| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"david ford" |
| Date: |
30 Jun 2004 07:33:31 AM |
| Object: |
Darwin Contribute to Holocaust? |
What is Darwin's contribution, if any, to the coming of the Holocaust?
T. H. Huxley's?
Haeckel's?
Nietzsche's?
.
|
|
| User: "Steve the Sauropodman" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
16 Jul 2004 08:24:07 AM |
|
|
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com> wrote in message news:<9Z1Ic.43024$IX4.4014952@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
Bob Casanova wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 07:18:29 +0000 (UTC), the following
appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com>:
Bob Casanova wrote:
Yep. But I've found that the best way to avoid an endless
series of "Yes, they did!", "No, they didn't!" with deniers
of all sorts is to provide a minimal but factual response,
with perhaps just a *teeny* bit of sarcasm ("HTH"). It seems
to effectively shut most of them up, and helps educate the
lurkers.
I simply insist we discuss physical evidence so there can be a
rational discussion rather than simple recitation and assertion which
is characterizes the religious nature of the issue.
Therefore I point out the absense of physical evidence of gas
chambers and the absense of physical evidence of 6 million vanished
from earth. They believers wish it to be a matter of faith and are
very upset if they have to deal with the absense of physical evidence
for their belief in gas chambers and 6 million Jews missing.
You can attempt to "point out" all the incorrect assertions
you wish. The fact remains that there's a wealth of
physical, documentary and testimonial evidence supporting
the facts of the Holocaust. Don't tell me, let me guess; you
want the physical evidence (not links to it, the *actual*
*physical* evidence) presented here, right?
In your quirky religion there are always claims of physical evidence
of GAS CHAMBERS but no one can ever produce it. GAS CHAMBERS only. If
you took the time to respond why did you not simply recite the
physical evidence of GAS CHAMBERS? It would be much simpler than these
eternal claims evidence exists but never producing it.
Having come late to this discussion, let me offer my apoligies if this
particular section of the thread has been already been fully debated.
However, nothing quite disgusts me on a visceral level as Holocaust
deniers. I had an aunt, who lost her entire family in the death
camps. She was the only survivor; at the time she was married to my
uncle. Both had emmingrated to the USA - New York just prior to
Hitler's rise to power. Whle my aunt never talked about the
systematic murder of her parents siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles
and cousins, my uncle did. He told me that in the early years of the
1930's my aunt would recieved letters from family members, smuggled
out of Germany, that told of nighttime arrests, of Jewish citizens
being seized off the streets never to be seen again; of the whispers
of work camps run by slave labor and of course state sanctions murder
of Jews.
Now I don't expect Giwer, or his ilk to consider any of that
anectdotal evidence proof. Hell, they don't believe eyewitness
testmony, official Nazi documemntation of concentration camp
operations and "efficiency" reports, or even captured Nazi, and Allie
films of the camps themselves. However, I would suggest that you get
your ***** down here to the National Archives in Washington, DC and
study the transcripts of the Neurnburg Trials. IIRC vol. 36 of the
transcripts is the photographic documentation of the Holocaust
atrocities. Nightmares in black and white.
And no, Giwer, I'm not jewish. My aunt converted to RC after she
married my uncle, though both were never particularly religious. All
the proof any rational individual needsto understand the Holocaust is
easily available, but I don't suspect that the deniers will give a
damn. I believe that you holocaust deniers admire the Nazis. Perhaps
it's the snappy uniforms, or the colorful rallies, or the
foot-stomping party songs, or the delusion that a cohesive social
order can arise from the crushing totalitarian dominance of the
citizens. On some twisted level I suspect that you secretly would
love to don your brown shirt, spit polished leather belts and swastika
arm bands, and go merrily goose-stepping down the street and shouting
"We'er sombody, now!!!" just like that psychopathic paper-hanger,
Adolph Schicklegruber.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Casanova" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
16 Jul 2004 04:37:37 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 13:24:07 +0000 (UTC), the following
appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by
(Steve the Sauropodman):
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com> wrote in message news:<9Z1Ic.43024$IX4.4014952@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
Bob Casanova wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 07:18:29 +0000 (UTC), the following
appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com>:
Bob Casanova wrote:
Yep. But I've found that the best way to avoid an endless
series of "Yes, they did!", "No, they didn't!" with deniers
of all sorts is to provide a minimal but factual response,
with perhaps just a *teeny* bit of sarcasm ("HTH"). It seems
to effectively shut most of them up, and helps educate the
lurkers.
I simply insist we discuss physical evidence so there can be a
rational discussion rather than simple recitation and assertion which
is characterizes the religious nature of the issue.
Therefore I point out the absense of physical evidence of gas
chambers and the absense of physical evidence of 6 million vanished
from earth. They believers wish it to be a matter of faith and are
very upset if they have to deal with the absense of physical evidence
for their belief in gas chambers and 6 million Jews missing.
You can attempt to "point out" all the incorrect assertions
you wish. The fact remains that there's a wealth of
physical, documentary and testimonial evidence supporting
the facts of the Holocaust. Don't tell me, let me guess; you
want the physical evidence (not links to it, the *actual*
*physical* evidence) presented here, right?
In your quirky religion there are always claims of physical evidence
of GAS CHAMBERS but no one can ever produce it. GAS CHAMBERS only. If
you took the time to respond why did you not simply recite the
physical evidence of GAS CHAMBERS? It would be much simpler than these
eternal claims evidence exists but never producing it.
Having come late to this discussion, let me offer my apoligies if this
particular section of the thread has been already been fully debated.
However, nothing quite disgusts me on a visceral level as Holocaust
deniers. I had an aunt, who lost her entire family in the death
camps. She was the only survivor; at the time she was married to my
uncle. Both had emmingrated to the USA - New York just prior to
Hitler's rise to power. Whle my aunt never talked about the
systematic murder of her parents siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles
and cousins, my uncle did. He told me that in the early years of the
1930's my aunt would recieved letters from family members, smuggled
out of Germany, that told of nighttime arrests, of Jewish citizens
being seized off the streets never to be seen again; of the whispers
of work camps run by slave labor and of course state sanctions murder
of Jews.
Now I don't expect Giwer, or his ilk to consider any of that
anectdotal evidence proof. Hell, they don't believe eyewitness
testmony, official Nazi documemntation of concentration camp
operations and "efficiency" reports, or even captured Nazi, and Allie
films of the camps themselves. However, I would suggest that you get
your ***** down here to the National Archives in Washington, DC and
study the transcripts of the Neurnburg Trials. IIRC vol. 36 of the
transcripts is the photographic documentation of the Holocaust
atrocities. Nightmares in black and white.
