I'm from Missouri

This site is named for the famous statement of US Congressman Willard Duncan Vandiver from Missouri : "I`m from Missouri -- you'll have to show me." This site is dedicated to skepticism of official dogma in all subjects. Just-so stories are not accepted here. This is a site where controversial subjects such as evolution theory and the Holocaust may be freely debated.

Name:
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States

My biggest motivation for creating my own blogs was to avoid the arbitrary censorship practiced by other blogs and various other Internet forums. Censorship will be avoided in my blogs -- there will be no deletion of comments, no closing of comment threads, no holding up of comments for moderation, and no commenter registration hassles. Comments containing nothing but insults and/or ad hominem attacks are discouraged. My non-response to a particular comment should not be interpreted as agreement, approval, or inability to answer.

Saturday, August 26, 2006

Holocaust mythologies

So far I have concentrated on the evolution debate but I have pretty much exhausted that subject, so I finally decided to post an article on the holocaust.

Holocaust revisionism is by far the biggest taboo in our society. As soon as you question official holocaust history, people will smear you as a neo-Nazi and anti-Semite and will refuse to hear what you have to say on other subjects. Lunatic Iranian president Mahmoud What's-his-name was at least right about one thing -- saying that the holocaust has been exalted above god, religion, and the prophets. When you try to contradict official holocaust dogma, it doesn't matter how reliable your information sources are or how logical your arguments are -- you are going to be denounced as a crackpot.

My criticism of official Holocaust dogma consists of two parts here -- one concerns the official death counts for Auschwitz and the other concerns the issue of Jew identification.

Auschwitz:

Despite claims that official holocaust history is based on "meticulous" Nazi records, there have been wild inconsistencies in something as simple as the number of deaths at Auschwitz. Official figures have been as low as 1 million and as high as 4 million. Nizkor says,

"Deniers often use the 'Four Million Variant' as a stepping stone to leap from an apparent contradiction to the idea that the Holocaust was a hoax, again perpetrated by a conspiracy. They hope to discredit historians by making them seem inconsistent. If they can't keep their numbers straight, their reasoning goes, how can we say that their evidence for the Holocaust is credible? One must wonder which historians they speak of, as most have been remarkably consistent in their estimates of a million or so dead. In short, all of the denier's blustering about the 'Four Million Variant' is a specious attempt to envelope the reader into their web of deceit, and it can be discarded after the most rudimentary examination of published histories."

However, it took many decades for official holocaust historians to reach a consensus that the correct figure was likely in the range of 1-1.5 million. The official holocaust historians' excuse that they knew all along what the correct figure was does not hold any water.

Jew Identification:

Also, I assert that a "systematic" Jewish holocaust was virtually impossible because the Nazis had no reliable way of distinguishing Jews from non-Jews. We don't even know what a Jew is. Is a Jew someone who practices Judaism? Someone who eats kosher food, observes the Sabbath and Jewish holidays, and goes to synagogue? Or is a Jew just someone who is a descendant of someone who did those things? How much Jewish blood does a person need to be defined as a Jew? It seems that if there had been a Jewish holocaust, we would have heard some complaints from who believed that they were mistakenly identified as Jews. Also, it seems that a lot of non-Jews would have been afraid that they would be mistaken for Jews.

This issue of Jew identification should be central to the study of holocaust history, but this issue is generally ignored by both mainstream holocaust historians and holocaust revisionists. For the most part, it is just assumed that the Nazis "just knew" who the Jews were -- this is just like the "just-so" stories of evolution theory. There are various theories of how the Nazis identified Jews, but these theories are all very fishy. It is argued that the Jews lived in ghettos and shtetls, but supposedly many of the Jewish victims of the holocaust were assimilated Jews. It is argued that Jews were identified by "informers," but there could not have been enough informers to account for more than a tiny fraction of the alleged 6 million Jewish victims of the holocaust, and the Nazis could not have trusted these informers. It is argued that Jews were identified by "Jewish-sounding" last names, but many non-Jewish German and other non-Jewish European names sound Jewish (just ask Jesse Jackson -- he thought that Nixon's aides Ehrlichman and Haldeman were Jewish). It is argued that Jews carried Jewish "papers" -- but it is doubtful that Europeans at that time carried any kind of identification (even here in the USA, the driver's license or a facsimile has become the de facto ID). It is argued that the Nazis kept "meticulous" genealogical records, but most of the Jewish victims of the Holocaust lived in other countries that did not have the Nazis' obsession with identifying Jews. The drastic changes in the national boundaries of Europe that occurred after WW I also made record-keeping extremely difficult, and even the pre-Nazi records of Germany itself were probably poor in regard to Jewish genealogy. There were no fingerprint records or anything like that to aid in identification. The Nazis just rounded up victims en masse -- there was no time for individual identification. A lot of people were scattered by the war, making identification even more difficult. Since Jews were hard to identify, it seems that the Nazis would have permanently marked any that were found (e.g., by tattooing them), rather than depending on unreliable means of ID like Star of David.armbands.

