The Debate wouldn't Die - Some extra bits

Peter Myers, May 16, 2009; update June 28, 2009.

My comments within quoted text are shown {thus}; write to me at contact.html.

You are at http://mailstar.net/holocaust-debate25.html.

Please report broken links. Write to me at contact.html.

Back to the previous bulletin in the debate: holocaust-debate24.html.

{start of bulletin 25}

(1) Elie chose to go West with the Nazi Mass Murderers - Friedrich Paul Berg (2) Deborah Lipstadt calls Norman Finkelstein "dirt" (3) Transcript of NPR interview where Lipstadt calls Finkelstein "dirt" (4)) Memoirs of Rudolph Hoss - "your ignorant and foolish comments" (5) On the Mossad Payroll? Wish they'd pay better (6) New Website to Counter 'Holocaust Denial' (7) On the Mossad Payroll? - Shamir's middle ground (8) On the Mossad Payroll? - more from Patrick (9) Disaggregation of the Six Million Total - from Syd Walker (10) Raul Hilberg calculates 5.1 Million; and explains the origins of the 6 Million figure (11) Soviet period - why not Khrushchev? (12) Wiesel writes of young men, freed from the camps, going around "to rape German girls" (13) Raping German girls: Elie Wiesel and the Scandal of Jewish Rage (14) Hilberg a Denier? 5.1million? Tell German authorities (15) Soviet period - why not Khrushchev? (16) Elie Wiesel and the Catholics - dialogue or monologue? Dispenser of Jewish Light? (17) Six Million? The importance of the numbers (18) REPLY TO Six Million? The importance of the numbers (19) Jews complain that Pope said "millions" instead of "6 Million"

(1) Elie chose to go West with the Nazi Mass Murderers - Friedrich Paul Berg

From: ReporterNotebook <RePorterNoteBook@Gmail.com> Date: 05.05.2009 03:31 AM

Go West Young Man

by Friedrich Paul Berg

http://nazigassings.com/GoWestYoungMan.html

In the book for which Elie Wiesel is most famous, namely Night, which is recommended reading in public schools across this country, Wiesel paints an horrendous picture of life in Auschwitz from April 1944 to January 1945 when he was there. Although many hundreds of thousands of Jews were supposedly gassed there during this time, Wiesel makes no mention of gassings or gas chambers anywhere in his book, as Jürgen Graf and Robert Faurisson have pointed out to us. He does however claim to have seen flames from the chimneys and Dr. Mengele wearing a monocle. Both claims are clearly lies.

When the Russians were about to overrun Auschwitz in January 1945, both Elie and his father "chose" to go west with the retreating 'Nazis' and SS rather than be "liberated" by America's greatest ally. They could have told the whole world about Auschwitz within days--but, both Elie and his father as well as countless thousands of other Jews chose instead to trek west with the 'Nazis' on foot at night in the middle of one of the coldest winters and continue working for the defense of the Reich thereafter. In effect, they chose to collaborate.

Some of Wiesel's exact words in Night are:

"The choice was in our hands. For once we could decide our fate for ourselves. We could both stay in the hospital, where I could, thanks to my doctor, get him [the father] entered as a patient or nurse. Or else we could follow the others. 'Well, what shall we do, father?' He was silent. 'Let's be evacuated with the others,' I told him."

Elie's tale in this regard is corroborated by other "survivor" accounts including that of Primo Levi. In Levi's book Survival in Auschwitz, we have his words for January 17th, 1945:

"It was not a question of reasoning: I would probably also have followed the instinct of the flock if I had not felt so weak: fear is supremely contagious, and its immediate reaction is to make one try to run away."

But he's talking here about running away with the 'Nazis'--and not 'Nazis' who were mere rank and file party members but supposedly the worst of the worst. He's talking here about running away with the same 'Nazis' and SS who had supposedly carried out the greatest imaginable mass murders of Jews and others in the entire history of the universe. He's talking about running away with the people who supposedly did the actual killings of thousands daily for several years. But, according to his own words he would probably have gone with them nonetheless, except that he was not feeling good that day; he was feeling weak. The "fear" that he overcame was clearly fear of the Russians and not the 'Nazis;' there is no mention of fear of what the 'Nazis' and SS might do when the evacuees entered the forest or sometime later.

The choices that were made here in January 1945 are enormously important. In the entire history of Jewish suffering at the hands of gentiles what moment in time could possibly be more dramatic than this precious moment when Jews could choose between, on the one hand, liberation by the Soviets with the chance to tell the whole world about the evil 'Nazis' and to help bring about their defeat--and the other choice of going with the 'Nazi' mass murderers and to continue working for them and to help preserve their evil regime. In the vast majority of cases, they chose to go with the 'Nazis'.

The momentous choice brings Shakespeare's Hamlet to mind:

"To remain, or not to remain; that is the question: to remain and be liberated by Soviet troops and risk their slings and rifles in order to tell the whole world about the outrageous 'Nazis'--or, take arms and feet against a sea of cold and darkness in order to collaborate with the very same outrageous 'Nazis.' Oh what heartache--ay there's the rub! Thus conscience does make cowards of us all."

So what was the final score--here a drum roll seems fitting in the background as Vanna White comes onto the stage with the sealed envelope and the answer to the great riddle. The envelope is torn open and the choice is--drum roll again--according to Levi himself 800 choose to remain in Auschwitz, but 20,000 choose to go and collaborate with the 'Nazi' mass murderers. Wow! Such a surprise--already!

We see the same deliberate pro-'Nazi' collaboration in the "survivors" from Schindler's List. In their well-known story, as the Russians were about to overrun Plaszow just thirty miles down the road to the east from Auschwitz in November 1944, Schindler and more than a thousand Jews chose to go west with the retreating 'Nazis' rather than hang back and be "liberated" by the Soviets. Some even spent the next several weeks at Auschwitz--and none were gassed, not even in the movie. ...

{end}

I cut this where Berg launched into his "Nazi Gassings Never Happened" line. Here is a letter I wrote to him:

hoaxbuster@earthlink.net
Paul,

I don't agree with you that Nazi Gassings never happened.