And no, Giwer, I'm not jewish. My aunt converted to RC after she
married my uncle, though both were never particularly religious. All
the proof any rational individual needsto understand the Holocaust is
easily available, but I don't suspect that the deniers will give a
damn. I believe that you holocaust deniers admire the Nazis. Perhaps
it's the snappy uniforms, or the colorful rallies, or the
foot-stomping party songs, or the delusion that a cohesive social
order can arise from the crushing totalitarian dominance of the
citizens. On some twisted level I suspect that you secretly would
love to don your brown shirt, spit polished leather belts and swastika
arm bands, and go merrily goose-stepping down the street and shouting
"We'er sombody, now!!!" just like that psychopathic paper-hanger,
Adolph Schicklegruber.
You're wasting your time. There's no physical evidence, and
that's that. Anything resembling physical evidence is either
fake or not really physical evidence at all, according to
those who make a religion of apologism for the Nazis.
And FWIW, you and your family have my sympathy.
(And no, Matt, I'm not interested in further discussions
with you on the subject, so save your fingers.)
--
Bob C.
Reply to Bob-Casanova @ worldnet.att.net
(without the spaces, of course)
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steve the Sauropodman" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
19 Jul 2004 07:44:20 AM |
|
|
Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote in message news:<moigf05nvs02acfi1u4b1di67lerle4as0@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 13:24:07 +0000 (UTC), the following
appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by
(Steve the Sauropodman):
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com> wrote in message news:<9Z1Ic.43024$IX4.4014952@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
Bob Casanova wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 07:18:29 +0000 (UTC), the following
appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com>:
Bob Casanova wrote:
Yep. But I've found that the best way to avoid an endless
series of "Yes, they did!", "No, they didn't!" with deniers
of all sorts is to provide a minimal but factual response,
with perhaps just a *teeny* bit of sarcasm ("HTH"). It seems
to effectively shut most of them up, and helps educate the
lurkers.
I simply insist we discuss physical evidence so there can be a
rational discussion rather than simple recitation and assertion which
is characterizes the religious nature of the issue.
Therefore I point out the absense of physical evidence of gas
chambers and the absense of physical evidence of 6 million vanished
from earth. They believers wish it to be a matter of faith and are
very upset if they have to deal with the absense of physical evidence
for their belief in gas chambers and 6 million Jews missing.
You can attempt to "point out" all the incorrect assertions
you wish. The fact remains that there's a wealth of
physical, documentary and testimonial evidence supporting
the facts of the Holocaust. Don't tell me, let me guess; you
want the physical evidence (not links to it, the *actual*
*physical* evidence) presented here, right?
In your quirky religion there are always claims of physical evidence
of GAS CHAMBERS but no one can ever produce it. GAS CHAMBERS only. If
you took the time to respond why did you not simply recite the
physical evidence of GAS CHAMBERS? It would be much simpler than these
eternal claims evidence exists but never producing it.
Having come late to this discussion, let me offer my apoligies if this
particular section of the thread has been already been fully debated.
However, nothing quite disgusts me on a visceral level as Holocaust
deniers. I had an aunt, who lost her entire family in the death
camps. She was the only survivor; at the time she was married to my
uncle. Both had emmingrated to the USA - New York just prior to
Hitler's rise to power. Whle my aunt never talked about the
systematic murder of her parents siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles
and cousins, my uncle did. He told me that in the early years of the
1930's my aunt would recieved letters from family members, smuggled
out of Germany, that told of nighttime arrests, of Jewish citizens
being seized off the streets never to be seen again; of the whispers
of work camps run by slave labor and of course state sanctions murder
of Jews.
Now I don't expect Giwer, or his ilk to consider any of that
anectdotal evidence proof. Hell, they don't believe eyewitness
testmony, official Nazi documemntation of concentration camp
operations and "efficiency" reports, or even captured Nazi, and Allie
films of the camps themselves. However, I would suggest that you get
your ***** down here to the National Archives in Washington, DC and
study the transcripts of the Neurnburg Trials. IIRC vol. 36 of the
transcripts is the photographic documentation of the Holocaust
atrocities. Nightmares in black and white.
And no, Giwer, I'm not jewish. My aunt converted to RC after she
married my uncle, though both were never particularly religious. All
the proof any rational individual needsto understand the Holocaust is
easily available, but I don't suspect that the deniers will give a
damn. I believe that you holocaust deniers admire the Nazis. Perhaps
it's the snappy uniforms, or the colorful rallies, or the
foot-stomping party songs, or the delusion that a cohesive social
order can arise from the crushing totalitarian dominance of the
citizens. On some twisted level I suspect that you secretly would
love to don your brown shirt, spit polished leather belts and swastika
arm bands, and go merrily goose-stepping down the street and shouting
"We'er sombody, now!!!" just like that psychopathic paper-hanger,
Adolph Schicklegruber.
You're wasting your time. There's no physical evidence, and
that's that. Anything resembling physical evidence is either
fake or not really physical evidence at all, according to
those who make a religion of apologism for the Nazis.
And FWIW, you and your family have my sympathy.
(And no, Matt, I'm not interested in further discussions
with you on the subject, so save your fingers.)
--
Bob C.
Reply to Bob-Casanova @ worldnet.att.net
(without the spaces, of course)
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov
Thank you Bob...for my aunt.
Steve
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
20 Jul 2004 01:28:47 AM |
|
|
Bob Casanova wrote:
You're wasting your time. There's no physical evidence, and
that's that. Anything resembling physical evidence is either
fake or not really physical evidence at all, according to
those who make a religion of apologism for the Nazis.
None of it addressed gas chambers.
And FWIW, you and your family have my sympathy.
(And no, Matt, I'm not interested in further discussions
with you on the subject, so save your fingers.)
Nor am I interested in discussing anything but gas chambers.
Certainly not made up stories to entertain children.
--
One day the shadow awoke and said, "Look how perfectly
I am shaded from the sun." And later complained he
could not see the sun.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3193
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
16 Jul 2004 11:55:47 PM |
|
|
Steve the Sauropodman wrote:
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com> wrote in message news:<9Z1Ic.43024$IX4.4014952@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
In your quirky religion there are always claims of physical evidence
of GAS CHAMBERS but no one can ever produce it. GAS CHAMBERS only. If
you took the time to respond why did you not simply recite the
physical evidence of GAS CHAMBERS? It would be much simpler than these
eternal claims evidence exists but never producing it.
