and many continents.

Oh yes it does. The length of time that society's were dominated by organized
religion is one of the factors in this regard.

(snip)

I label Jew haters, Jew haters. You've admitted it.

>> I've seen you
>> >drive the innocent and curious away: You attack like a swarm of ravenous
>> >piranhas.
>>
>> Rubbish. The innocent and curious are by and large like most people. They
>> look
>> at you as a cancer on humanity, the embodiment of those uncontrolled
>> emotions
>> of hate that have been responsible the deaths of millions.

>Yes, I suppose Jews have been responsible for the deaths of millions,
>haven't they?

Supposing is what you do.

(snip)

>> >Yes. What it means is that *any* Gentile who bothers to pay attention to
>> >what has been and *is* happening in the world, and the curious part that
>> >Jews have played eventually begins to smell the stench. The more you dig,
>> >the worse it stinks.
>>
>> That's because the stench you smell is you. Try joining the human race.
>
>You mean I should convert to Judaism? (They don't consider Goyim to be fully
>human. That includes you, by the way)
>> >
>> >> >> Based on their past posting history, the few bozos who have bothered
>to
>> >> >> claim that they aren't neo-Nazis or anti-Semites were, upon
>examination
>> >> >> of their claims, found to be clearly lying.
>> >> >
>> >> >Ever wonder if they haven't been "converted" with the help of your
>> >> >ankle-gnawing pro-Semite rat pack?
>> >>
>> >> Why should we wonder about bigots looking for an excuse for their
>bigotry.
>> >
>> >I know why you're bigoted Philip:
>>
>> Really. Then show my bigotry. You've admitted yours. Now you want to
>justify
>> it by claiming everyone else is too. You can't hide from your despicable
>> character that easily.
>
>Why should I have to show it, Philip? You do a fine job of that.

Hehe. Anyone notice a pattern developing here with Waldo?

>> >Bigotry is at the fundamental core of the
>> >religion and culture of your tribe,

>> No it isn't.

>Ok then, let's just say that Bigotry is at the fundamental core of the
>religion and culture of the Jewish tribe. Is that better?

No, just as stupid.

>> > your heritage that stretches back over
>> > millennia.
>>
>> Who's heritage doesn't stretch back over millenia? Do you always resort to
>> just meaningless drivel when trying to justify your defects?
>>
>> >You've been raised with it, and fed on it like mothers milk.
>> >Ethnocentric bigotry and the disdain of Gentiles is the glue that holds
>> >Judaism together.

>> No, bigotry and disdain is what motives you and your ilk.

>Is that so? Daedra Morrighan posted something earlier today that bears
>repeating here:

No it doesn't.

(snip)

>Naaaaaw. Jews aren't bigots, are they Philip?

All groups of people have bigots. After all, you belong to a group.

>> The fact that you
>> must express it anonymously shows you know you are beyond the pale.
>
>Why do you claim that I post anonymously? I sign my "name", Waldo, to every
>post I write. Is that less of a name than "Philip Matthews"?

Ah, yes it is Waldo.

I have no
>reason to believe that this is *your* real name, and frankly, I DON'T CARE.
>
>If you are so anxious to become a "public person" why not end every post
>with a link to a personal website?

I don't have one. But the fact remains, you post anonymously, and apparently,
are rather sensitive about it.

(snip)

>You're a moron, "Philip Matthews".

That's one "t", anonymous coward. Of course I undertand that you don't want the
people in your life to see what a shameful, hateful exuse for a human being you
are.

(snip)

>> This is a LIE. What
>> >is disputed is the magnitude, the methods and the motives of the
>calamity.
>>
>> Then you deny the Holocaust.
>
>Oh, so it's an all or nothing deal then, is it Philip.

Yes.

(snip)

> >> >You have no problem with anyone dissecting the relationship between
>> >> >Eisenhower and McArthur regarding the Korean War.
>> >>
>> >> Not analagous. We would have a problem with people saying there was no
>> >> Korean
>> >> War.
>> >
>> >Lie. See above.
>>
>> Your point is not analagous.
>> >
>> >> >You couldn't care less whether revisionists pick apart the details of
>the
>> >> >Boer Wars, or the Spanish conquest of the Americas.
>> >>
>> >> But we would if someone denied there was a Boer War or Spanish
>conquest.
>> >
>> >More lies. See above, deceiver.
>>
>> LOL!
>
>You're bleeding diarrhea and you know it.