Nevertheless, your quote from Elie Wiesel's book Night is important.

Can I suggest that you expand the quote, so that the reader can get the sequence better.

It would be best to scan several pages in - some before and some after this critical quote.

And to insert page-numbers. I add page numbers like this: ...

{p. 127} The failure of the animals to provide an adequate companionship for Adam is given as the reason for the creation of woman. ...

{endquote}

I suggest you also scan in corroborating material and present it in the same way.

You will have more impact if you do not overdo your own commentary. You want Wiesel's words to linger in the reader's mind - don't blot them out with your own strident statements.

By the way, I can think of a REASON for Wiesel's decision.

Wiesel and other Jews in the camp at this point must have been from those selected as healthy enough to work in the arms factories etc.

Gassings had stopped long before; the Nazis had destroyed the Gas Chambers so that the Russians would not find incriminating evidence.

Wiesel was faced with a choice between the "Devil he Knew" and an Unknown.

It's true the Russians came as Liberators. But going West with the Germans meant they were approaching the Americans, who were also coming as Liberators.

{Paul Berg was not part of the Debate, but he replied to my letter above}

From: hoaxbuster <hoaxbuster@earthlink.net> Date: 06.05.2009 07:31 PM

The Elie Wiesel quote I used is from page 78 of Night, Bantam Books, copyrighted 1960. This edition, it seems, is almost universally available. The cover even claims the book is "nonfiction."

Page 77 includes some discussion of the imminent "evacuation" and the possible consequences. Although the "faceless one" insisted that Hitler was going to "annihilate" the Jews and kill all the invalids, Elie rejected that advice. At the top of page 78, Elie tells us that he was "not thinking of death" but did not want to be separated from his father. If he wasn't even thinking death, then it seems that he could not have been worried about being killed by the Nazis in the camp or during the "evacuation" either.

Another noteworthy part of Night is page 31 where Elie describes his arrival in Auschwitz at night and how he and his father were marched, step by step, to a flaming pit (without chains, or handcuffs, or any physical restraint). But, one moment before they were to be consumed in the flaming pit (no gas chambers required), Elie and his father "were ordered to turn to the left and made to go into a barracks."

Friedrich Paul Berg

(2) Deborah Lipstadt calls Norman Finkelstein "dirt"

http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/elsie-the-cow-chair-in-judeo-yenta-studies-denounces-finkelstein-on-npr/

Elsie the Cow Chair in Judeo-Yenta Studies Denounces Finkelstein on NPR

Editor's note: Replying to a caller's question about Finkelstein, Elsie mooed:

"Think of him as the dirt you step in on the street and you know what kind of dirt I'm talking about. It has no importance unless you fail to clean it off your feet before you go into the house."

Reader letters follow article.

For Deborah Lipstadt's comments on Finkelstein go to 26:55 in the audio:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5226811

"Austrian Court Jails Historian Who Denied Holocaust."

(Audio for this story available on the NPR site)

Talk of the Nation, February 21, 2006 · An Austrian court sentences British historian David Irving to three years in prison Monday, for the crime of denying the holocaust. Guests examine whether or not anti-Nazi laws are needed more than 60 years after the end of World War II.

Guests:

Derek Scally, Berlin correspondent for the Irish Times

Deborah Lipstadt, professor of Modern Jewish and Holocaust Studies at Emory University in Atlanta

Mark Weitzman, director, Task Force against Hate, the Simon Wiesenthal Center

Reader letters

From: bkasten[at]octavian.net To: normangf[at]hotmail.com Subject: Letter to NPR Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 17:31:17 -0600

Mr. Finkelstein,

FYI, after being deeply disturbed over the comments "allowed to pass" on yesterday's "Talk of the Nation," I felt compelled to send this email to NPR:

ÑÑÑÑÑÑ

The Talk of the Nation episode of February 21, 2006, had a deeply and truly appalling moment­one in which the guest Prof. Deborah Lipstadt was allowed, without comment or notice on the host's part, to make particularly distasteful and vulgar comments about Prof. NormanFinkelstein.

The comment: "Think of him as the dirt you step in on the street and you know what kind of dirt I'm talking about. It has no importance unless you fail to clean it off your feet before you go into the house."

Éall passing without notice or comment on the host's part. And, indeed, a muffled chuckle may have been heardÉ

Robert B. Kasten ...

(3) Transcript of NPR interview where Lipstadt calls Finkelstein "dirt"

http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=5226811

May 5, 2009

Austrian Court Jails Historian Who Denied Holocaust

(Because of intense interest in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, NPR makes available free transcripts of its coverage. View related web coverage or listen to the audio for this story.)

Talk of the Nation: February 21, 2006

NEAL CONAN, host:

This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan in Washington.

In Vienna yesterday, controversial British historian David Irving was sentenced to three years in prison for denying the Holocaust during a visit to Austria 17 years ago. ...

Joining us now from a BBC studio in Rome is Deborah Lipstadt, professor of modern Jewish and Holocaust studies at Emery University in Atlanta. As you just heard, in 2000, David Irving sued her for libel for describing him as a Holocaust denier. Irving lost that case, and many say, all of his professional reputation.

Professor Lipstadt wrote a book about the experience, called, History on Trial: My Day in Court with David Irving.

Welcome to TALK OF THE NATION.

Professor DEBORAH LIPSTADT (Modern Jewish and Holocaust studies, Emery University): Thank you, Neal. It's a pleasure being here.

CONAN: What's your reaction to the conviction and sentence yesterday?

Professor LIPSTADT: Well, let me say this, first and foremost, generally, I'm against laws that censor. I don't believe in censorship, I don't, I'm a free speech tradition, as most Americans are, and I don't, but also, I don't think censorship is efficacious. I think that, certainly, in the case of Holocaust denial, we won my case, in which David Irving was trying to curtail my freedom of speech and force me to pulp my books and, you know, apologize to him, but we won not by relying on the law, we won by relying on history, on facts, on material evidence, on interviews. ...

CONAN: Let's see if we can get another caller on the line. This is Rick, Rick's calling us from Marin in California.