Having come late to this discussion, let me offer my apoligies if this
particular section of the thread has been already been fully debated.
I am only talking about gas chambers. If you don't have physical
evidence of gas chambers there is nothing you have to contribute.
However, nothing quite disgusts me on a visceral level as Holocaust
deniers.
Some day you are going to have figure out why you are that way. That
is the kind of reaction religious fanatics have when they encounter
unbelievers. Clearly you are responding emotionally. There is
something very wrong with such anti-intellectual behavior.
--
One day the shadow awoke and said, "Look how perfectly
I am shaded from the sun." And later complained he
could not see the sun.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3193
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steve the Sauropodman" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
19 Jul 2004 08:04:12 AM |
|
|
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com> wrote in message news:<_o2Kc.30301$KP6.1420458@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
Steve the Sauropodman wrote:
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com> wrote in message news:<9Z1Ic.43024$IX4.4014952@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
In your quirky religion there are always claims of physical evidence
of GAS CHAMBERS but no one can ever produce it. GAS CHAMBERS only. If
you took the time to respond why did you not simply recite the
physical evidence of GAS CHAMBERS? It would be much simpler than these
eternal claims evidence exists but never producing it.
Having come late to this discussion, let me offer my apoligies if this
particular section of the thread has been already been fully debated.
I am only talking about gas chambers. If you don't have physical
evidence of gas chambers there is nothing you have to contribute.
However, nothing quite disgusts me on a visceral level as Holocaust
deniers.
Some day you are going to have figure out why you are that way. That
is the kind of reaction religious fanatics have when they encounter
unbelievers. Clearly you are responding emotionally. There is
something very wrong with such anti-intellectual behavior.
Gee, Matt, I think I have a pretty good idea why I am the way I am. I
think I am an intelligent, decent person, a loving husband and father;
so I'm told a beloved uncle to my neices and nephews. I was raised
within a family that embraced liberal, humanist traditions - you know
the - "good kind" - that really believed that all people were equal;
the color of a persons skin, the gender of their lovers, their age, or
their dress was irrelivant; that you were free to believe or
disbelieve any faith you chose so long as it hurt no one; to value
education; work hard, to be suspicious of politicians that told you
"...I'm only doing this for your own good"...which inveriably meant
that it wasn't good for anyone except politicians. I was raised to
question authority; check out so-called "banned books" from any good
Public Library; corny as it sounds every 4th of July re-read the
Declaration of Independence, and at least once a year read the US
Constitution from beginning to end lest the elected clowns we all too
often appoint to political office try to take it away from us.
However, for me Matt I find it ... disquieting ... that someone could
look at the atricities performed by the Nazis, and see the evidence of
the systematic incarceration, torture and murder of millions of
innocent individuals, and expect anyone to see it in some detached,
depersonalized manner. That, sir, is some of the early warning signs
of sociopathic behavior - lack of empathy towards people. Somethings
tells me that if one were to look deeper into your background I wonder
if they would find incidents of animal cruelty, insect mutilation, or
perhaps a secret wish to eliminate a family member of close neighbor.
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like
fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. "
George Washington
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robin Levett" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
17 Jul 2004 05:14:34 AM |
|
|
Matt Giwer wrote:
Steve the Sauropodman wrote:
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com> wrote in message
news:<9Z1Ic.43024$IX4.4014952@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
In your quirky religion there are always claims of physical evidence
of GAS CHAMBERS but no one can ever produce it. GAS CHAMBERS only. If
you took the time to respond why did you not simply recite the
physical evidence of GAS CHAMBERS? It would be much simpler than these
eternal claims evidence exists but never producing it.
Having come late to this discussion, let me offer my apoligies if this
particular section of the thread has been already been fully debated.
I am only talking about gas chambers. If you don't have physical
evidence of gas chambers there is nothing you have to contribute.
However, nothing quite disgusts me on a visceral level as Holocaust
deniers.
Some day you are going to have figure out why you are that way. That
is the kind of reaction religious fanatics have when they encounter
unbelievers. Clearly you are responding emotionally. There is
something very wrong with such anti-intellectual behavior.
I suspect he feels that way for the same reason as many others on this
group; the spectacle of someone as intellectually dishonest as you
presuming to lecture the rest of us on "skepticism", while making one-eyed
apologies for one of the foulest regimes of the twentieth century is
stomach-churning.
--
Robin Levett
rlevett@rlevett.ibmuklunix.net (unmunge by removing big blue - don't yahoo)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
20 Jul 2004 01:26:32 AM |
|
|
Steve the Sauropodman wrote:
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com> wrote in message news:<9Z1Ic.43024$IX4.4014952@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
Bob Casanova wrote:
In your quirky religion there are always claims of physical evidence
of GAS CHAMBERS but no one can ever produce it. GAS CHAMBERS only. If
you took the time to respond why did you not simply recite the
physical evidence of GAS CHAMBERS? It would be much simpler than these
eternal claims evidence exists but never producing it.
Having come late to this discussion, let me offer my apoligies if this
particular section of the thread has been already been fully debated.
However, nothing quite disgusts me on a visceral level
That visceral thing is part of what is so strange about it. After 59
years people still haven't moved on with their lives. It is very
strange. Morbid dwelling on the past is not healthy.
as Holocaust deniers.
I have only talked about gas chambers and nothing but gas chambers.
Can't you have a holocaust without gas chambers?
I had an aunt, who lost her entire family in the death camps.
By what means? This also bears upon which camp.
She was the only survivor; at the time she was married to my
uncle.
Which camp? What was it like being liberated by the Russians? These
days officially as per Yad Vashem the only death camps were in Poland.
A while back I had someone come on like you about his father (US Army)
having liberated a death camp. When I informed him the US army not
entering Poland and thus he could not have liberated a death camp he
threw a hissy fit.
Both had emmingrated to the USA - New York just prior to
Hitler's rise to power.
I see. She had no first hand knowledge at all.
Whle my aunt never talked about the
systematic murder of her parents siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles
and cousins, my uncle did.
So you didn't hear anything from her. So we have a third hand story
from a person with no personal knowledge.