On the contrary, your attempt at analogy was pathetic.

>> >> >You and the Cockroach Clan are single minded in your efforts: To
>protect
>> >the
>> >> >fabricated and "sanctified" image of Jewish suffering at the hands of
>the
>> >> >Nazis during WWII, and to absolve Jews of any guilt regarding the
>> >atrocities
>> >> >committed under Bolshevism and Communism.
>> >>
>> >> See, you've proven why those examples are not analgous. You claim,
>without
>> >a
>> >> shred of evidence, that the Holocaust is fabricated,
>> >
>> >Another lie. I specifically said that the IMAGE was fabricated.
>>
>> Tell us the difference.
>
>The IMAGE of the "Holocaust" as portrayed by Exterminationists has been
>built up, blown out of proportion and spun for public consumption for the
>purpose of eliciting pity for the Jews.

No it hasn't, which is why people like you make assinine comments like this and
then never defend them. The dominant image of the Holocaust is defenseless Jews
being murdered by various means, in exceptionally large numbers, at the hands
of rabid haters operating under a state sanctioned program. That image reflects
truth.

(snip)

>> >Questioning the magnitude, method and motives under which Jews suffered
>> >during WWII is ALSO an entirely different order of claim than your
>> >accusation of denying that the so-called "Holocaust" ever happened.
>>
>> No it isn't. Method, motive and magnitude are part of the definition. You
>> are
>> Holocaust Denier, who when pressed to defend his denial, offers arguments
>> like
>> your sound proof shooting galleries. In other words, you can't make a fact
>> based argument for your denial.

>I'll go further. The mass gassings never happened.

Who cares if you go further with your lies!

The building supposedly
>used as gas chambers may have been used to gas commodities for lice
>eradication, but were never used to gas humans.

There were multiple buildings involved, in multiple camps, and there is no
evidence to support your claim. Delousing chambers were of a different design,
and most of the death camps didn't have them.

>The Kremas were real, and really were used to dispose of corpses (Jewish and
>otherwise) who piled up quickly due to deaths from disease and malnutrition
>(and limited executions).

Deaths from disease were a tiny part of the total. 1.4 million inmates were
transported to Auschwitz. Over 1 million never left. The vast majority of them
were gassed in buildings constucted to gas them and burn the corpses.

>There were rumors of gas chambers in the camps - rumors that became stories
>that vengeful Jews soon swore to have witnessed first-hand (one woman claims
>to have *survived* no less than THREE gassings, and you thought that the
>story of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego was miraculous!)

The rumors were true, as the evidence proves.
(snip

>> Show us
>> >ONE noted revisionist, or ONE person who posts here regularly who"DENIES"
>> >that the Jews suffered horribly under the Nazis during WWII. SHOW US.
>>
>> Suffering horribly during WWII is not the definition of the Holocaust.
>
>Suppose YOU define the "Holocaust" for us Philip. Suppose you collaborate
>with your Jew and Shabbos Goy buddies and lay down the TEN COMMANDMENTS of
>the "Holocaust", the articles of faith one MUST believe in order to avoid
>being branded a heretic, and faced with the rack, the Iron Maiden, the thumb
>screws. or, (horror of all horrors) being labeled an ANTI-SEMITE . . . (god
>forbid!)

Read a history book.

(snip)

>> Why is that? Why is it that you waste all this time spewing
>> nonsense about Jews, and yet you can't make a coherent argument for the
>> overstatement of the magnitude, methods and motives of the Nazis?
>
>The arguments have been made coherently and eloquently over and over again.

No they haven't. They've never been made. Your attempt in this very thread,
where you offer a fictional alternative to what happened in the camps
concerning gassing, based on not a shred of evidence, is all we ever get.

(snip)

>> >But discussion of the "Holocaust" is off limits (and even ILLEGAL in some
>> >countries),
>>
>> Discussion of the Holocaust is not off limits in any country. "Stop lying,
>> Pinocchio the stretching of your nose is making your glasses go out of
>> focus. Are you typing with your schnoz yet?"