A fairly recent book titled "IBM and the Holocaust" argues that the Nazis identified all the Jews of Europe by using Hollerith card-reading and card-sorting machines to cross-correlate data stored on billions of IBM Hollerith punched cards, but those primitive machines obviously did not have such data-processing capability -- all they could do was just read and sort a few cards at a time. Also, a lot of the data for the cards would have been difficult or impossible to collect. The introduction to the book says,

Only after Jews were identified could they be targeted for asset confiscation, ghettoization, deportation, and ultimately extermination. To search generations of communal, church, and governmental records all across Germany -- and later throughout Europe -- was a cross-indexing task so monumental, it called for a computer. But in 1933, no computer existed.

In fact, a Jewish source -- Washington Jewish Week --- completely contradicts the book by claiming that the Hollerith machines were not used to identify individual Jews:

Milton [former senior historian at the U.S. Holocaust Museum] adds today, "We have no proof that the Hollerith was ever used to target individuals for deportation lists. It was a back-up system because it was too broad a system, providing aggregate counts of population groups," she explains. "However, when they would check a deportation list against what is known as the number of Jews in a town, then the Hollerith list would provide the evidence that, 'Yes, this figure is reasonable. We know we have X number of Jews, X number of Roma [Gypsies] registered' in a town like Heidelberg, and therefore, we know that this might have been used as back-up material."

The book "IBM and the Holocaust" was not intended to be a scholarly work --- it was designed to sell, as is evidenced by its sensational, defamatory and unsubstantiated charge that IBM USA had a "mission" to help exterminate European Jews. The only worthwhile contribution of the book was to raise a question that both mainstream historians and holocaust revisionists have been ignoring: how were the Jews identified?

Even the bible has examples of Jews who were mistaken to be non-Jews -- Moses and Esther.

I am now bracing myself for a flood of comments containing no rational arguments but lots of insults and ad hominem attacks.

=================================

"I'm from Missouri -- you'll have to show me." Willard Duncan Vandiver, US Congressman from Missouri

Labels:

25 Comments:

Anonymous Voice In The Wilderness said...

Your choice of topics indicates a need for attention.

Sunday, August 27, 2006 6:36:00 AM  
Anonymous Voice In The Urbanness said...

If you want to start a new subject, how about your belief that classical music couldn't have been passed down for centuries without devine intervention?

Sunday, August 27, 2006 10:24:00 PM  
Anonymous Voice In The Wilderness said...

Comments are disappearing again. It looks like Larry(?) has started censorship. We know that he would not live up to his claim.

What seemed to offend him was a mention that he himself was raised as a Jew although he does not practice that religion. I wondered if this was what caused him to break his promise. If so, it shows where this thread came from.

Monday, August 28, 2006 1:13:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Voice In The Wilderness said...

>>>>>Comments are disappearing again. It looks like Larry(?) has started censorship. <<<<<<<

Nothing is being censored here. Sometimes, there is a delay -- sometimes up to several hours -- in the posting of a comment on the tan pages. Comments should appear on the white comment-entry pages immediately. If your comment does not appear, just submit it again.

I have been trying for several hours now to post comments on Wesley Elsberry's Austringer blog. The comments don't post and there is no return message. I have tried to email Wesley directly but I am now getting a message that access is denied. It is very frustrating when you try to post a rebuttal to a reply to one of your own comments and the rebuttal does not go through. So your problem is minor compared to mine.

Monday, August 28, 2006 4:25:00 PM  
Anonymous Voice In The Wilderness said...

> Comments should appear on the white comment-entry pages immediately. If your comment does not appear, just submit it again. <

I will give you the benefit of the doubt but the comment appeared on the white comment-entry pages and then disappeared a few hours later and has not returned. I will repeat my points.

> My criticism of official Holocaust dogma consists of two parts here -- one concerns the official death counts for Auschwitz <

How is this important? Is there any doubt that a very large number of people were killed there? Does it really make a difference if there were 6 million or 6 thousand?

> the other concerns the issue of Jew identification. <

It isn't foolproof but then again the Nazis also killed every Gypsy and Seventh Day Adventests that they could get hold of. In Denmark they gathered some non-Jewish citizens and threatened to kill them if the Jews were not turned over. The King of Denmark replied "What is the point of exchanging one Dane for another?" In a like way, what difference does it make whether some non-Jews were killed and some Jews were not? The point was the intention of the Nazis and that they did kill a great number of people.

> I am now bracing myself for a flood of comments containing no rational arguments but lots of insults and ad hominem attacks. <

Well since you are the one who usually is the first to engage in such antics, perhaps if you refrain, it may not happen this time.