He told me that in the early years of the
1930's my aunt would recieved letters from family members, smuggled
out of Germany, that told of nighttime arrests, of Jewish citizens
being seized off the streets never to be seen again; of the whispers
of work camps run by slave labor and of course state sanctions murder
of Jews.
You must have been young to be told stories like that. There is no
claim of any mail censorship until the war started in 1939. There were
no arrests of Jewish Germans until 1940. But he told you stories of
the early 1930s when nothing of the kind was happening. You must have
been very young. Clearly you have never critically reconsidered these
stories in light of what you should know of the history of the times.
Now I don't expect Giwer, or his ilk to consider any of that
anectdotal evidence proof. Hell, they don't believe eyewitness
testmony, official Nazi documemntation of concentration camp
operations and "efficiency" reports, or even captured Nazi, and Allie
films of the camps themselves.
I certainly have no interest in stories of stories of stories which
are patently false, claiming things happened which did not happen in
the early 30s and did not start until late 1939. Those things were
popular stories in the 30s but it was known at the time they were just
stories.
However, I would suggest that you get
your ***** down here to the National Archives in Washington, DC and
study the transcripts of the Neurnburg Trials. IIRC vol. 36 of the
transcripts is the photographic documentation of the Holocaust
atrocities. Nightmares in black and white.
No gas chambers in those pictures. GAS CHAMBERS are the only subject.
And all the scary stories your uncle told you as a kid do not
substitute for gas chambers.
--
If we had the wisdom to better the world with our military
power, the world would be begging us to do it.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3199
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ken Shaw" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
20 Jul 2004 10:13:37 AM |
|
|
Which camp? What was it like being liberated by the Russians? These
days officially as per Yad Vashem the only death camps were in Poland.
A while back I had someone come on like you about his father (US Army)
having liberated a death camp. When I informed him the US army not
entering Poland and thus he could not have liberated a death camp he
threw a hissy fit.
You are playing semantic games. Dachau may have not been an official
extermination camp but it had a homocidal gas chamber which was built
for the purpose of killing prisoners. While there is no direct evidence
for it's use there is direct evidence for more than 3000 Dachau
prisoners being sent to Hartheim Castle where they were executed in a
gas chamber.
Ken
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Iain Greig" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
20 Jul 2004 10:30:25 AM |
|
|
Ken Shaw <none.of@your.biz> wrote:
Which camp? What was it like being liberated by the Russians? These
days officially as per Yad Vashem the only death camps were in Poland.
A while back I had someone come on like you about his father (US Army)
having liberated a death camp. When I informed him the US army not
entering Poland and thus he could not have liberated a death camp he
threw a hissy fit.
You are playing semantic games. Dachau may have not been an official
extermination camp but it had a homocidal gas chamber which was built
for the purpose of killing prisoners. While there is no direct evidence
for it's use there is direct evidence for more than 3000 Dachau
prisoners being sent to Hartheim Castle where they were executed in a
gas chamber.
Plus, by the very end, the deathmarches of the remaining camp prisoners
and the collapse of basic needs turned Dachau, Bergen-Belsen and other
'political/work' camps into deathtraps for those who had survived
other camps. It was something like a few percent of Auschwitz
inmates left in January 1945 who survived the Germans marching them
away from the Russians.
--D.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
21 Jul 2004 02:25:12 AM |
|
|
David Iain Greig wrote:
Ken Shaw <none.of@your.biz> wrote:
Which camp? What was it like being liberated by the Russians? These
days officially as per Yad Vashem the only death camps were in Poland.
A while back I had someone come on like you about his father (US Army)
having liberated a death camp. When I informed him the US army not
entering Poland and thus he could not have liberated a death camp he
threw a hissy fit.
You are playing semantic games. Dachau may have not been an official
extermination camp but it had a homocidal gas chamber which was built
for the purpose of killing prisoners. While there is no direct evidence
for it's use there is direct evidence for more than 3000 Dachau
prisoners being sent to Hartheim Castle where they were executed in a
gas chamber.
Plus, by the very end, the deathmarches of the remaining camp prisoners
and the collapse of basic needs turned Dachau, Bergen-Belsen and other
'political/work' camps into deathtraps for those who had survived
other camps. It was something like a few percent of Auschwitz
inmates left in January 1945 who survived the Germans marching them
away from the Russians.
The issue is only gas chambers.
As to the "death march" Anne Franke made the trip. And the Germans
gave inmates the choice of staying to be liberated -- according to
Wiesel or Vrba, forget which. And the Belsen population increased to
three times capacity when the Auschwitz inmates arrived. Some death
march. Again one asks for more than stories and ugly names.
--
When the Nuremberg Laws were passed in Germany, Blacks in
America would have embraced such laws as in improvement
in their legal condition.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3210
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
21 Jul 2004 02:17:47 AM |
|
|
Ken Shaw wrote:
Which camp? What was it like being liberated by the Russians? These
days officially as per Yad Vashem the only death camps were in Poland.
A while back I had someone come on like you about his father (US Army)
having liberated a death camp. When I informed him the US army not
entering Poland and thus he could not have liberated a death camp he
threw a hissy fit.
You are playing semantic games. Dachau may have not been an official
extermination camp but it had a homocidal gas chamber which was built
for the purpose of killing prisoners. While there is no direct evidence
for it's use there is direct evidence for more than 3000 Dachau
prisoners being sent to Hartheim Castle where they were executed in a
gas chamber.
Try reading my post this time and taking a look at the URL.
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo2/dachgas.phtml
That link shows the gas chambers that killed 400,000 people in 1945
on the left and the freshly painted, never used gas chamber shown to
tourists on the right.
It is difficult to believe I have to point out to adults the one on
the right is to show the tourists and not the ones which created the
story. Do the words RUBE and EGRESS right a bell, Mr. Barnum? If rubes
don't see a gas chamber they feel cheated so the museum built them a
shiny new gas chamber. Tell me how the US Army missed something like
that while showing Degesh delousing equipment and claiming it was to
exterminate people?
As to the castle story, show me the gas chamber which identifies the
necessary engineering features of a cyanide gas chamber. What is this
physical evidence you claim exists for the Hartheim story? You must
have reviewed it and been convinced by it to post it as credible as it
is your credibility on the line.
--
One day the shadow awoke and said, "Look how perfectly
I am shaded from the sun." And later complained he
could not see the sun.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3193
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ken Shaw" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
21 Jul 2004 10:09:13 AM |
|
|
Matt Giwer wrote:
Ken Shaw wrote:
Which camp? What was it like being liberated by the Russians? These
days officially as per Yad Vashem the only death camps were in Poland.
