In article <VuCdncBv2Pncu_TbnZ2dnUVZ_gqdnZ2d@speakeasy.net>, Hatto von
Aquitanien <abbot@AugiaDives.hre> wrote:

<deletions>

I am a scientist. Assertions without supporting evidence are baseless.
Assertions which are inconsistent with evidence are wrong. The
allegations
collectively known as The Holocaust(tm) are baseless and wrong
assertions.

History does not work in the same way that the natural sciences do. The
only evidence that we have that the Peloponnesian War occurred is written
sources, some of them contradictory or clearly self serving. The historian
does not dismiss all of this evidence and argue that the Peloponnesian War
is a myth, but rather uses various methods of textual criticism to
evaluate the information in the texts. If the principle that you state
were true, courts could never convict people smart enough to destroy all
of the evidence of crimes.

The Germans have many things to be proud of but the
Holocaust isn't one of them.

There is something interesting in Rudolf's report on his observations at
Auschwitz which becomes clear even though he never explicitly stated it.
If the Germans had set out to exterminate the Jews, there wouldn't be any
Jews.

That's like saying that if the Germans had set out to wipe Leningrad off
the face of the earth they would have wiped Leningrad off the face of the
earth.

With respect to the Nazi plan to exterminate the Jews of Europe, a few
points must be raised.

1. The plan was severely flawed from its inception, since different people
and cultures define "Jew" in different ways. As it was, the Nazis had to
draw up and pass the Nuremberg Laws, and then adjust them later. Even then
they discovered that at least three non-congruent sets of Jews could be
defined:
a) People who were Jews by religion ("Glaubensjuden").
b) People who were Jews by race ("Rassenjuden")
i. Full Jews ("Volljuden"): people with four Jewish grandparents
ii. People of Mixed Blood to the First Degree ("Mischlinge ersten
Grades"): people with three Jewish grandparents
iii.People of Mixed Blood to the Second Degree ("Mischlinge zweiten
Grades"): people with two Jewish grandparents
c) People who were Jews by contacts
i. People who were married to Jews
ii. People who associated with, "acted like", or "looked like" Jews.
Even these definitions were difficult to apply in countries with different
traditions of record-keeping than Germany had.

2. The plan was based on the unwarranted assumption, based primarily on an
assessment of the losses sustained by the Soviet Army during the Winter
War against Finland, that the European part of the Soviet Union could be
taken invaded, overrun, and conquered between June 22, 1941 and the onset
of winter in late October, that is to say, in about twenty weeks. The
ideological basis of the plan was that the Russians were subhumans,
*Untermenschen*, who lacked the intellectual capacity to learn from past
errors: their army of cretins would fight as badly against Germany as it
had against Finland.

3. The plan ran into a conflict between ideological and practical
objectives. During the first weeks of Barbarossa, Jews were being
slaugtered on the eastern front, without regard to gender, age, or
possible professional qualifications. As it became evident that the USSR
would not be the pushover that the Nazi strategists had originally
envisioned, voices requesting that genocidal ideology not be allowed to
take precedence over practical necessity began to be heard. The killing
continued, but those Jews who were of greater economic utlity to the Nazi
war effort living than dead began to be spared. These practical objectives
eventually dominated, and Jews capable of work were not only taken better
care of, but they were also forced to work in various capacities
overseeing and even particpating in the continued mass-murder of less
fortunate Jews. During the final stages of the war, objectives changed yet
again. Those Jews who were healthy or socially prominent were to be used
as bargaining chips to be exchanged for much needed vehicles or fuel, or
even for safe passage to a safe haven for Himmler and his cronies. Those
less fortunate Jews detained in concentration camps were to be shot or
marched to death in conjunction with concentration camp liquidations so
that they would not compete with the German civilian population for scarce
food and housing, or exact revenge on them for the brutal manner in which
the German government had treated and exploited them.