RICK (Caller): Yeah, hi. Deborah, I was fortunate enough to hear Anthony Julius, your lawyer, speak on the case. I was actually living in England for a couple of years when it happened, so I followed it pretty closely, and, actually, this evening, I'm teaching a class on neo-anti-Semitism at Berkeley JCC out here, and in that class, we'll look at the cartoons, the anti-Semitic cartoons, and for the first time, I'm going to look at the Danish cartoons and see if we can judge them by the standards of neo-anti-Semitism.

My question for you is, to what extent do you think Holocaust denial is part of the new anti-Semitism, and how do you respond to people like Norman Finkelstein and Alexander Coburn {sic - should be Cockburn} and Chomsky on the issues of the, not so much Chomsky, but certainly the first two, on the issues of the Holocaust?

Professor LIPSTADT: First of all, I do think you're right. I do think Holocaust denial is part of this new form of anti-Semitism. It's been wrapped up into it. But one of the things that's happened in the past couple of years, certainly in the "Western" quote-unquote world, in part, not wholly, but in part as a result of the loss Irving suffered in, in his case against me, was that Holocaust denial has been pretty much discredited, so that anti-Semites who begin to rely on that tend to look more like fringe, sometimes kooks, than they look like serious people raising serious anti-Semitic issues. Someone who's really canny and smart about, or is going to play it smart about trying to spread anti- Semitism, is going to tend to stay away from Holocaust denial.

The one place where it has been on the ascendancy, as someone mentioned earlier, is in the Arab/Muslim world, as exemplified certainly by the president of Iran. In terms of Norman Finkelstein, I don't pay him much mind. He doesn't, he really, he's a child of Holocaust survivors, and he's milked that position, to my mind, to use it as a way of attacking Israel. He's defended David Irving, not so much for what he says, but as a victim. During my trial, he came out in support of David Irving, etcetera, so you know, at one point during my trial, you mentioned Anthony Julius, who was my lawyer in England and who was just absolutely terrific, he was...

CONAN: And we just have a few seconds left.

Professor LIPSTADT:...an architect of the case, but at one point, Anthony Julius said to me about David Irving, and I would say the same thing about Norman Finkelstein, think of him as the dirt you step in, in the street, and you know what kind of dirt I'm talking about, it has no importance unless you fail to clean it off your feet before you go into the house.

CONAN: Thank you very much for the call, Rick.

RICK: Thank you!

CONAN: Deborah Lipstadt, thank you very much for being with us today.

Professor LIPSTADT: You're welcome. Thank you for having me, Neal.

CONAN: Deborah Lipstadt, a professor of modern Jewish and Holocaust studies at Emory University, author of History on Trial: My Day in Court with David Irving. She joined us from a BBC studio in Rome. Mark Weitzman, thank you for your time, as well.

Mr. WEITZMAN: Thanks for having me. It was a pleasure.

CONAN: Mark Weitzman of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, with us from our bureau in New York. When we come back from the break, the story of an al-Qaeda would-be suicide bomber. This is NPR News. Copyright ©2007 National Public Radio®

(4) Memoirs of Rudolph Hoss - "your ignorant and foolish comments"

From: patrick <patrickh@ymail.plala.or.jp> Date: 05.05.2009 07:57 AM

I was saddened and disappointed by your ignorant and foolish comments appended to the Hoss Document. Saddened and disappointed because reading your comments was like watching an influential and respected person degrading himself.

Whether the documents are genuine, i.e. actually written by Hoss, is unimportant. There are at least three other issues that are crucial: torture, personal and reflective style, and forensic evidence.

1. torture: There is no question that Hoss was tortured, but you seem to take an Alan Dershowitz view that that is not so important and then immediately babble about writing style. I thought that evidence tortured out a witness was unacceptable in Western jurisprudence until, of course, the neo-Kahns torpedoed out legal system and turned it into a jewdicature.

2. personal and so reflective style: Have you read the moving personal testimonials of such important Hoaxoco$t witnesses as Benjamin Wilkomirsky, Jerzy Kosinsky, etc. who were later esposed as liars, fakes, charlatans? Your amateurish opinions dealing with literature and document analysis are totally irrelevant to any serious and honest discussion of issues related to the Nuremburg Show Trials.

3. forensic evidence: Let`s just imagine that the Hoss documents are not only genuine and that Hoss was not tortured or even inconvenienced. Let`s imagine that he showed up voluntarily to the criminal Judeo-Bolsheviks and Judeo-Amis running the post-war show trials and wanted to "confess". It happens occasionally that someone appears and accuses himself of serious crimes he never committed. Now if someone appeared at a police station and accused himself of murdering 6,000,000 Jews, would the police just say thank you, have him sign a confession, and then string him up. I think not. They would first investigate whether there in fact had been any such crime and then secondly investigate whether the self-accuser was in fact the criminal. Now these two steps, i.e. investigate whether there was any such crime and whether the unfortunate Hoss had committed the crime, were never taken. There is absolutely no forensic evidence whatsoever Horrendous crimes cannot be proven simply by documents. There must be some forensic and physical evidence that the crime actually took place. There is absolutely no evidence that a single Jew was gassed to death at Arschwitz. There are only millions of false statements that millions of Jews were gassed to death.

Cum ira et studio, Dr. Patrick Henry McNally ----------------------

{Patrick's letter then quotes my words, as follow}

Comment by Peter Myers: why I put this material online. http://mailstar.net/Hoss-Memoirs.html

This book is about an event deemed pivotal in history. Media documentaries and movies on it, having a hectoring, nagging tone, have no impact on deniers. Jewish ownership of the media, and Israel's use of this event for what Norman Finkelstein dubbed the "Holocaust Industry", only harden the sceptics.

Deniers like Robert Faurisson dismiss Hoss' Memoirs as written under duress, even torture. But Hoss was not the ONLY leading Nazi put on trial at Nuremberg. The others would have been given the same treatment, yet none of them produced a Memoir so personal and so reflective.

Interrogators can get prisoners to sign statements admitting guilt, but not to make such detailed revelations as Hoss does here.

Let the Reader judge for him/her self. If, like me, you find these Memoirs genuine, then placing them online has been justified.