>You are quite correct Philip. I misspoke above. What I *should* have said is
>that so-called "Holocaust Denial" is considered "inciting racial hatred",
>and is ILLEGAL in some countries.

Quite different isn't it!

"Discussion" of the "Holocaust is fine, so
>long as you adhere to the "Simon Wiesenthal Approved" version of WWII
>"History".

So long as you adhere to facts, not Jew hating rhetoric.

>> > because we might "hurt Jewish feelings". And the role of
>> >murderous Jews under Bolshevism/ Communism is off limits, because we fear
>> >being labeled as anti-Semites.
>>
>> You do? That's news to me.
>
>I don't. But thanks to Jewish spin-doctoring, being labeled and anti-Semite
>is on par with being labeled a baby rapist in the PC eye of the media.

More empty rhetoric. You need to find someone you can talk to about your
feelings, since that is about all you have to offer.

>> And the discussion of Jews and communism goes on
>> here ad nauseum, with very little intelligence on the part of the Jew
>haters
>> who distort the issue.

>Translation: You can't deny it. The Bolshevik revolution was Jewish,

False.

And the crimes of Communism so often cited by Jew haters such as yourself did
not occur under the Bolsheviks, but under later governments under the control
of non Jews.

(snip)



>> >In the mean time, Jews reap handsome benefits thanks to the "Holocaust"
>> >tale, and walk away scott-free from their crimes under communism.
>>
>> Jews and non Jews participated in communism. Mostly non Jews. The Jewish
>> participants no more got away with communism's crimes than their non
>Jewish
>> counterparts. One gets the impression your less concerned with the evil of
>> communism than with bashing Jews.

>You cannot separate Soviet communism from Jews any more than you can
>separate Nazism from Germans.

Another incorrect analogy. You cannot separate Russians from Communism anymore
than you can separate Germans from Nazism.

(snip)

Allan Matthews

unread,
Jun 10, 2001, 2:07:09 PM6/10/01
to
In article <20010610122017...@ng-mb1.aol.com>,
phil...@aol.com says...

> In >Message-id: <3b233183$0$2...@news.impulse.net>
>
> >Waldo" Wald...@hushmail.com wrote:
> >A tiny minority, you say? Galileo was only one man, a man who denied
> >"established facts" . . . and he was right.
>
> You are not Galileo, Waldo.

As the late Carl Sagan was fond of saying "Yes, people laughed at
Galileo, but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

Waldo is definitely far, far closer the latter than the former.

Waldo

unread,
Jun 11, 2001, 3:30:03 AM6/11/01
to

Philip Mathews <phil...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010610122017...@ng-mb1.aol.com...

> In >Message-id: <3b233183$0$2...@news.impulse.net>
>
> >Waldo" Wald...@hushmail.com wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
> >> >Semitism is bigoted, ethnocentric and anti-Gentile by nature.
> >Anti-Semitism
> >> >is a perfectly natural reaction to Semitism.
> >>
> >> There is no such thing as semitism.
> >
> >No such thing as Semitism? That's a relief.
> >
> >An antithesis requires a thesis, does it not? If, as you say, there is no
> >such thing as Semitism, then there can be no such thing as anti-Semitism.
> >Why are you wasting your time battling a non-existent foe?
>
> Antisemitism is not anti-semitism. It meaning has nothing to do with
Semites.

Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language defines
"Semitism" as follows:

"1. Semitic characteristics, esp. the ways, ideas, influence etc. of the
Jewish people."

The same defines "ant-Semitism" as follows:

"discrimination against or prejudice or hostility toward Jews."

I would define anti-Semitism as *opposition* to the ways, ideas, influence
etc. of the Jewish people.

So you're wrong, Philip (surprise!), and you've failed your spelling test.
"Anti-Semitism" *is* hyphenated.

> >> There is nothing natural about antisemitism; it is hateful, deceitful,
and
> >dangerous.
> >
> >Really? Tell us how this thing that you claim does not exist is "hateful,
> >deceitful, and dangerous".
>
> Ah, you claimed it doesn't exist.

No, you claimed Semitism didn't exist, and I claimed that anti-Semitism
couldn't exist without Semitism, and I showed you to be the fool you are.