It should be obvious that a program with as vague a goal as implementing a
Final Solution to the Jewish Question in Europe could not have been
completed in a Europe where different people defined Jews differently,
Germany did not have control of all of Europe, and an all-fronts war made
even medium-term planning impossible. Nor should we forget that not
everyone in the Nazi establishment agreed with the ideological issue of
exterminating the Jews or with the practical issue of undertaking such a
tremendous task in wartime conditions. Germany's allies Bulgaria, Finland,
Hungary, and Italy refused to hand over their Jewish citizens, using this
as a condition for future support. Germans sympathetic to the plight of
Jews in the Nazi civil government in occupied Denmark tipped of the Danish
Resistance to an imminent roundup and deportation of Danish Jews, while
the Germans guarding the border between Denmark and neutral Sweden looked
the other way as almost the entire Danish Jewish community was smuggled to
Sweden in fishing trawlers.

Summa summarum. Although the Germans are known to implement projects with
ruthless efficiency and thoroughness, the Final Soution to the Jwish
Question on Europe involved so many random variables, including even the
definition of the number and attributes of its intended targets, that it
could never have succeeded completely. It was not an issue of science,
which depends upon the working of immutable natural laws, but rather one
of human behavior, which involves far less tangible issues such as
definitions, perception, morality, and conscience all working within a
context of rapidly changing wartime conditions and a conflict between
ideological and economic considerations.

Actually, there are no alledged factories of death; there were
factories
of death period.

There is not one shred of evidence to support that baseless and
contradicted
allegation.

The German legal system, which initiated numerous post-war trials devoted
to the factories of death, strongly disgrees with you:

? Devin O. Pendas, *The Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial, 1963­65: Genocide,
History and the Limits of the Law* ,Cambridge University Press, 2006.

? http://www.deathcamps.org/belzec/perpetrators.html

? http://www.zchor.org/CHELMSUM.HTM

? http://www.auschwitz.dk/sobibor/Trials.htm

?
http://www.holocaust-education.dk/eftertid/ansvarskyld.asp#Treblinkaproces

So does the Austrian government:

? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauthausen-Gusen_camp_trials

Enough evidence of various kinds was produced for the courts to sentence
dozens of people to death sentences, others to life sentences, many to
long prison sentences, and a few, such as SS-Untersturmführer Hans Münch
of Auschwitz, to acquittal.

Regards,
Eugene Holman

Jews in the Nazi civil government in occupied Denmark tipped of the Danish
Resistance to an imminent roundup and deportation of Danish Jews, while
the Germans guarding the border between Denmark and neutral Sweden looked
the other way as almost the entire Danish Jewish community was smuggled to
Sweden in fishing trawlers.

Summa summarum. Although the Germans are known to implement projects with
ruthless efficiency and thoroughness, the Final Soution to the Jwish
Question on Europe involved so many random variables, including even the
definition of the number and attributes of its intended targets, that it
could never have succeeded completely. It was not an issue of science,
which depends upon the working of immutable natural laws, but rather one
of human behavior, which involves far less tangible issues such as
definitions, perception, morality, and conscience all working within a
context of rapidly changing wartime conditions and a conflict between
ideological and economic considerations.

On Jun 8, 2:49 am, Hatto von Aquitanien <a...@AugiaDives.hre> wrote:

What pride is there in
that. Holocaust denial is hate speech and writing. You refuse to
accept that.You think the Holocaust didn't happen. That is your
delusion.

I am a scientist. Assertions without supporting evidence are baseless.
Assertions which are inconsistent with evidence are wrong. The
allegations collectively known as The Holocaust(tm) are baseless and
wrong assertions.

You are a scientist? Of what. Scientists have played major roles in
extremist politics before. Both Schockley and Pierce were
physicists. Mengele was a scientist. Just because you are scientist
doesn't mean you can't engage in genocide.

After hearing the Zionazis keep repeating that, I checked on it for
myself. My take is that even the judge who was very biased against
Irving admitted that some of Lipstadt's statements were not verified.
Holman did a nice dance around "not verified" but in common English it
means that Lipstadt is a liar, Zionazi propaganda notwithstanding.

I would take it easy with that "charlatan and liar" stuff because it
fits Lipstadt the same as Irving.