I believe that Sceptics and Deniers who read this document are more likely to be convinced by it than by all the Hollywood propaganda.

Reply to Patrick (Peter M.):

Hoss says the Nazis chose Gas Chambers because they were a MORE HUMANE way of killing than mass shootings. Cyclon B killed everyone within a short time. Before entry, the victims were kept ignorant, so that they would not cause trouble; but this also reduced the time of their suffering.

From the viewpoint of someone about to be killed, a Gas Chamber is no worse than bullets, nuclear bombs, cruise missiles, White Phosphorus fired from a drone, being left to die in the snow, being thrown into a raging cold river, being thrown to sharks in the ocean, being burned alive in a crowded building, being infected with deadly disease-germs, being fed poison in a gift of wheat-flour.

It was the Nazis' cold precision that seems so wanton. But the mindset of Israel's generals, & the Neocons, is no different. Cold Warriors were insensitive to the suffering of the other side. During the Korean war, the US shot refugees fleeing south, because they thought that North Korean soldiers might be disguised among them: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/29/AR2006052900914.html

Benjamin Freedman's talks supply small details suppressed from History that make Nazi grievances about Jews comprehensible. Even so, Jews fall into various camps; there was no reason for a blanket exclusion. If the Strasser brothers had been able to topple Hitler, German National Socialism would not have taken the path of exclusion, violence and expansionist wars. Otto Strasser hoped for peaceful federation of European countries, not conquest. Why aren't we talking about him instead of Hitler?

The Soviet Union in the Postwar years developed a different solution to Jewish attempts at domination (eg the 1946 Baruch Plan for World Government). This was to keep them IN. They were allowed to prosper in the Professions, but kept out of sensitive government posts: http://mailstar.net/slezkine.html.

(5) On the Mossad Payroll? Wish they'd pay better

From: Ardeshir Mehta <ardeshir@mac.com> Date: 06.05.2009 04:16 PM Subject: Re: [news_sense] Peter Myers

On 5-May-09, at 1:54 PM, Theon wrote:

> Am I alone in detecting stock propaganda straight from Prof Shitlips' Mossad Phrase Book permeating Peter Myers' language these days? E.g. "the Nazis had destroyed the Gas Chambers so that the Russians would not find incriminating evidence.".

You are not alone.

Reply (Peter M.):

aaarghinternational@hotmail.com
Serge & Ardeshir,

Are you implying that Norman Finkelstein and Kevin McDonald work for Mossad too?

Lipstadt & Dershowitz attacked Finkelstein just as much as Irving. Lipstadt even said that Finkelstein was a WORSE threat.

She calls Finkelstein a "SOFT" Denier. Because he accepts the Holocaust but rejects the Industry.

This is what anti-Denial has got to. The vendetta against Finkelstein shows the Industry ast its worst - it's indefensible.

Anti-Zionism is weakened, not strengthened, by attaching it to Denial.

Yad Vashem published Browning's book The Origins of the Final Solution. Perhaps they did not realise that he, when writing on his own, does not use the term "the Holocaust"; he only uses the expression "Final Solution". Browning's co-writer Matthaus, author of Chapter 7, uses "the Holocaust". When Browning and Matthaus write jointly, in the Preface and in pp. 234-243 of Chapter 6, both "Holocaust" and "Final Solution" are used.

In the Index (p. 596), the entry for "Holocaust" says "See Final Solution to the Jewish Question".

Similarly, Arno J. Mayer uses the word "Judeocide" in place of the ideologically-loaded word "Holocaust".

Pressac, in his English-language book, also does not use the term "the Holocaust". But those who bought the copyright do use it, eg by placing his book on their "Holocaust History Project" website.

These may seem minor points, but I think they hint at a world of meaning. These leading authors reject the Industry. They are on Finkelstein's side. And Hilberg is too.

This is where the debate should be focused now - exposing the Industry, without rejecting the Judeocide/ Final Solution.

Browning shows, contrary to Lipstadt in Denying the Holocaust, that Nazi policy on Jews was not originally genocidal - that emigration was the earlier option.

He explains Nazi disdain for Slavs (including Poles) as originating in World War I propaganda, when Germany & the Russian Empire were in a bitter struggle.

He calls Nazi-occupied Poland a laboratory where racial policy (on Poles, other Slavs, & Jews) was worked out in an evolutionary process.

The Nazis do not come out very attractively there. It's in keeping with Otto Strasser's earlier warnings.

They are not a model for us today - that's the lesson. Neither is the Soviet Union - the Lenin/Trotsky period, the Stalin period, or post-Stalin. Except perhaps for the Gorbachev period, when the Totalitarian features were dismantled.

Last week, I found this photo of Gorbachev in a large book of photos about life in the USSR (1987): http://mailstar.net/GorbachevShevardnadze.jpg

It's also at http://mailstar.net/GorbachevShevardnadze.gif

The caption reads:

{quote} General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev leans on his desk as he and Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze await the arrival of French Prime Minister Jacques Chirac. May 15th was a busy day for the General Secretary, who commutes from his home on the western outskirts of Moscow to his Kremlin office between 9 and 10 in the morning and stays until 8 p.m. Gorbachev's vigorour style takes him on the road more often than his predecessors, making him unusally visible for a Soviet leader. Private portrats are extremely rare, however, and veteran Soviet photographer Yuri Abramochkin was given only 90 seconds to capture this image.

{end} From: A Day in the Life of the Soviet Union, 1987, Collins Publishers.

This rare photo is much more personal than other photos of world leaders. It shows Gorbachev's own desk - his intimate space - and it looks very simple & humble, considering that he was the leader of a superpower. Who would believe, looking at this photo, that the Soviet Union would be gone four years later?

It's time to dispassionately review ALL the Socialist experiments (Left and Right) to consider where they went wrong; and their good points too. The Finance systems of those regimes are of particular importance - they may offer a way out of the current impasse.