> >> >The saliva of the parasitic Vampire Bat contains an anesthetic which
is
> >> >useful in preventing the victim from perceiving that he is under
attack,
> >> >thus allowing the bat to feed unmolested.
> >>
> >> Ah, wrote for Geobbels I see.
> >>
> >> >Jews go one step further - and have managed to so brainwash the
Gentile
> >> >public that, should one dare to point out the machinations of the
Jews,
> >he
> >> >will be immediately set upon by both Jews and their brainwashed
Gentile
> >> >defenders and branded as a heretic: a Nazi, a Fascist, an anti-Semite.
> >>
> >> In other words, you admit you're a tiny minority whose views are
anathema
> >to
> >> decent people everywhere.
> >
> >A tiny minority, you say? Galileo was only one man, a man who denied
> >"established facts" . . . and he was right.
>
> You are not Galileo, Waldo.

Galileo and Copernicus were a tiny minority who's views, however factual and
correct, were held in contempt those in power in their time. History has
vindicated Galileo and Copernicus, as it will those who seek the truths
which have been buried by the fables of the "Holocaust".

<snip>

> >> That fact that we've discussed them hardly makes them spurious. In
fact,
> >> your
> >> best argument against gassing was that it would have been easier to
> >> construct
> >> sound proof shooting galleries than use gas chambers.
>
> >Ha! Compare that to your argument that the efficiency conscious Nazis
would
> >gas victims, drag the bodies through piles of shit, puke and piss, and
> >*then* shave their heads! You're a buffoon!
>
> Well, there is a difference of course. Gassing, cremation, and head
shaving
> happened, as the evidence shows.

There is ample evidence for cremation- (having thousands of dead corpses
lying about is unpleasant) and head shaving (of *live* people, for the
purpose of lice control) and there is even evidence of gassing (of
commodities - clothing, bedding and the like, ALSO for lice control)

There is NO credible evidence for the mass gassing of people.

> Your theory is a figment of your highly selective imagination.

Your statement is a figment of your highly selective *memory*, Philip. I
never claimed that the Nazis killed *anyone* in "soundproof shooting
galleries", I stated that shooting, or other methods would have been more
efficient than the alleged mass gassings.

> And by the way, the Nazis didn't drag the victims. In
> fact, they didn't have to touch them. Presumably under your sound proofed
> shooting gallery the bodies would have dragged themselves to the
crematoria.

Ah yes, your famous assertion that Sonderkomandos would be willing to drag
gassing victims to the crematories, but would have balked at handling
prisoners that were killed in any other way.

What was the "logic" behind that again?

> >Actually, there is NO good argument that *supports* the ridiculous claims
of
> >mass gassing.
>
> There is evidence, and there is nothing ridiculous about the claims.

There is evidence that Bigfoot exists too, but I'm not swallowing that one
either.

> The evidence does not support this alleged "established
> >historical fact".
>
> Oh, but it most certainly does, to your chagrin.

Bolshevik. = (Bullshit)

> >> Aside from the obvious
> >> idiocy of that claim, it ignores the fact of gassing, as proven by the
> >> evidence. The only thing supurious about that discussion was your
> >argument.
> >
> >The evidence *always* fails.
>
> An empty lie.
>
> There is no *physical* evidence to support the
> >claim that anything other than lice were killed on a large scale by
gassing.
>
> There is no evidence that anything other than humans entered the homicidal
gas
> chambers whose walls contain traces of HCN.

There is no evidence that these buildings were used to gas HUMANS at all! If
there were traces of HCN on the walls, they were in extremely minute
quantities when compared to chambers dedicated to gassing commodities,
indicating that these structures were likely used as temporary commodity
fumigation chambers.

I happen to have some experience in using poisonous gas for controlling
pests in commodities, and have personally transformed trucks, trailers,
small buildings, and portions of larger buildings into temporary fumigation
chambers.

I have never used HCN. My gas of choice was Methyl Bromide (get that, Ewan
Jackson?) and the target pest was the Indian Meal Moth. Methyl Bromide is an
excellent fumigant: It penetrates practically everything, and kills adults,
larvae, pupa *and* eggs.