Monday, August 28, 2006 5:06:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Voice In The Wilderness said ( 8-28-06 5:06:57 PM ) --

>>>>>> How is this important? Is there any doubt that a very large number of people were killed there? Does it really make a difference if there were 6 million or 6 thousand? <<<<<

It makes a big difference. We know that the Nazis killed a lot of people, but I assert that we don't know how many and we don't know how many were Jews. But mainstream holocaust historians won't admit that. And if we don't know how many Jews were killed or what fraction of the victims were Jews, then do the Jews have any special claim to victimhood compared to other groups that were also targeted by the Nazis, e.g., gypsies, homosexuals, and the physically or mentally handicapped, or compared to people who were mistaken for Jews? I think it is an important question. The Jews have exploited this victimhood for political ends, most conspicuously in helping to get blind US support for Israel. The US record of single-handedly vetoing many UN Security Council resolutions directed at Israel has been a disgrace -- the US voted alone in every such veto. It is hard to blame the Arabs for being frustrated about that.

>>>>> In Denmark they gathered some non-Jewish citizens and threatened to kill them if the Jews were not turned over. <<<<<

The story I heard was that the Nazis required the Danish Jews to wear Star of David armbands, and the king of Denmark decided to wear the armband and asked all Danes to do the same, and the Nazis were non-plussed because they could not then identify the Jews! Actually, though, this story may be apocryphal. One website says,

Although the Danes did undertake heroic efforts to shelter their Jews and help them escape from the Nazis, there is no real-life example of the actions described by this legend. Danish citizens never wore the yellow badge, nor did King Christian ever threaten to don it himself. In fact, Danish Jews never wore the yellow badge either, nor did German officials ever issue an order requiring Danish Jews to display it.
-- from http://auschwitz.dk/Denmark.htm

It is certainly one of the most popular stories about the holocaust. Leon Uris's book "Exodus" helped popularize the story, and the story was also mentioned in the movie based on the book.

Also, imagine the chaos that would have resulted if the Nazis had to rely on "informers" to identify the Jews: "He's a Jew" . . . "No, you are" . . . . "You liar!" . . . ."No, he is" . . . . etc..

Anyway, I think that the mainstream holocaust historians have a lot of explaining to do.

Tuesday, August 29, 2006 10:12:00 AM  
Anonymous Voice In The Wilderness said...

> It makes a big difference. We know that the Nazis killed a lot of people, but I assert that we don't know how many and we don't know how many were Jews. <

Again. How does it make a difference? What if they were Jews? What if they were not?

> other groups that were also targeted by the Nazis, e.g., gypsies, homosexuals, and the physically or mentally handicapped <

At least you are not a gypsy.

> The Jews have exploited this victimhood for political ends, most conspicuously in helping to get blind US support for Israel. <

On the other hand, The UN has been remarkably one sided against Israel. Many of the countries voting against Israel are only voting so with the assurance that the US will veto the resolutions. They are playing to the gallery.

How about the one sided anti-Israeli press? Reuters even admitted doctoring photos to show the accidental damage to civilians while saying little about the hundreds of missles per day that were aimed by the Hesbolla at civilian targets.

> It is hard to blame the Arabs for being frustrated about that.<

The Arab governments have exploited Israel to distract their own people from seeing who the number one enemy of the average arab is. It is his own government.

>>>>> In Denmark they gathered some non-Jewish citizens and threatened to kill them if the Jews were not turned over. <<<<<

> The story I heard was that the Nazis required the Danish Jews to wear Star of David armbands. <

That is a different story whose accuracy or lack of the same has no effect on the first.

> Actually, though, this story may be apocryphal. One website says,

Although the Danes did undertake heroic efforts to shelter their Jews and help them escape from the Nazis, there is no real-life example of the actions described by this legend. <

There are no real-life examples of the actions that the writers of this website are willing to acknowledge. There are a lot of citizens of formerly Nazi occupied countries who would like to deny their own complicity. It is an interesting fact that although the SS was originally formed solely of Teutonic Germans, new SS units were formed in nearly every occupied country and many of their citizens were only too happy to join. Many of the worst atrocities against citizens of occupied countries were perpetrated by their own citizens.

Let us suppose that the stories of the Danish King are false. So what? You still have not made a point. You seem to believe that if Hitler only killed one million instead of six million Jews while trying to exterminate them all, that they have no right to complain.

You belong to at least two and possibly three of the groups that Hitler tried to exterminate. Does this have any effect on your opinion?

Tuesday, August 29, 2006 2:36:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Voice In Wilderness said --

>>>>>How does it make a difference? What if they were Jews? What if they were not? <<<<<

It makes a big difference. A lot of the Jews' special claim to victimhood is based on the notion that Jews were a very high percentage of the Nazis' victims.

The problem here is not what the right numbers are -- the problem is the effort to suppress all challenges to official holocaust dogma.