(6) New Website to Counter 'Holocaust Denial'

From: IHR News <news@ihr.org> Date: 07.04.2009 06:05 PM

New Website Set to Counter 'Holocaust Denial'

The Associated Press

http://www.cjp.org/page.aspx?id=197435

A new website aimed at curbing Holocaust denial will include a history of Muslim-Jewish relations in English, French, Arabic and Farsi, the project's organizers said before the project's launch on Friday by prominent figures from Europe and the Muslim world. The initiative, called Project Aladdin, hinges on the Internet site, which is also to carry a history of the Holocaust and offer online Arabic and Farsi translations of books including "Anne Frank's Diary," the organizers said ... The initiative, which was to be launched at UNESCO's Paris headquarters, is partially sponsored by France's Foundation for the Memory of the Shoah.

Comment (Peter M.):

The implicit assumption is that Islamic Fundamentalism is based on Holocaust Denial.

But Islamic Fundamentalism is a reaction to Zionism. It is sustained by Israel's ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians and wars against its neighbours.

The West has abandoned its Christian religious states, but Israel was created as a religious state whose official calendar is the Jewish Calendar based on Creation 6,000 years ago. The Jewish religion is taught in Israeli schools.

The Islamic world has its secularist wing; but Israel gives a counter-example.

The current Intifada began on Sept 28, 2000, when Sharon took 1,000 riot police to the Temple Mount, just after Barak announced that Israel was considering placing that area in UN hands.

The Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade is enervated by Jewish aspirations to build the Third Temple on the site of the Dome of the Rock: http://mailstar.net/dome.html

That small piece of land is the most dangerous place in the world, because of this conflict. And it will not go away.

I was going to buy a copy of Wiesel's book Night. Then I discovered that the Yiddish edition, which came out first, reported with implicit approval, that young Jewish men, freed from Nazi camps, went around raping German girls - systematically as an act of vengeance. A collective payback akin to the Nazis' own collective punishment.

This information was removed from the English and other editions. Only the Yiddish edition has it. (items 12 & 13)

(7) On the Mossad Payroll? - Shamir's middle ground

From: Israel Shamir <info@israelshamir.net> Date: 06.05.2009 11:18 AM

Dear Peter,

re Serge and Ardeshir's remarks,

people are free to hold or change their assessments of history. Serge and Ardeshir's remarks are an attempt of intimidation. Let Peter go his way into forming his perspective. Peter is doing a huge project, and supplies so many people with information. We should be grateful to him, instead of trying to intimidate into silence. As far as I understood the H debate (now online) did not convince Peter in Serge's view of things. Quite all right, Serge and other friends should bite the bullet and live with it, instead of pouring abuse.

As for the subject of the debate, it would be illegal for me, as a resident of Israel and a frequent visitor to Europe, to have any opinion of the H but the permitted one - but one may chose having no opinion at all in such a situation.

I propose a religion-based attitude: I deny H as Abraham denied idols. The advantage is that I do not have to be interested whether Jews were killed, how and by whom. For me it is irrelevant. To the question "Do you deny H?" I reply with "Do you deny God?"

Probably all of us could agree that God is more important than any idol like H...

Shamir

(8) On the Mossad Payroll? - more from Patrick

{Patrick replies to my statements, indicated by '>'}

From: patrick <patrickh@ymail.plala.or.jp> Date: 06.05.2009 11:40 AM

> Norman Finkelstein and Kevin McDonald are not Deniers. And Professor Faurisson and I are also not deniers. We are affirmers, i.e. we affirm that there is no compelling evidence to merit belief in the story about 6,000,000 Jews being murdered during WW2.

> Lipstadt & Dershowitz attacked Finkelstein just as much as Irving. Lipstadt even said that Finkelstein was a WORSE threat. She calls Finkelstein a "SOFT" Denier. Because he accepts the Holocaust but rejects the Industry.

Lipstadt is an evil foul-mouthed propagandist, e.g. her disgusting comment about Finkelstein being doggy doo-doo.

> This is what anti-Denial has got to. The vendetta against Finkelstein shows the Industry ast its worst - it's indefensible. No, it does not show the Industry at its worst. The imprisonment of Germar Rudolf and the state-terrorist JewState's massacre of Palestinians show Jews (not just the Industry) at their worst.

> Anti-Zionism is weakened, not strengthened, by attaching it to Denial. I am not so much interested in anti-Zionism as in anti-Semenism, i.e. opposition to the psychotic Jewish belief in their sacred semen or Holy Seed. Zionism directly attacks only the Palestinians, but Semenism (or Semitism or Jewish Supremacy) and Talmudic Jewdayism attack all humans.

> Yad Vashem published Browning's book The Origins of the Final Solution. Perhaps they did not realise that he, when writing on his own, does not use the term "the Holocaust"; he only uses the expression "Final Solution". ... Similarly, Arno J. Mayer uses the word "Judeocide" ... Pressac, in his English-language book, also does not use the term "the Holocaust". ... These leading authors reject the Industry. They are on Finkelstein's side. And Hilberg is too. "A rose is a rose is a rose... and the Holocaust by any other name is stil a filthy anti-human LIE!

I do not care about the Industry because it mainly embezzles money from the Little Jews. Of course, billions from gentile banks also. But even if there were no Industry, there would still be the unspeakably foul lies and crimes that Jews have committed against Gentiles, starting with the Germans, Palestinians, and on through all of Europe. Thank God for the Holocaust Industry because it gets even Jews to think about the Hoax of the millenia!

> This is where the debate should be focused now - exposing the Industry, without rejecting the Judeocide/ Final Solution. Browning shows, contrary to Lipstadt in Denying the Holocaust, that Nazi policy on Jews was not originally genocidal - that emigration was the earlier option.

I am not interested in any intra-Judaic squabbles between the ideological lackeys of the Holocaust Industry. I refuse to be distracted from the central issue of the Arshwitz gas chamber accusation.

> He explains Nazi disdain for Slavs (including Poles) as originating in World War I propaganda, when Germany & the Russian Empire were in a bitter struggle. He calls Nazi-occupied Poland a laboratory where racial policy (on Poles, other Slavs, & Jews) was worked out in an evolutionary process. The Nazis do not come out very attractively there. It's in keeping with Otto Strasser's earlier warnings. Hitler lost the war for himself because of his crazy anti-Russian racism. This is also the viewpoint of many German nationalists today.