A while back I had someone come on like you about his father (US Army)
having liberated a death camp. When I informed him the US army not
entering Poland and thus he could not have liberated a death camp he
threw a hissy fit.
You are playing semantic games. Dachau may have not been an official
extermination camp but it had a homocidal gas chamber which was built
for the purpose of killing prisoners. While there is no direct evidence
for it's use there is direct evidence for more than 3000 Dachau
prisoners being sent to Hartheim Castle where they were executed in a
gas chamber.
Try reading my post this time and taking a look at the URL.
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo2/dachgas.phtml
That link shows the gas chambers that killed 400,000 people in 1945
on the left and the freshly painted, never used gas chamber shown to
tourists on the right.
It is difficult to believe I have to point out to adults the one on
the right is to show the tourists and not the ones which created the
story. Do the words RUBE and EGRESS right a bell, Mr. Barnum? If rubes
don't see a gas chamber they feel cheated so the museum built them a
shiny new gas chamber. Tell me how the US Army missed something like
that while showing Degesh delousing equipment and claiming it was to
exterminate people?
As to the castle story, show me the gas chamber which identifies the
necessary engineering features of a cyanide gas chamber. What is this
physical evidence you claim exists for the Hartheim story? You must
have reviewed it and been convinced by it to post it as credible as it
is your credibility on the line.
No, you sack of ***** the topic I was responding to was your semantic
***** over the term death camp and the translation of the German term
more correctly translated as extermination camps. Dachau had several
small delousing rooms but there is the additional large room built after
the typhus problem was under control and far too large for use as a
delousing chamber with gas equipment. What do you think it was for?
The Hartheim Castle murders are supported by letters and diary entries
of people involved. Are you now denying that Hatheim Castle was used to
kill the mentally and physically challenged? The building still stands
and the modifications to involved are still there.
Ken
.
|
|
|
| User: "david ford" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
27 Jul 2004 08:33:08 PM |
|
|
Ken Shaw <none.of@your.biz> wrote in message
news:<mMvLc.296208$Gx4.231397@bgtnsc04-news.ops.world
net.att.net>...
Matt Giwer wrote:
[snip]
Ken, on 2004-07-26, I replied to a post of yours in "Re: Harun
Yahya and Holocaust denial". My reply is at
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0407260721.2237125e%40posting.google.com
Are you now denying that Hatheim Castle was used to
kill the mentally and physically challenged? The building still
stands and the modifications to involved are still there.
[KS]"Kill[ing] the mentally and physically challenged" is very
much in keeping with "social Darwinism," i.e. the application of
Darwinian thought to humans and human society.
Weikart, Richard. 2004. _From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary
Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany_ (USA: Palgrave
Macmillan), 312pp. A paragraph on 148:
Not only did Haeckel justify infanticide, abortion, and
assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia, but he also
supported the involuntary killing of the mentally ill. He
condemned the idea that all human life should be
preserved, "even when it is totally worthless." He called
cretinism and microcephaly "decisive proof" for the
physical basis of the soul, since those suffering from these
conditions "spend their entire life at a lower animal stage of
development in their soul's activity." He complained that
not only are many mentally ill people burdens to society,
but so are lepers, cancer patients, and others with incurable
illnesses. Why not just spare ourselves much pain and
money, he asked, by just giving them a shot of morphine?
To safeguard against abuse, Haeckel proposed that a
commission of physicians make the final decision in each
case, but the individual being reviewed would have no
voice. The leading Darwinist in Germany thus gave his
scientific imprimatur to murdering the disabled, both in
infancy and in adulthood.
about Weikart's new book
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0407030531.19253d93%40posting.google.com
Wald and Haeckel on spontaneous generation
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=Pine.SGI.3.96A.980903003951.13619B-100000%40umbc9.umbc.edu
Say, Ken, do you believe in spontaneous generation?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
28 Jul 2004 03:31:17 AM |
|
|
david ford wrote:
[KS]"Kill[ing] the mentally and physically challenged" is very
much in keeping with "social Darwinism," i.e. the application of
Darwinian thought to humans and human society.
Weikart, Richard. 2004. _From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary
Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany_ (USA: Palgrave
Macmillan), 312pp. A paragraph on 148:
Not only did Haeckel justify infanticide, abortion, and
assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia, but he also
supported the involuntary killing of the mentally ill. He
condemned the idea that all human life should be
preserved, "even when it is totally worthless." He called
cretinism and microcephaly "decisive proof" for the
physical basis of the soul, since those suffering from these
conditions "spend their entire life at a lower animal stage of
development in their soul's activity." He complained that
not only are many mentally ill people burdens to society,
but so are lepers, cancer patients, and others with incurable
illnesses. Why not just spare ourselves much pain and
money, he asked, by just giving them a shot of morphine?
To safeguard against abuse, Haeckel proposed that a
commission of physicians make the final decision in each
case, but the individual being reviewed would have no
voice. The leading Darwinist in Germany thus gave his
scientific imprimatur to murdering the disabled, both in
infancy and in adulthood.
The error here is the absense of compare and contrast. That is 8th
grade, 12-13 year old, required material. It is something that
pre-pubesents should be able to do and recognize the absense of it.
One can find such material all through Europe and America in the
early 20th century. This is far from the worst of it and the worst was
in England having a certain pride of place in social Darwinism,
claiming Darwin as an Englishman and all. What other country openly
spoke of their "natural fitness" to rule the world but England?
Euthanasia continues to be common in hospitals today but with the
added courtesy of either unspoken concurrance of the family or the
lawful non-payment of life support costs. As Hawkings has pointed out,
were it not for his personal wealth he would have died long ago.
It is interesting a civilization so enamored with eugenics by
abortion finds a problem with eugenics at all. This is a culture where
amniocentisis is almost mandatory and full genetic screening of the
fetus is just a few years away. Calling it a different name or setting
different -- and arbitrary -- times does not change the fact. The
"miracle" of first breath is a purely arbitrary distinction.
--
What if books really do not burn at Fahrenheit 451?
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3207
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
22 Jul 2004 12:04:55 AM |
|
|
Ken Shaw wrote:
Matt Giwer wrote:
Ken Shaw wrote:
Which camp? What was it like being liberated by the Russians? These
days officially as per Yad Vashem the only death camps were in Poland.