Like HCN, the effectiveness of Methyl Bromide is dependant on ambient
temperature: Lower temperatures require longer periods of exposure to
achieve the desired effect. *That* is why the Nazis commodity fumigation
chambers contained equipment for heating and circulating the gas.

Furthermore, unlike Methyl Bromide (which delivered in the form of a
compressed liquid), the HCN used by the nazis came absorbed into pellets,
and the application of heat and forced air facilitated the release of the
gas from these pellets.

The Nazis were well acquainted with the proper use of Zyklon B (HCN), why
were they so meticulous in killing bugs, and so phlegmatic when applying
such methods to humans?

> Physical evidence is but one form
> of evidence. There is no physical evidence for the battle of Gettysburg.

Bullshit.

> >Nada. Zip. Zilch. It always falls back to *testimonies* from vengeful
Jews
> >frothing with hatred, or Nazis who've been coerced and tortured.
>
> No it doesn't. It includes documentary evidence, physical evidence, as
well as
> the admissions of Nazis and others who worked in the crematoria. An open
and
> shut case, as any case in which the perpetrator admits he did it and
witnesses
> testify they saw him do it would be.

Loosely interpreted documents, weak or fabricated physical evidence, and
testimonies that are no more reliable than yours would be.

<snip>

> >> >Of course, Jews could NEVER be responsible for ANY animosity others
might
> >> >hold toward them, could they Phillip?
> >>
> >> Precisely. How could an entire people, of different nationalities,
> >different
> >> political persuasions, different lifestyles be responsible for a
> >hatefilled,
> >> monolithic response to to their Jewishness?
>
> >You tell me Philip, it has happened over and over and over again . . .
>
> Illogical. That doesn't mean the fault lies with the victim. Only the
guilty
> offer that excuse for their actions.

Sure, and in the case of the Jews, they work their machinations against
their Gentile hosts, eventually get busted, and blame the Gentiles for
punishing them.

Why does this remind me of Blacks blaming their criminality on "White
racism"???

> >peoples in different nations, with different
> >political persuasions, different lifestyles, different religions, in
> >different centuries and even different millenia *always* seem to find
> >themselves at odds with this funny little tribe of people called Jews.
>
> They find themselves at odds with the lies perpetrated against Jews by the
most
> powerful institutions in society, including the church, who sought to
scapegoat
> Jews for religious or other reasons.

I'll agree that Jews have been unnecessarily persecuted to some extent for
their alleged execution of Jesus, but this in NO WAY accounts for all of the
calamity Jews have brought upon themselves.

Now, what "other reasons"?

> In a way it is more understandable that
> people living in a much more hierarchical society with the antisemitic
message
> coming from those in authority would succumb to it than for a piece of
filth
> like yourself, whose views are despised by authorities of all kinds today.

Would you like to see me imprisoned - or worse- for the things that I say,
Philip?

> In a
> sense Hitler's Germany and the Tsar's Russia were a throwback to the days
when
> someone was needed to point the finger at, either to blame or to rally the
> masses. The fact that peoples of all kinds commit atrocities doesn't
excuse the
> atrocities.

Except, of course, when the atrocities are committed by Jews. Tsarism fell
to a revolution plotted, financed and executed by Jewish minds. Hitler saw
the same revolutionary tactics being planned by Jews against Germany and the
rest of Europe, and took action intended to nip it in the bud.

THAT is why the Jews were rounded up en masse and imprisoned: Not because of
any scapegoating or church-sponsored persecution, but because Jews were
considered a threat to State security. As it turns out, they were *indeed* a
valid threat.

> >Wherever they go, trouble follows, yet you claim that it's NEVER the Jews
> >fault? How can this be, Philip?
>
> Because it's the fault of those who attack Jews, Waldo. Grow up and accept
the
> consequences of your beliefs. Your hatred is yours, don't try to blame
anyone
> else for it.

You're a naive puppy, Philip. Your mind has been washed and rinsed, and is
currently in the spin-cycle.