> ... It's time to dispassionately review ALL the Socialist experiments (Left and Right) to consider where they went wrong; and their good points too. The Finance systems of those regimes are of particular importance - they may offer a way out of the current impasse.

Yes, I cannot agree too strongly with this your concluding statement. And especially the finance and monetary systems of the two states with their rejection of privately owned and foreign dominated central banking systems. Jim Condit made a fascinating video on this theme with the title, "The Final Solution to Adolf Hitler." I do not accept all his viewpoints but the DVD is certainly worthy watching.

I first went to the Soviet Union in 1966 for five weeks on a Russian language study program. I was shocked at the high standard of living the people, i.e. high in comparison to the image painted by the Western press and in comparison to the reality of the central areas of Detroit where I lived at the time.

The collapse of the Soviet Union was a victory for Ziojnist Jews but a disaster for many, many small ethnicities that lived as protected enclaves within the Soviet Union. They were much better off than Indian reservations and black ghettos in the USA.

If Gorbachev was not a CIA agent, then he certainly acted like one. He was a naive bungler who betrayed his peoples over into the hands of the scum of the Soviet society and the international capitalist gang-banksters. Thank you, Patrick Henry McNally

(9) Disaggregation of the Six Million Total - from Syd Walker

From: Syd Walker Date: 06.05.2009 02:31 AM

I understand you consider yourself a 'Holocaust Affirmer' and are pleased to wear that badge

I wonder if you could assist me.

I've been trying to find a breakdown of the claimed Jewish casualties during World War Two.

An Australian court, as you know, affirmed the six million total during the Toben case.

Can you explain to me what the total is based on? At which locations did these people die - and in each case, what were the principle causes of death?

I don't like to bother you unnecessarily - but I've found it surprisingly hard to come up with references via the web that clarify this, from an 'affirmer' perspective. Perhaps I haven't looked in the right places?

Reply (Peter M.):

> a breakdown the claimed Jewish casualties > during World War Two.

I have no particular interest in the 6 Million figure; I consider it a distraction.

I don't recall seeing Finkelstein, Pressac or Browning making much of it.

Hilberg, regarded as the most eminent scholar in the field, came up with 5.1 million, in the third & final edition of his book. I quote his words and give his compilation below.

Apart from giving that figure, which is NOT 6 MILLION, Hilberg explains how the figures are calculated, and says that there is a large margin for error.

He does not make a Sacred Cow of the 6 Million figure; and nor do I.

Who does? The Industry. It has made a mantra of this figure; and mantras appeal to sub-rational parts of the mind. But the Deniers also fasten onto it, as if by demolishing that Mythic figure they can disprove the Nazi genocide and Gas Chambers.

I scanned parts of Hilberg's book months ago, and had intended putting relevant bits online. But then I came across Pressac, Browning and Hoss, and put them up instead. I was not going to bother with the 6 Million figure, so unimportant did I consider it.

Your question has forced me to revisit my Hilberg material. I will only bother with the bits relevant to your question.

It's an instance of the dialectical process at work.

(10) Raul Hilberg calculates 5.1 Million; and explains the origins of the 6 Million figure

The Destruction of the European Jews

Third Edltion

Volume III

By Raul Hilberg

2003: Yale University Press/New Haven and London

{p. 1321} TABLE B-2

DEATHS BY COUNTRY

Poland up to 3,000,000
USSR over 700,000
Romania 270,000
Czechoslovakia 260,000
Hungary over 180,000
Germany 130,000
Lithuania up to 130,000
Netherlands over 100,000
France 75,000
Latvia 70,000
Yugoslavia 60,000
Greece 60,000
Austria over 50,000
Belgium 24,000
Italy (including Rhodes) 9,000
Estonia over 1,000
Norway under 1,000
Luxembourg under 1,000
Danzig under 1,000

Total 5,100,000

Note: Borders refer to 1937. Converts to Christianity are included, and refugees are counted with the countries from which they were deported.

TABLE B-3

DEATHS BY YEAR

1933-1940 under 100,000
1941 1,100,000
1942 2,600,000
1943 600,000
1944 600,000
1945 over 100,000

Total 5,100,000

Note: Rounded to the nearest 100,000.

{p. 1301} APPENDIX B

STATISTICS OF JEWISH DEAD

On November 26, 1945, a former Sturmbannfuhrer in the Security Service, Dr. Wilhelm Hottl, signed an affidavit in which he described a conversation with Adolf Eichmann in Budapest at the end of August 1944. On the occasion, according to Hottl, Eichmann had told him that six million Jews had been killed, four million of them in camps and two million in other ways, particularly in the course of shootings during the campaign against the USSR. The International

1. Affidavit by Wilhelm Hottl, November 26,1945, PS-2738.

{p. 1302} Military Tribunal, in its judgment of September 30, 1946, cited the six million figure, attributing it to Eichmann without mention of Hottl.2

Eichmann may well have indicated six million,3 but at the meeting of his officers at the end of the war he had remarked that he would laughingly jump into his grave for the deaths of five million victims,4 and in 1961, at his trial in Jerusalem, he repeated the lower number.5

During his service in the Reich Security Main Office, Eichmann had collected numerous reports with statistics that could be added.6 After the war, Jewish organizations made their own calculations, but in a totally different manner. The principal method ofthese agencies was the subtraction of postwar data (including registrations) from prewar census figures or estimates. In a mimeographed unpublished compilation prepared in June 1945 by the Institute of Jewish Affairs in New York City, the death toll was 5,659,600 to 5,673,100, including 1,250,000 within the August 1939 boundaries of the USSR. The Soviet share was based on the assumption that originally there had been 2,100,000 Jewish inhabitants in that portion of the old territory which was to be occupied by the Germans, that Soviet authorities had evacuated half of the urban residents but a smaller percentage of the village population from this region, and that there was a residue of 30,000 survivors.7 A year later, Jakob Leszczynski of the World Jewish Congress came out with an overall total of 5,978,000 dead, including 1,500,000 Soviet Jews within the August 1939 frontiers.8

To this day, most of the published estimates have hovered between five and six million. Moreover, the methods of calculating the results have remained essentially the same. The numbers are extrapolated from the available, sometimes fragmentary reports of German agencies, satellite

2. Judgment, International Military Tribunal, Trial of the Major War Criminals XXII,496.

3. The same number was given in June 1944 by a Jewish emissary, Joel Brand, who had been sent out by Eichmann from Hungary for ransom negotiations with the Allies, to the Jewish Agency's Moshe Shertok. "Preliminary Report" by Moshe Shertok, June 27,1944, Weizmann Archives, Rehovoth, Israel.