>>>>> On the other hand, The UN has been remarkably one sided against Israel. <<<<<<

That has been somewhat true of the General Assembly, which once passed a resolution -- since repealed -- declaring Zionism to be racism. It has not been true of the Security Council.

>>>> Many of the countries voting against Israel are only voting so with the assurance that the US will veto the resolutions. <<<<<<

That is absolutely absurd. UN Security Council members must take full responsibility for their own votes -- they cannot make excuses for themselves by saying that they voted for a resolution only because the US vetoed it. And any UN Security Council member that is undecided about a resolution can abstain, but there were no or very few abstentions in many of the cases where the US vetoed a resolution directed at Israel. And as I said, no other Security Council member ever voted with the US when the US vetoed a resolution directed at Israel -- not once. In several cases, the vote opposing the US veto was unanimous. Also, some of the resolutions that the US vetoed were merely declaratory resolutions, calling on Israel to comply with previous Security Council resolutions or the Geneva Conventions or something like that -- there were no proposed sanctions or anything like that. The sad record of these vetoes is here.

>>>>> The Arab governments have exploited Israel to distract their own people from seeing who the number one enemy of the average arab is. It is his own government. <<<<<

Three Arab governments -- Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon -- have signed treaties with Israel. Some other Arab governments have been saying for decades that they would recognize Israel in exchange for Israeli withdrawal to pre-1967 borders. And lately a lot of Arab governments have been more concerned about Iran, Iraq, the Sunni-Shiite conflict, and Islamic terrorism than about Israel. The Arabs are also concerned about high oil prices -- while benefiting from high prices in the short term, they are concerned about the impact on the global economy and they are afraid that sustained high prices will cause oil consuming nations to get serious about conservation and finding alternative sources of energy.

>>>>>Many of the worst atrocities against citizens of occupied countries were perpetrated by their own citizens. <<<<<

So? What does that have to do with my arguments?

>>>>> Let us suppose that the stories of the Danish King are false. So what? You still have not made a point. <<<<<<<

You were the one who raised the issue about the Danish Jews -- I was just responding to you.

>>>>> You belong to at least two and possibly three of the groups that Hitler tried to exterminate. Does this have any effect on your opinion? <<<<<<

Which groups are those? Anyway, no, it would have no effect on my opinion.

Tuesday, August 29, 2006 5:29:00 PM  
Anonymous Voice In The Wilderness said...

>>>>>How does it make a difference? What if they were Jews? What if they were not? <<<<<

> It makes a big difference. A lot of the Jews' special claim to victimhood is based on the notion that Jews were a very high percentage of the Nazis' victims. <

Do you or does anyone else have any information at all that would indicate that Jews were a high percentage of the Nazis’ victims? Suppose, contrary to fact, that we say that they were not a high proportion. Do you have any they were .How does this make a big difference

The problem here is not what the right numbers are -- the problem is the effort to suppress all challenges to official holocaust dogma.

>>>>> On the other hand, The UN has been remarkably one sided against Israel. <<<<<<

That has been somewhat true of the General Assembly, which once passed a resolution -- since repealed -- declaring Zionism to be racism. It has not been true of the Security Council.

>>>> Many of the countries voting against Israel are only voting so with the assurance that the US will veto the resolutions. <<<<<<

> That is absolutely absurd. <

Yes. It is absurd. But they do it anyway.

> UN Security Council members must take full responsibility for their own votes -- they cannot make excuses for themselves by saying that they voted for a resolution only because the US vetoed it. <

One US Senator recently decried the fact that a resolution which he had voted against, had been voted down. He said that he had been assured that it would pass without his vote. He had wanted it to pass but did not want to take the political heat of voting for it. UN Politicians are no different.

> Also, some of the resolutions that the US vetoed were merely declaratory resolutions, calling on Israel to comply with previous Security Council resolutions or the Geneva Conventions or something like that <

It is interesting that nobody is asking the Hezbolla to comply with previous Security Council resolutions.

>>>>> The Arab governments have exploited Israel to distract their own people from seeing who the number one enemy of the average arab is. It is his own government. <<<<<

> Three Arab governments -- Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon -- have signed treaties with Israel. <

And Egypt actually lived up to the treaty. Jordan and Lebanon have not.

> And lately a lot of Arab governments have been more concerned about Iran, Iraq, the Sunni-Shiite conflict, and Islamic terrorism than about Israel. <

Yes, but for political reasons, they refrain from making these fears public.

> The Arabs are also concerned about high oil prices -- while benefiting (sic) from high prices in the short term, they are concerned about the impact on the global economy and they are afraid that sustained high prices will cause oil consuming nations to get serious about conservation and finding alternative sources of energy. <

The wiser ones, Saudi Arabia for example, are concerned about high oil prices. Americans, while complaining about gas prices, are buying bigger, less efficient cars. As far as consuming nations finding alternative sources of energy, I wouldn’t count on it. So far the politicians are just posturing. They are putting a great deal of money in programs that can be guaranteed not to work but have cancelled some others that threatened to be successful.