> >> >Throughout ALL the ages, ALL of the
> >> >pogroms, ALL of the stereotypes, ALL of the expulsions, and even the
Holy
> >> >Holocaust itself, Jews were completely innocent of ANYTHING that might
> >have
> >> >provoked or incited these incidents, RIGHT?
> >>
> >> Correct. There is no reason to assume that any one people are more
likely
> >to
> >> offend than any other.
>
> >But there is plenty of evidence that Jews do INDEED offend, isn't there
> >Philip?
>
> No.

Sucker.

> (snip)
>
> >> Stereotyping and scapegoating, especially when it
> >> enjoys the active involvement of the Church over centuries,
>
> >Strange argument you have there Philip. First you claim the Jews are the
> >victims of scapegoating, then you use Christians as a scapegoat for the
> >suffering of the Jews! You have a twisted mind, Philip.
>
> The actions of the Church with respect to Jews is well documented, and has
been
> largely admitted by them. They do not think they are being scapegoated,
but
> perhaps you know better.

Damn right I do. The Catholic Church is a whore house - a despicable blend
of Judaism and just about every form of Paganism you can imagine. Martin
Luther saw this before he broke off to develop his OWN brand of whoredom.

Luther also saw the Jews for what they were.

That the Catholic and Protestant religions would cow to the pressures of
Judaism is no surprise to me.

By the way, I sell "Life After Death Insurance" - at a discount: I have
plans that start as low as 4% of your income, that's 6% below the going
rate! Let me know if you're interested.

> >> becomes a
> >> self-fulfilling and self-justifying belief system. No other group of
> >people
> >> have had to endure such abuse, and pointing to mistreatment as evidence
of
> >> its
> >> justification is the excuse of the guilty.
> >
> >Bullshit. You're little persecution ploy might be viable in a small area
> >over a short time span, but it doesn't work when spread over several
> >millennia and many continents.
>
> Oh yes it does. The length of time that society's were dominated by
organized
> religion is one of the factors in this regard.

Oh, a conspiracy theory? Funny that you and yours are so ready to JUMP at
accusing Christians of conspiracy, and yet you scoff at the possibility of a
Jewish conspiracy.

> (snip)

and <snip>

> >Of course you'd immediately label anyone who didn't either kick for your
> >team or cower to rebuff as a "Jew hater", wouldn't you Philip?
>
> I label Jew haters, Jew haters. You've admitted it.

Bullshit, I've admitted no such thing, liar. You label anyone who doesn't
speak of Jews in *glowing* terms as a "Jew hater".

<snip>

> (snip)
>
> >> >Yes. What it means is that *any* Gentile who bothers to pay attention
to
> >> >what has been and *is* happening in the world, and the curious part
that
> >> >Jews have played eventually begins to smell the stench. The more you
dig,
> >> >the worse it stinks.
> >>
> >> That's because the stench you smell is you. Try joining the human race.
> >
> >You mean I should convert to Judaism? (They don't consider Goyim to be
fully
> >human. That includes you, by the way)

What? No response? Then you agree that Jews don't consider non-Jews to be
human, including you. Is this correct, Philip?

<snip>

> >> >Bigotry is at the fundamental core of the
> >> >religion and culture of your tribe,
>
> >> No it isn't.
>
> >Ok then, let's just say that Bigotry is at the fundamental core of the
> >religion and culture of the Jewish tribe. Is that better?
>
> No, just as stupid.
>
> >> > your heritage that stretches back over
> >> > millennia.
> >>
> >> Who's heritage doesn't stretch back over millenia? Do you always resort
to
> >> just meaningless drivel when trying to justify your defects?
> >>
> >> >You've been raised with it, and fed on it like mothers milk.
> >> >Ethnocentric bigotry and the disdain of Gentiles is the glue that
holds
> >> >Judaism together.
>
> >> No, bigotry and disdain is what motives you and your ilk.
>
> >Is that so? Daedra Morrighan posted something earlier today that bears
> >repeating here:
>
> No it doesn't.

It's all there for the record, Philip, and it proves that Jews are RACISTS
AND BIGOTS TO THE CORE.

Snip restored:
___________________________

"A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Yahweh even to his
tenth

References:

____________________________________


> (snip)

<unsnip>

> >Naaaaaw. Jews aren't bigots, are they Philip?
>
> All groups of people have bigots. After all, you belong to a group.