A while back I had someone come on like you about his father (US Army)
having liberated a death camp. When I informed him the US army not
entering Poland and thus he could not have liberated a death camp he
threw a hissy fit.
You are playing semantic games. Dachau may have not been an official
extermination camp but it had a homocidal gas chamber which was built
for the purpose of killing prisoners. While there is no direct evidence
for it's use there is direct evidence for more than 3000 Dachau
prisoners being sent to Hartheim Castle where they were executed in a
gas chamber.
Try reading my post this time and taking a look at the URL.
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo2/dachgas.phtml
That link shows the gas chambers that killed 400,000 people in 1945
on the left and the freshly painted, never used gas chamber shown to
tourists on the right.
It is difficult to believe I have to point out to adults the one on
the right is to show the tourists and not the ones which created the
story. Do the words RUBE and EGRESS right a bell, Mr. Barnum? If rubes
don't see a gas chamber they feel cheated so the museum built them a
shiny new gas chamber. Tell me how the US Army missed something like
that while showing Degesh delousing equipment and claiming it was to
exterminate people?
As to the castle story, show me the gas chamber which identifies the
necessary engineering features of a cyanide gas chamber. What is this
physical evidence you claim exists for the Hartheim story? You must
have reviewed it and been convinced by it to post it as credible as it
is your credibility on the line.
No, you sack of ***** the topic I was responding to was your semantic
***** over the term death camp and the translation of the German term
more correctly translated as extermination camps.
Then you must have some one else in mind as I am talking about gas
chambers. You should not identify me as the origin when I am not. That
misleads people.
Dachau had several small delousing rooms
Which were shown as gas chambers for killing people when the camp was
liberated. So we have an established history of the allies lying about
gas chambers.
but there is the additional large room built after
the typhus problem was under control and far too large for use as a
delousing chamber with gas equipment. What do you think it was for?
Showers, Brausebad, like is says. It has showerheads, a water heater
outside and a rumor the heads were never connected to the water heater
not quite explaining the water heater.
The Hartheim Castle murders are supported by letters and diary entries
of people involved. Are you now denying that Hatheim Castle was used to
kill the mentally and physically challenged? The building still stands
and the modifications to involved are still there.
Are you refering to the short term program that existed before the
war and was stopped as soon as people complained? That is the only one
that credibly occurred. The folks who ran the program got a bit
overenthusiastic but that sort of thing goes on today.
--
Iraq embrace western values? We can't even get our
fundies to embrace the American value of freedom
from religion in our government.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3192
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
28 Jul 2004 03:34:33 AM |
|
|
Ken Shaw wrote:
No, you sack of ***** the topic I was responding to was your semantic
***** over the term death camp and the translation of the German term
more correctly translated as extermination camps.
I can be polite here and suggest where you were confused. I did cite
Yad Vashem as to which camps were death camps. If you consider that
semantic ***** fine but it was not my semantics. It was Yad Vashem,
the de facto authority on the subject. Tell them your problem. They
have a website.
--
When the Nuremberg Laws were passed in Germany, Blacks in
America would have embraced such laws as in improvement
in their legal condition.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3210
.
|
|
|
| User: "Earle Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
29 Jul 2004 05:50:11 PM |
|
|
In article <QFJNc.4932$wM.2615@twister.tampabay.rr.com>,
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com> wrote:
Ken Shaw wrote:
No, you sack of ***** the topic I was responding to was your semantic
***** over the term death camp and the translation of the German term
more correctly translated as extermination camps.
*
There should be a comma after '*****'.
earle
*
--
__
__/\_\
/\_\/_/
\/_/\_\ earle
\/_/ jones
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
01 Aug 2004 04:45:23 AM |
|
|
Earle Jones wrote:
In article <QFJNc.4932$wM.2615@twister.tampabay.rr.com>,
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com> wrote:
Ken Shaw wrote:
No, you sack of ***** the topic I was responding to was your semantic
***** over the term death camp and the translation of the German term
more correctly translated as extermination camps.
*
There should be a comma after '*****'.
earle
*
Period actually. The "no" in this usage implies "it is not" the rest
being a form or address.
--
What if books really do not burn at Fahrenheit 451?
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3207
.
|
|
|
| User: "Charles & Mambo" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
03 Aug 2004 05:44:28 PM |
|
|
Matt Giwer wrote:
No, you sack of ***** the topic I was responding to was your semantic
***** over the term death camp and the translation of the German term
more correctly translated as extermination camps.
*
There should be a comma after '*****'.
Only if it was a really painful and aneurysm inducing bowel movement.
Period actually.
What? What if it was a man?
--
Come down off the cross
We can use the wood
Tom Waits, Come On Up To The House
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steve the Sauropodman" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
21 Jul 2004 08:25:40 AM |
|
|
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com> wrote in message news:<w%2Lc.78420$uK.39311@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
Steve the Sauropodman wrote:
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com> wrote in message news:<9Z1Ic.43024$IX4.4014952@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
Bob Casanova wrote:
In your quirky religion there are always claims of physical evidence
of GAS CHAMBERS but no one can ever produce it. GAS CHAMBERS only. If
you took the time to respond why did you not simply recite the
physical evidence of GAS CHAMBERS? It would be much simpler than these
eternal claims evidence exists but never producing it.
Having come late to this discussion, let me offer my apoligies if this
particular section of the thread has been already been fully debated.
However, nothing quite disgusts me on a visceral level
That visceral thing is part of what is so strange about it. After 59
years people still haven't moved on with their lives. It is very
strange. Morbid dwelling on the past is not healthy.
as Holocaust deniers.
I have only talked about gas chambers and nothing but gas chambers.
Can't you have a holocaust without gas chambers?
I had an aunt, who lost her entire family in the death camps.
By what means? This also bears upon which camp.
She was the only survivor; at the time she was married to my
uncle.
Which camp? What was it like being liberated by the Russians? These
days officially as per Yad Vashem the only death camps were in Poland.
A while back I had someone come on like you about his father (US Army)
having liberated a death camp. When I informed him the US army not
entering Poland and thus he could not have liberated a death camp he
threw a hissy fit.
Both had emmingrated to the USA - New York just prior to
Hitler's rise to power.
I see. She had no first hand knowledge at all.
Whle my aunt never talked about the
systematic murder of her parents siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles
and cousins, my uncle did.
So you didn't hear anything from her. So we have a third hand story
from a person with no personal knowledge.