>>>>>Many of the worst atrocities against citizens of occupied countries were perpetrated by their own citizens. <<<<<

> So? What does that have to do with my arguments? <

Go back and look at it in context. You may understand the second time around.

Tuesday, August 29, 2006 7:20:00 PM  
Anonymous Voice In The Wilderness said...

Something is definitely wrong with the blog. I posted something again and it first showed, then when I returned to the thread it was gone. I reposted it and it now appears slightly garbled. Bits and pieces of the previous post are mixed in.

Tuesday, August 29, 2006 7:23:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Voice In Wilderness said ( 8-29-06 at 7:20:21 PM ) --

>>>>Do you or does anyone else have any information at all that would indicate that Jews were a high percentage of the Nazis’ victims? <<<<<

I believe that it is generally claimed that they were 50 percent or more of the Nazis' victims.

>>>>>Suppose, contrary to fact, that we say that they were not a high proportion. Do you have any they were .How does this make a big difference <<<<<

It would reduce their special claim to victimhood.

>>>> One US Senator recently decried the fact that a resolution which he had voted against, had been voted down. He said that he had been assured that it would pass without his vote. He had wanted it to pass but did not want to take the political heat of voting for it. UN Politicians are no different. <<<<<

And that stupid Senator probably got political heat from both sides of the issue because of the reason he gave for voting against the resolution. When the resolution was voted down, he should have just kept his big mouth shut. I think that no UN Security Council reps are dumb enough to claim that they voted in favor of a resolution only because they believed that the US would veto it. Also, UN reps can reduce political heat by abstaining -- US legislators cannot. US legislators can only be absent during the voting. It is noteworthy that there were no or few abstentions in many of the cases where the US vetoed Security Council resolutions directed at Israel. And as I said, no other member ever voted along with a US veto of a resolution directed at Israel. See the record here.

>>>>> It is interesting that nobody is asking the Hezbolla to comply with previous Security Council resolutions. <<<<<<

SC resolution 1701 is directed at Hezbollah as well as Israel.

>>>> And Egypt actually lived up to the treaty. Jordan and Lebanon have not. <<<<<

So far as I can see, Jordan lived up to its treaty. Lebanon's problem was that trying to control Hezbollah would have been risky.

Tuesday, August 29, 2006 8:36:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Voice In The Wilderness said...

>>>>Something is definitely wrong with the blog. I posted something again and it first showed, then when I returned to the thread it was gone. I reposted it and it now appears slightly garbled. Bits and pieces of the previous post are mixed in. <<<<<

I can assure you that I have not been tampering with the comments. I hope that a hacker has not invaded this blog. It is hard to imagine a computer malfunction that would cleanly -- or nearly cleanly -- merge two comments. To check for evidence of tampering, you might check the wording and time on a comment immediately after posting so that you can see if there are any changes later.

If you think that you have problems, here is mine: I have been unable for some time now to post reply comments on Wesley Elsberry's blog, Austringer. He posted a comment asking me to use 'trackbacks" instead of direct comments. Trackbacks are not supported by this blog service, blogger.com, and another commenter on Austringer pointed out that trackbacks can be tricky. Wesley's response was, "This is sooooo not my problem."

Tuesday, August 29, 2006 8:57:00 PM  
Anonymous Voice In The Wilderness said...

> It is hard to imagine a computer malfunction that would cleanly -- or nearly cleanly -- merge two comments. <

It is not cleanly. It is like bits and pieces of a previous comment are inserted.

I am not blaming you for the problem. I just want to make you aware of it. We might ask if anyone else has run into this.

> I have been unable for some time now to post reply comments on Wesley Elsberry's blog, Austringer. He posted a comment asking me to use 'trackbacks" instead of direct comments. <

Are you trying to just make comments or trying to link back to this blog? There are good reasons for people to be careful about linking blogs as this has been misused by some in the past (inserting spam, etc.). Although you may not have practiced this yourself he must set up criteria and then live with them.

> Wesley's response was, "This is sooooo not my problem." <

He is right. Why not make simple comments without links or is he also stopping that?

Wednesday, August 30, 2006 7:42:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

AϦ

Wednesday, August 30, 2006 4:37:00 PM  
Blogger DaveScot said...

Larry

The Nazis undertook the wholesale systematic slaughter of Jews. Their goal was genocide. In the attempt, while an exact number may not be known, they killed approximately a fuck of a lot of Jews and there were/are tens of thousands of living witnesses to it.

I fail to understand what you are trying to accomplish by questioning the exact details of the pogrom. I mean, I know you're not all there, but I thought you were more all there than this.

Thursday, August 31, 2006 2:38:00 AM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Voice In The Wilderness said...