4. Affidavit by Dieter Wlsliceny, November 29, 1945, in Office of United States Council for Prosecution of Axis Criminality, Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression, VIII, p.610.

5. Testimony by Eichmann, July 7 and 20,1961, Eichmann trial, English transcript, Session 88, p. H 1, and Session 105, pp. Ll 1, Mm 1. See also Eichmann's memoirs, Ich, Adolf Eichmann (Leoni am Starnberger See, 1980), pp. 460-61, 472-76.

6. Teshmony by Eichmann, July 6,1961, Session 87, p. Y 1.

7. Institute of Jewish Affairs, "Statistics of Jewish Casualties during Axis Domination " August 1945, in the library of the Institute.

8. Jakob Leszczynski, "Bilan de l'extemitation'' Congres Juif Mondial (Brussels, Paris, Geneva, June 1946).

{p. 1303} authorities, and Jewish councils, or they are refined from comparisons of prewar and postwar statistics. One must bear in rnind, however, that the raw data are seldom self-explanatory, and that their interpretation often requires the use of voluminous background materials that have to be analyzed in turn. Assumptions may therefore be piled on assumptions, and margins of error may be wider than they seem. Under these circum- stances, exactness is impossible.

(11) Soviet period - why not Khrushchev?

From: Eric Walberg <efgh1951@yahoo.com> Date: 06.05.2009 07:40 AM

>They are not a model for us today... Neither is the Soviet Union - the Lenin/Trotsky period, the Stalin period, or post-Stalin. Except perhaps for the Gorbachev period, when the Totalitarian features were dismantled.

why not the Khrushchev period? He effectively dismantled the totalitarian features of Stalinism but was faced with unremitting hostility from abroad and resentment by the Stalinists and was overthrown. Gorbachev was naive and forgot who the enemy was. He is no model, as his subsequent careers show.

Reply (Peter M.):

You're right. I've always liked Khrushchev, ever since he banged his shoe on the table at the UN. He had a common touch - he was a true peasant at heart.

In his Memoirs, he wrote:

Khrushchev Remembers (Tr. & ed. Strobe Talbot; Andre Deutsch, London, 1971)

{p. 394} But we knew that the number one goal which the English, American, and French would be pursuing in Geneva would be what they called "the reunification of Germany," which really meant the expulsion of Socialist forces from the German Democratic Republic: in order words, the liquidation of Socialism in the German Democratic Republic and the creation of a single capitalist Germany which would, no doubt, be a member of NATO. {endquote}

He was a bit more savvy than Gorbachev.

Kennedy was shot; but Brezhnev, when he toppled Khruschev, did it peacefully.

Khruschev was overthrown because he was blamed for the Sino-Soviet Split; but that continued anyway.

(12) Wiesel writes of young men, freed from the camps, going around "to rape German girls"

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/books/review/Donadio-t.html?pagewanted=print

January 20, 2008

The Story of ÔNight'

By RACHEL DONADIO

This fall, Elie Wiesel's "Night" was removed from the New York Times best-seller list, where it had spent an impressive 80 weeks after Oprah Winfrey picked it for her book club. The Times's news survey department, which compiles the list, decided the Holocaust memoir wasn't a new best seller but a classic like "Animal Farm" or "To Kill a Mockingbird," which sell hundreds of thousands of copies a year largely through course adoptions. Indeed, since it appeared in 1960, "Night" has sold an estimated 10 million copies Ñ three million of them since Winfrey chose the book in January 2006 (and traveled with Wiesel to Auschwitz). ...

Wiesel was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize the following year. The Nobel committee called Wiesel "a messenger to mankind," teaching "peace, atonement and human dignity." Wiesel's "commitment, which originated in the sufferings of the Jewish people, has been widened to embrace all repressed peoples and races." By the late '90s, "Night" was a standard high school and college text, selling around 400,000 copies a year.

Yet some critics have homed in on the very qualities that have helped "Night" find a broad readership. Some have criticized Wiesel for universalizing Ñ and even Christianizing Ñ Jewish suffering. In "The Holocaust in American Life" (1999), the historian Peter Novick cites crucifixion imagery in "Night" as evidence of the "un-Jewish" or Christian tenor to much Holocaust commemoration. Others have suggested Wiesel may have revised the book to appeal to non-Jewish readers. In a 1996 essay, Naomi Seidman, a Jewish studies professor at Berkeley's Graduate Theological Union, detected strong notes of vengeance in the Yiddish version. In the final scene, after the camp has been liberated, Wiesel writes of young men going into Weimar "to rape German girls." But there's no mention of rape in the subsequent French or English translations. Wiesel said his thinking had changed between versions. "It would have been a disgrace to reduce such an event to simple vengeance."

(13) Raping German girls: Elie Wiesel and the Scandal of Jewish Rage

http://www.radioislam.net/wiesel/eng/girls.htm

Elie Wiesel - Raping German girls: "a frivolous dereliction of the obligation to fulfill the "historical commandment of revenge."

April 8, 1999

Elie Wiesel University Professor and Andrew W. Mellon Professor in the Humanities Boston University 745 Commonwealth Avenue Boston, Massachusetts 02215 USA

Dear Mr. Wiesel:

I bring to your attention the following excerpts from Naomi Seidman's essay, Elie Wiesel and the Scandal of Jewish Rage. The event of central concern is the deal that you struck with French Catholic writer and Nobel Laureate François Mauriac at your meeting with him in 1954, which deal encompassed Mauriac launching your literary career, but at a price, referred to by Naomi Seidman below as a "transformation" in your writing.