He told me that in the early years of the
1930's my aunt would recieved letters from family members, smuggled
out of Germany, that told of nighttime arrests, of Jewish citizens
being seized off the streets never to be seen again; of the whispers
of work camps run by slave labor and of course state sanctions murder
of Jews.
You must have been young to be told stories like that. There is no
claim of any mail censorship until the war started in 1939. There were
no arrests of Jewish Germans until 1940. But he told you stories of
the early 1930s when nothing of the kind was happening. You must have
been very young. Clearly you have never critically reconsidered these
stories in light of what you should know of the history of the times.
Now I don't expect Giwer, or his ilk to consider any of that
anectdotal evidence proof. Hell, they don't believe eyewitness
testmony, official Nazi documemntation of concentration camp
operations and "efficiency" reports, or even captured Nazi, and Allie
films of the camps themselves.
I certainly have no interest in stories of stories of stories which
are patently false, claiming things happened which did not happen in
the early 30s and did not start until late 1939. Those things were
popular stories in the 30s but it was known at the time they were just
stories.
However, I would suggest that you get
your ***** down here to the National Archives in Washington, DC and
study the transcripts of the Neurnburg Trials. IIRC vol. 36 of the
transcripts is the photographic documentation of the Holocaust
atrocities. Nightmares in black and white.
No gas chambers in those pictures. GAS CHAMBERS are the only subject.
And all the scary stories your uncle told you as a kid do not
substitute for gas chambers.
Thanks Matt.
I am really astounded by your paranormal abilities to divine the
content and context of conversations between me and my Uncle; presume
to know my age and level of understanding at what I was told (for the
record I was in my early 20's at the time and already well towards a
major in Anthropology); understand the totality of my Aunt's
suffering; and the conditions her family experienced in Europe.
Obviously, it wasn't "first hand" knowledge, Einstein. Because my
Aunt would have been killed along with the rest of her family and my
Uncle would have been married to someone else...Duh.... But of course,
despite a mountain of evidence, testimony, films, letters, journals,
official Nazi documentation, etc., we're all expected to believe the
Nazi apologists.
But, wait! Matt, YOU don't have any first hand knowledge of the
subject...do you? Why no - you're just relying on stories or stories
or stories. All second-hand information from Allied or anti-Nazi
sources. But of course...it's all clear...the Jewish Global
Conspiracy (or is that the Global Jewish Conspiracy?). Historians,
anthropologists, judges, lawyers, military officials, the media, and
of course a duped public are all engaged in a huge hoax to denegrate
those poor, unfortunate, misunderstood Waffen SS and Gestapo boy
scouts who were only following orders, and trying to end European and
eventually world choas. *Sniff-Sniff*
So tell me...is it just anti-Semeticism, or are you that in love with
the dead Nazi political machine? What is it - the crisply starched
brown shirts, the knee-slapping, Horst Wessel song, those snappy
bright red flags and shiny gold eagles? Inquiring minds want to know.
Come on, Matt 'fess up. Wouldn't you just love to live in a social
order where self-righteous thugs are in power. Where any group of
socially inept, limp-*****, pimple-assed teenage boys could dress up in
their shoulder belts, and Nazi dagger and just kick the ***** anyone
that they wanted to.
Come on that must be some kind of power rush. Think about it. It
would be a place where you could gang rape a fourteen girl, and the
local Nazi constabulary would dismiss the entire incident with some
smirking, fateously innane statement like "...Ach!Vell you know...
boys vill be boys. Hee, hee, hee." Afterall, if she doesn't get
pregnant no harm done, and if she does she helping to provide strong
children for the greater glory of 'der Fahderlant'.
Sad, Matt...really sad.
"I have never met a man so ignorant that I could not learn something
from him".
Galileo Galilei
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Giwer" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
22 Jul 2004 12:39:33 AM |
|
|
Steve the Sauropodman wrote:
Matt Giwer <jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com> wrote in message news:<w%2Lc.78420$uK.39311@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
No gas chambers in those pictures. GAS CHAMBERS are the only subject.
And all the scary stories your uncle told you as a kid do not
substitute for gas chambers.
Thanks Matt.
I am really astounded by your paranormal abilities to divine the
content and context of conversations between me and my Uncle; presume
to know my age and level of understanding at what I was told (for the
record I was in my early 20's at the time and already well towards a
major in Anthropology);
That's pretty young.
understand the totality of my Aunt's
suffering; and the conditions her family experienced in Europe.
But you said she never talked about it so how do you know of her
"suffering" if she was silent on the subject.
As to the experience, the stories have things occuring before anyone
else claims such things occurred.
Obviously, it wasn't "first hand" knowledge, Einstein. Because my
Aunt would have been killed along with the rest of her family and my
Uncle would have been married to someone else...Duh....
You reported your uncle's stories not anything from her. Or did I
read it wrong? When a man is telling stories it is disrespectful for a
european wife to disagree, at least it used to be that way.
But of course,
despite a mountain of evidence, testimony, films, letters, journals,
official Nazi documentation, etc., we're all expected to believe the
Nazi apologists.
Whatever mountain you are talking about, the dates of when things
happened that you report occurred after the war started as per
official records of such things. How can it be explained that your
uncle's second or third hand stories do not match the same records you
call upon for corroboration? (Never read any did you.) And if the
dates are all wrong, how credible are his stories?
But, wait! Matt, YOU don't have any first hand knowledge of the
subject...do you? Why no - you're just relying on stories or stories
or stories. All second-hand information from Allied or anti-Nazi
sources. But of course...it's all clear...the Jewish Global
Conspiracy (or is that the Global Jewish Conspiracy?). Historians,
anthropologists, judges, lawyers, military officials, the media, and
of course a duped public are all engaged in a huge hoax to denegrate
those poor, unfortunate, misunderstood Waffen SS and Gestapo boy
scouts who were only following orders, and trying to end European and
eventually world choas. *Sniff-Sniff*
No gas chambers there either. We do have a tradition of lies about
gas chambers as shown in the Dachau photos.
There is one question with an easy answer to show if you are familiar
with the material. How did the SS become a criminal organization in
the legal sense?
So tell me...is it just anti-Semeticism, or are you that in love with
the dead Nazi political machine? What is it - the crisply starched
brown shirts, the knee-slapping, Horst Wessel song, those snappy
bright red flags and shiny gold eagles? Inquiring minds want to know.
Come on, Matt 'fess up. Wouldn't you just love to live in a social
order where self-righteous thugs are in power. Where any group of
socially inept, limp-*****, pimple-assed teenage boys could dress up in
their shoulder belts, and Nazi dagger and just kick the ***** anyone
that they wanted to.