<<<<> It is hard to imagine a computer malfunction that would cleanly -- or nearly cleanly -- merge two comments. <

It is not cleanly. It is like bits and pieces of a previous comment are inserted.<<<<<<

Well, I have not seen any such comment on this blog, but I did see a comment that looked like it had sentences out of place -- my own statements that are not shown as quotes and your statements that are shown as quotes on your post of August 29, 2006 7:20:21 PM

<<<<<> I have been unable for some time now to post reply comments on Wesley Elsberry's blog, Austringer. He posted a comment asking me to use 'trackbacks" instead of direct comments. <

Are you trying to just make comments or trying to link back to this blog?<<<<<<

He ASKED me to use trackbacks. Here is what he said:

>>>>> Larry, if you want to say something here, use a trackback. I don’t see any point in the assertion treadmill that is your forte. <<<<<<

To use trackbacks, you must have a blog on a blog system that supports trackbacks. A lot of people do not have blogs, and my blog system, blogger.com, does not support trackbacks.

Trackbacks were never intended to be a substitute for direct comments.

As an alternative, I want to offer to post comments on my unused blog and link to those comments in posts on Wesley's blog, but I can't get through to him. I can't post comments on his blog and he is apparently now blocking my emails. Some lousy jerks have no Internet etiquette at all. It is sad that such a lousy jerk as that owns a big, popular blog like Panda's Thumb.

In contrast, you get up in arms when you encounter the slightest difficulty in posting on this blog. I can assure you that you are as unwelcome on this blog as I am on Wesley's blog.

If someone wants to contact Wesley Elsberry to tell him what the problem is, his email address is --
welsberr@pandasthumb.org

Also, troll-supreme Kevin Vicklund wrote on Wesley's blog,

>>>>> The problem is that Larry doesn’t have a clue as to how to leave a trackback, and if he screwed up the process in any manner would bitch worse than DaveScot did when he couldn’t follow directions at PT on how to track back. <<<<<

Well, Kevin, despite repeated attempts by Panda's Thumb to block me, I continued to crack PT for several months after I was banned there, so I must be doing something right.

Anyway, Kevin, blogger.com does not support trackbacks, so it doesn't matter, does it?

And trackbacks are just something else to go wrong. Wesley himself admitted that they are tricky.

Thursday, August 31, 2006 2:58:00 AM  
Anonymous Voice In The Wilderness said...

>>>>>>Are you trying to just make comments or trying to link back to this blog?<<<<<<

> He ASKED me to use trackbacks. Here is what he said: <

In your warped mind is your reply responsive, or even relevant, to my question?

> I can't post comments on his blog and he is apparently now blocking my emails. Some lousy jerks have no Internet etiquette at all. <

I have posted messages to you on your e-mail and you have never responded to them. I guess you must be a lousy jerk by your own definition.

> In contrast, you get up in arms when you encounter the slightest difficulty in posting on this blog. <

When have I been "up in arms"? I have just notified you of problems. Yesterday or the day before I saw a post by "Anonymous" that was clearly garbled. It consisted of nothing but a few ascii characters. I did not reply because I thought that Anonymous could reply for him/herself.

> I can assure you that you are as unwelcome on this blog as I am on Wesley's blog. <

In contrast, I know that my contributions probably account for most of the interest that people have in your blog.

There is a limited amount of time that people will want to watch you, as a lunatic beating on the bars of his cage and declaring himself to be Napoleon Bonaparte. Many come to see the more valuable contributions of Real Dave, Kevin Vicklund, and another whom modesty prevents me naming. I know that for the majority, my posts are welcome here. I consider this a home away from home.

> I continued to crack PT for several months after I was banned there <

Posting under a false name is not "cracking". You are clearly a tyro with computers.

Thursday, August 31, 2006 8:11:00 AM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

DaveScot said ( August 31, 2006 2:38:34 AM ) --

>>>>> while an exact number may not be known <<<<<<

I assert that not only don't we have "exact" number, we have no idea what the total number is and we have no idea how many were Jews.

Why do you think so many people are skeptical of official holocaust history? Because the official holocaust historians have an airtight case?

A 1993 New York Times article says that only 62 percent of Americans polled believed that mass killings of Jews took place --

>>>>>> Often accused of trying to ignore France's role in the deportation of Jews during World War II, the French are much more knowledgeable about the Holocaust than Americans and Britons, according to a poll carried out for the American Jewish Committee. The results of the poll, released here on Thursday, also show that while a majority of the French are aware of the movement to deny the existence of the Holocaust, 94 percent of them -- compared with 84 percent of Britons and 62 percent of Americans -- believe that mass killings of Jews did take place. <<<<<<

Other poll results are reported by the "Journal of Historical Review", published by the Institute for Historical Review, a holocaust denial/revisionism outfit.