Jews attempt to portray themselves as a group immune from demonstrating
bigotry. The truth is that they are THE most racist and bigoted group ever
to soil the face of the planet. Bar none.

> >> The fact that you
> >> must express it anonymously shows you know you are beyond the pale.
> >
> >Why do you claim that I post anonymously? I sign my "name", Waldo, to
every
> >post I write. Is that less of a name than "Philip Matthews"?
>
> Ah, yes it is Waldo.

How so?

> I have no
> >reason to believe that this is *your* real name, and frankly, I DON'T
CARE.
> >
> >If you are so anxious to become a "public person" why not end every post
> >with a link to a personal website?
>
> I don't have one. But the fact remains, you post anonymously, and
apparently,
> are rather sensitive about it.

No, I'm not sensitive Philip. Neither am I so stupid that I would post
personal information in a public domain. This holds true whether we're
dissecting the "Holocaust" tales, or swapping recipes for apple pie.

If you want to post all of your personal info, knock yourself out. Until you
do, shut your trap.

> (snip)
>
> >You're a moron, "Philip Matthews".
>
> That's one "t", anonymous coward. Of course I undertand that you don't
want the
> people in your life to see what a shameful, hateful exuse for a human
being you
> are.

One "t" two "t's", who gives a shit. At least I don't misspell anti-Semite.

> (snip)
>
> >> This is a LIE. What
> >> >is disputed is the magnitude, the methods and the motives of the
> >calamity.
> >>
> >> Then you deny the Holocaust.
> >
> >Oh, so it's an all or nothing deal then, is it Philip.
>
> Yes.

Then you admit that the "Holocaust" is held to standards above and beyond
any other historic event - that it is untouchable, beyond reproof.

I don't know what "religion" you *claim* to adhere to, Philip, but your true
faith is "Holocaustism".

Amen.

> (snip)
>
> > >> >You have no problem with anyone dissecting the relationship between
> >> >> >Eisenhower and McArthur regarding the Korean War.
> >> >>
> >> >> Not analagous. We would have a problem with people saying there was
no
> >> >> Korean
> >> >> War.
> >> >
> >> >Lie. See above.
> >>
> >> Your point is not analagous.

Bullshit.

>> >> >You couldn't care less whether revisionists pick apart the details of
> >the
> >> >> >Boer Wars, or the Spanish conquest of the Americas.
> >> >>
> >> >> But we would if someone denied there was a Boer War or Spanish
> >conquest.
> >> >
> >> >More lies. See above, deceiver.
> >>
> >> LOL!

More bullshit.

> >You're bleeding diarrhea and you know it.
>
> On the contrary, your attempt at analogy was pathetic.

Bullshit on rye.

> >> >> >You and the Cockroach Clan are single minded in your efforts: To
> >protect
> >> >the
> >> >> >fabricated and "sanctified" image of Jewish suffering at the hands
of
> >the
> >> >> >Nazis during WWII, and to absolve Jews of any guilt regarding the
> >> >atrocities
> >> >> >committed under Bolshevism and Communism.
> >> >>
> >> >> See, you've proven why those examples are not analgous. You claim,
> >without
> >> >a
> >> >> shred of evidence, that the Holocaust is fabricated,
> >> >
> >> >Another lie. I specifically said that the IMAGE was fabricated.
> >>
> >> Tell us the difference.
> >
> >The IMAGE of the "Holocaust" as portrayed by Exterminationists has been
> >built up, blown out of proportion and spun for public consumption for the
> >purpose of eliciting pity for the Jews.
>
> No it hasn't,

Says you. That plus a dollar will buy you a cup of coffee.

> which is why people like you make assinine comments like this and
> then never defend them. The dominant image of the Holocaust is defenseless
Jews
> being murdered by various means, in exceptionally large numbers, at the
hands
> of rabid haters operating under a state sanctioned program. That image
reflects
> truth.

Ok. So much for the "dominant image". The truth is closer to this:

Jews were rightly viewed by the state of Germany as a threat to national
security and the war effort. They were known to be collaborating with the
communists, and sought to undermine/ overthrow German society. As security
risks, they were at first compelled to leave the country, and those who
refused were later rounded up and placed in concentration camps.

Those who were known to be, and many who were suspected of being
collaborators with the enemy