How did you get such an emotional load from events that happened
before you were born to people you never knew? That is not a normal
human reaction. You must have been somehow indoctrinated in it rather
young. I was born just as the war ended and I never met one person in
my age range who was upset over Pearl Harbor. In fact growing up I
remember Pacific theater veterans saying they couldn't blame them for
it because Roosevelt pushed them into it.
Come on that must be some kind of power rush. Think about it. It
would be a place where you could gang rape a fourteen girl, and the
local Nazi constabulary would dismiss the entire incident with some
smirking, fateously innane statement like "...Ach!Vell you know...
boys vill be boys. Hee, hee, hee." Afterall, if she doesn't get
pregnant no harm done, and if she does she helping to provide strong
children for the greater glory of 'der Fahderlant'.
You really believe it was all like some porno comic book with Nazis
in it?
Sad, Matt...really sad.
I am in the majority who simply cannot comprehend people like you. I
don't find anyone bemoaning the fate of settlers at the hands of the
red savages. I have not met a veteran who was pissed at the North
Koreans, Vietnamese or Iraqis from the first war. I have not heard the
endless recitation of real and imagined horror stories about them.
--
Were the US to cease support, Israel would
become a tail in search of a dog.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3201
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Casanova" |
|
| Title: Re: Define holocaust |
11 Jul 2004 03:17:46 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 02:49:01 +0000 (UTC), the following
appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com>:
Bob Casanova wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 07:18:29 +0000 (UTC), the following
appeared in sci.skeptic, posted by Matt Giwer
<jull43@tampabay.rr.RoMeVE.com>:
Bob Casanova wrote:
Yep. But I've found that the best way to avoid an endless
series of "Yes, they did!", "No, they didn't!" with deniers
of all sorts is to provide a minimal but factual response,
with perhaps just a *teeny* bit of sarcasm ("HTH"). It seems
to effectively shut most of them up, and helps educate the
lurkers.
I simply insist we discuss physical evidence so there can be a
rational discussion rather than simple recitation and assertion which
is characterizes the religious nature of the issue.
Therefore I point out the absense of physical evidence of gas
chambers and the absense of physical evidence of 6 million vanished
from earth. They believers wish it to be a matter of faith and are
very upset if they have to deal with the absense of physical evidence
for their belief in gas chambers and 6 million Jews missing.
You can attempt to "point out" all the incorrect assertions
you wish. The fact remains that there's a wealth of
physical, documentary and testimonial evidence supporting
the facts of the Holocaust. Don't tell me, let me guess; you
want the physical evidence (not links to it, the *actual*
*physical* evidence) presented here, right?
In your quirky religion there are always claims of physical evidence
of GAS CHAMBERS but no one can ever produce it. GAS CHAMBERS only. If
you took the time to respond why did you not simply recite the
physical evidence of GAS CHAMBERS? It would be much simpler than these
eternal claims evidence exists but never producing it.
What is there about the fact that the buildings, delivery
systems and gas stores were all found and are
well-documented, that mass graves (also well-documented)
were found on the sites, and that testimony by some of those
who operated these ..."facilities"..., along with records of
the operations, corroborates their use as places of mass
execution were you missing? All these are available for
review, IIRC; in fact, ISTR that there are tours through at
least one of the sites (Buchenwald?) where you can see the
actual gas chambers and crematoria. Any other references to
physical evidence you need?
--
Bob C.
Reply to Bob-Casanova @ worldnet.att.net
(without the spaces, of course)
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Day" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin Contribute to Holocaust? |
30 Jun 2004 08:06:28 AM |
|
|
david ford wrote:
What is Darwin's contribution, if any, to the coming of the Holocaust?
Less than Martin Lother's
T. H. Huxley's?
Haeckel's?
Nietzsche's?
Colin Day aa #1500
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Richard S. Crawford" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin Contribute to Holocaust? |
30 Jun 2004 10:18:45 AM |
|
|
david ford wrote:
What is Darwin's contribution, if any, to the coming of the Holocaust?
None, but that won't stop you from claiming that he did.
T. H. Huxley's?
None, but see the qualifier above.
Haeckel's?
None, but see the qualifier above.
Nietzsche's?
Probably very little, though I suppose you could, if you tried, make the
argument that Nietzsche's philosophy let to the sense of superiority
that the Nazis felt and helped rationalize the Holocaust. I think it's
extremely unlikely, given that many Nazis, especially Hitler, considered
themselves Christians, and Nietzsche had no use for Christianity.
Now here's my question to you:
What is the contribution of racism, unreasoning hatred, blind prejudice,
and simple human evil to the coming of the Holocaust? What will the
contributions of that factors be to any future Holocaust? And what will
you do to prevent one?
--
Richard Crawford (http://www.mossroot.com)
AIM: Buffalo2K / Y!: rscrawford
Ask me about my opposable thumb!
"When you lose the power to laugh at yourself, you lose the power to
think straight." --Clarence Darrow
.
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin Contribute to Holocaust? |
04 Jul 2004 12:28:53 AM |
|
|
"Richard S. Crawford" wrote:
david ford wrote:
What is Darwin's contribution, if any, to the coming of the Holocaust?
None, but that won't stop you from claiming that he did.
T. H. Huxley's?
None, but see the qualifier above.
Haeckel's?
None, but see the qualifier above.
Nietzsche's?
Probably very little, though I suppose you could, if you tried, make the
argument that Nietzsche's philosophy let to the sense of superiority
that the Nazis felt and helped rationalize the Holocaust. I think it's
extremely unlikely, given that many Nazis, especially Hitler, considered
themselves Christians, and Nietzsche had no use for Christianity.
Now here's my question to you:
What is the contribution of racism, unreasoning hatred, blind prejudice,
and simple human evil to the coming of the Holocaust? What will the
contributions of that factors be to any future Holocaust? And what will
you do to prevent one?
.....I would add 'envy' to the list; and I doubt he or any of us can do much
to prevent it. Envy and religion are the driving forces behind today's
fantical terorists and with modern weapons it only take a few retards to
destroy tens of thousands.
--
Richard Crawford (http://www.mossroot.com)
AIM: Buffalo2K / Y!: rscrawford
Ask me about my opposable thumb!
"When you lose the power to laugh at yourself, you lose the power to
think straight." --Clarence Darrow
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