>>>>>> I fail to understand what you are trying to accomplish by questioning the exact details of the pogrom. <<<<<<

I view the persecution of holocaust skeptics the same way that I view the persecution of Darwinism skeptics. Actually, the persecution of the holocaust skeptics is worse -- in several countries, you can go to jail for questioning official holocaust history. I believe in objectivity in the pursuit of knowledge and I hate political correctness.

>>>> I mean, I know you're not all there, but I thought you were more all there than this. <<<<<

I know that people get very frustrated when they can't rebut my arguments because of my good logic and excellent references. For example, on Panda's Thumb, some of my comments would be followed with a string of comments containing nothing but insults and ad hominem attacks. In contrast, when I am unable to address the issue(s), I stay silent.

Thursday, August 31, 2006 1:14:00 PM  
Anonymous Voice In The Wilderness said...

> I assert that not only don't we have "exact" number, we have no idea what the total number is and we have no idea how many were Jews. <

I have repeatedly asked why the number is important and why it is important to know how many were Jews. You have repeatedly dodged the question.

> A 1993 New York Times article says that only 62 percent of Americans polled believed that mass killings of Jews took place <

There are a very large number of ignorant people among us, yourself for example. I have seen polls showing that a majority of the population believe in ghosts. A large number believe that the world is only a few thousand years old and there are some extreme dimwits, yourself for example, who believe that the moon landings were done in a Hollywood studio.

> I view the persecution of holocaust skeptics the same way that I view the persecution of Darwinism skeptics.<

The paranoids are coming to get you.

> I know that people get very frustrated when they can't rebut my arguments because of my good logic and excellent references. <

This is a hypothetical question. You have not yet used good logic and rarely even seem to understand the references which you cite. Your arguments are easily refuted as can be seen by the consistency with which they are refuted.

> For example, on Panda's Thumb, some of my comments would be followed with a string of comments containing nothing but insults and ad hominem attacks. In contrast, when I am unable to address the issue(s), I stay silent.

You usually reply to comments which you are unable to refute with nothing but insults and ad hominem attacks. You resort to this at least four times as much as all of the other participants combined.

Thursday, August 31, 2006 4:58:00 PM  
Blogger DaveScot said...

Larry

Do you deny that the Nazis were *trying* to slaughter Jews? If they were imperfect to a small or large degree in correctly identifying Jews it doesn't change their intent. Tens of thousands of people witnessed the attempt. Holocaust survivors by the thousands attest to the fact that large fractions of their *Jewish* families disappeared forever. The gas chambers were real. The camps were real. Our own military found the camps filled with the dead and dying when Germany fell to Allied forces. Our own people filmed it. I've seen enough of the footage to not doubt the gross details.

Furthermore, the League of Nations carved the state of Israel out of Arab lands (in 1948 if memory serves) before any of the official holocaust history that you object to was extant.

If it's any consolation I don't think what the League of Nations did to the Arabs was just but that has nothing to do with official holocaust history. Israel's practice of making Jews a specially privileged class goes against my grain too. The bottom line now is that it's too late to rescind the actions of the League. That's water under the bridge. The other painful fact of life is that as objectionable as Israel is, they are a shining city on the hill in the otherwise totally fucked up Muslim Middle East and they are an important ally for western interests. The nutjob running Iran has a lot more wrong with him than just denying the holocaust ever happened too. Islam is a cancer on the body of humanity as far as I'm concerned and I agree with Ann Coulter that we should just kill all their leaders and convert the rest to Christianity.

Friday, September 01, 2006 12:50:00 AM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

DaveScot said ( 9/01/2006 12:50:35 AM ) --

>>>>>> Do you deny that the Nazis were *trying* to slaughter Jews? If they were imperfect to a small or large degree in correctly identifying Jews it doesn't change their intent. <<<<<

That is why I am a holocaust revisionist and not a holocaust denier. I am saying that we really do not know how many people the Nazis killed or the percentage that were Jews. Those numbers are important in regard to how we perceive Jews in relation to other groups that have been victimized. Those numbers have affected the mideast situation. Also, right now a lot of people of Armenian descent are trying to get the US to pressure Turkey into recognizing the Armenian genocide, but the US has been reluctant to do so because the US does not want to alienate Turkey. That's politics. Isn't the documentation of the Armenian genocide at least as good as that of the holocaust? Also, there is a lot of anti-semitism among blacks and I think that one reason for that is jealousy of Jews' high status as victims. You and others seem to think that distortion of history is harmless, but it is not.

>>>>>> Furthermore, the League of Nations carved the state of Israel out of Arab lands (in 1948 if memory serves) before any of the official holocaust history that you object to was extant. <<<<<<

That was the UN, not the League of Nations, that created Israel. And I presume that a lot of today's official holocaust history existed before 1948.

I am particularly shocked by the USA's sorry record of vetoing UN Security Council resolutions directed at Israel. There have been about 40 such US vetoes since 1972, but no other member of the 15-member Council has ever voted along with one of those vetoes. Not once. In many cases, the voting opposed to the US veto was unanimous (i.e., there were no abstentions). That can't be justified. How many people are aware of this? I think that all those vetoes are to blame to a great extent for the mideast mess today.

Friday, September 01, 2006 3:43:00 AM  
Anonymous Voice In The Wilderness said...

> Those numbers are important in regard to how we perceive Jews in relation to other groups that have been victimized. <

They seem important only to you. Everyone else seems to understand that attempted genocide is not good or evil depending on its efficiency or degree of success. You seem to have a blind spot on this.

> Those numbers have affected the mideast situation. <

Not if the numbers are only important to a single anti-semitic semite.

> Also, right now a lot of people of Armenian descent are trying to get the US to pressure Turkey into recognizing the Armenian genocide <

I'm not favoring a genocide under any circumstances but there is one basic difference. The Armenians were fighting in a war against the Turkish government. The actions of the Turks against them began as a tactical move. The Jews were not originally fighting against the German government. The attack on the Jews was due to the madness of one man who probably had Jewish ancestors. We are now being told that it wasn't that bad by a madman with all Jewish ancestors.

> You and others seem to think that distortion of history is harmless, but it is not. <

Than why do you attempt to distort it?

> I think that all those vetoes are to blame to a great extent for the mideast mess today. <

Since most of those vetoes were of PR attempts to slime Israel rather than real issues, I doubt that they were a cause, rather than a symptom of mideast problems.

Friday, September 01, 2006 8:46:00 AM  
Anonymous Shemp Fafarman said...

Oh great! Now we have a Jew claiming that the Holocaust was just malicious mischief. Oye Veh! What is next?

Friday, September 01, 2006 8:52:00 AM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Voice In The Wilderness said ( 9- 01-06 8:46:10 AM ) --

>>>>>> Those numbers are important in regard to how we perceive Jews in relation to other groups that have been victimized. <

They seem important only to you. Everyone else seems to understand that attempted genocide is not good or evil depending on its efficiency or degree of success. <<<<<

No, those numbers are very important to others, particularly the ADL's Foxman. He viciously attacked the Darwin-to-Hitler TV show even though the show did not dispute the numbers. His main argument against the show was that Hitler did not "need" Darwin to plan the holocaust.

<<<<<> Those numbers have affected the mideast situation. <

Not if the numbers are only important to a single anti-semitic semite. <<<<<

Wrong. Those numbers have been used to help justify one-sided US support for Israel.

>>>>> The Jews were not originally fighting against the German government. <<<<<<

The Nazis believed that the Jews were conspiring against Germany.

<<<<<<> You and others seem to think that distortion of history is harmless, but it is not.>

Than why do you attempt to distort it? <<<<<<

I am not attempting to distort it -- I am attempting to promote objectivity.

<<<<<<> I think that all those vetoes are to blame to a great extent for the mideast mess today. <

Since most of those vetoes were of PR attempts to slime Israel rather than real issues, I doubt that they were a cause, rather than a symptom of mideast problems. <<<<<<

So you are saying that all of those other UN Security Council members who never voted along with any of the approximately 40 US vetoes were always wrong, and the US was always right?

You just like to disagree with me for the sake of disagreeing with me. If I said that bears shit in the woods, you would say that I'm wrong because polar bears don't.

Friday, September 01, 2006 4:10:00 PM  
Anonymous Voice In The Wilderness said...

> No, those numbers are very important to others, particularly the ADL's Foxman. He viciously attacked the Darwin-to-Hitler TV show even though the show did not dispute the numbers. <

As usual, you don't understand what you see. Nobody cares about the accuracy of the numbers. There is no doubt among the sane that a large number of Jews were killed and it was the intent of the Nazis to kill every one that they could get their hands on.

> Those numbers have been used to help justify one-sided US support for Israel. <

Give an example of this. Where were the numbers important?

> The Nazis believed that the Jews were conspiring against Germany. <

Hitler believed it and convinced others. The Armenians actually were fighting actively against Turkey.

> I am attempting to promote objectivity. <

Another entry for Lunatic of the Month?

> So you are saying that all of those other UN Security Council members who never voted along with any of the approximately 40 US vetoes were always wrong, and the US was always right? <

No. I didn't say that at all. As usual you have failed in your "interpretations".

> You just like to disagree with me for the sake of disagreeing with me. <

No. I just disagree with you because you are almost always wrong. You have said one or two things that were right and I have acknowledged them. Like I said, even a blind pig occasionally finds an acorn.

> If I said that bears shit in the woods, you would say that I'm wrong because polar bears don't. <

No, that is not logical but it follows the type of thinking that you often apply to your analysis: "Why didn't anyone say that it didn't apply in this case."

Let's open up a new area of inquiry: Why does someone who was born and raised as a Jew, hate the Jews so much?

Friday, September 01, 2006 6:08:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home