François Mauriac launches your career.

{quote} What Mauriac gave Wiesel in return for this transformation was the weight of his moral authority and the power of his literary status. Mauriac found Wiesel a publisher, wrote his first and most glowing reviews, even dedicated his Life of Jesus to him, the "crucified Jewish child" (!); in short, Mauriac found and secured Wiesel the larger audience he wanted. And in conversation with Mauriac, Wiesel developed a language to talk about the Jewish genocide that could hold the attention of Jews and Christians, a considerable achievement indeed. (Naomi Seidman, Elie Wiesel and the Scandal of Jewish rage, Jewish Social Studies: History, Culture, and Society, Fall 1996, Volume 3, Number 1, p. 16, parenthesized exclamation mark was in the original) {endquote}

In return for two concessions.

(1) Stop talking about Jewish revenge:

{quote} The [1954] encounter [between Mauriac and Wiesel], it seems to me, could be described as a series of delicate negotiations, in which the survivor's first concession was to relinquish all talk (if not thought) of Jewish revenge ó and why not? As an author whose audience crossed ethnic boders, it made sense for Wiesel to suppress an impossible fantasy whose clearest effect would be to alienate Christians. (Naomi Seidman, Elie Wiesel and the Scandal of Jewish rage, Jewish Social Studies: History, Culture, and Society, Fall 1996, Volume 3, Number 1, p. 15) {endquote}

And here is the leading example of you making this concession in your description of events following the liberation of Buchenwald:

{quote} But the Yiddish [of Un di velt, your early version of Night] continues: "Early the next day, Jewish boys ran off to Weimar to steal clothing and potatoes. And to rape German girls [un tsu fargvaldikn daytshe shikses]. The historical commandment of revenge was not fulfilled." In French this passage reads: "Le lendemain, quelques jeunes gens coururent ? Weimar ramasser des pommes de terre et des habits ó et coucher avec des filles. Mais de vengeance, pas trace." Or, in Stella Rodway's English rendition: "On the following morning, some of the young men went to Weimar to get some potatoes and clothes ó and to sleep with girls. But of revenge, not a sign."

To describe the differences between these versions as a stylistic reworking is to miss the extent of what is suppressed in the French. Un di velt depicts a post-Holocaust landscape in which Jewish boys "run off" to steal provisions and rape German girls; Night extracts from this scene of lawless retribution a far more innocent picture of the aftermath of the war, with young men going off to the nearest city to look for clothes and sex. In the Yiddish, the survivors are explicitly described as Jews and their victims (or intended victims) as German; in the French, they are just young men and women. The narrator of both versions decries the Jewish failure to take revenge against the Germans, but this failure means something different when it is emblematized, as it is in Yiddish, with the rape of German women. The implication, in the Yiddish, is that rape is a frivolous dereliction of the obligation to fulfill the "historical commandment of revenge"; presumably fulfillment of this obligation would involve a concerted and public act of retribution with a clearly defined target. Un di velt does not spell out what form this retribution might take, only that it is sanctioned ó even commanded ó by Jewish history and tradition. (Naomi Seidman, Elie Wiesel and the Scandal of Jewish rage, Jewish Social Studies: History, Culture, and Society, Fall 1996, Volume 3, Number 1, p. 6) {endquote}

(2) And don't implicate the French in the Holocaust:

{quote} Wiesel's second concession was to narrow the target of his hatred to avoid accusing Mauriac or his countrymen of the crimes of complicity or silence. (Naomi Seidman, Elie Wiesel and the Scandal of Jewish rage, Jewish Social Studies: History, Culture, and Society, Fall 1996, Volume 3, Number 1, p. 15) . {endquote}

But I am left with four questions.

(1) Jewish vengeance? Naomi Seidman above leaves the decided impression that there exists within Jewish culture an inexorable call for vengeance. Thus, she cites your own words alluding to "the historical commandment of revenge," which she adds is "sanctioned ó even commanded ó by Jewish history and tradition." As I can recollect no comparable call for revenge within Ukrainian or Canadian or American cultures, I find this Jewish call for revenge surprising, and perhaps out of keeping with Western traditions, and wonder if you would be able to confirm its existence, and to elaborate on it?

(2) The target of Jewish vengeance is collective? It surprises me further that the Jewish call for vengeance is not limited to individuals guilty of wrongdoing against the Jewish people, but that it extends to all Germans, even those who are likely guiltless of any wrongdoing, such as German girls. Would you be able to confirm that Jewish vengeance does indeed extend broadly to all members of a national group in cases where some members of that group have committed crimes against the Jewish people?

(3) Raping German girls is too mild to constitute vengeance? Upon liberation, the Jews of Buchenwald ran off to rape German girls, and yet you view this action as insufficient to fulfill the Jewish historical commandment of revenge. I wonder if you would care to elaborate exactly what sort of actions would be severe enough to fulfill the Jewish historical commandment of revenge?

(4) Your literary career success has been a French protection payment? Naomi Seidman proposes the view that protection from Holocaust blame can be purchased from Jews in the same way that protection from arson can be purchased from the mafia, and that your career success has been the French payment for just such protection. Would you be able to confirm that Jewish leaders assign Holocaust blame not entirely on the basis of guilt, but also taking political favors into account? And would you care to comment on the possibility that Ukrainians have been singled out today to shoulder a disproportionate share of the blame for the Holocaust ó take the persecution of John Demjanjuk as a leading example of severe punishment applied in the absence of any provable wrongdoing ó simply because Ukrainians have as yet failed to offer Jews anything in compensation for their directing their historical commandment of revenge toward some other victims?

Yours truly,

Lubomyr Prytulak

(14) Hilberg a Denier? 5.1million? Tell German authorities

From: info@odeion.org Date: 07.05.2009 07:00 PM Subject: Re: Six Million?

You appear to have condemned yourself as a 'holocaust denier'. Your personal - and specious - definition of 'holocaust denial' is of no consequence to anyone. Go to Germany, go into a police station and tell the officer on duty that you are not convinced that six million Jews died in gas chambers on the orders of Adolph Hitler and that you think it was perhaps not more than 5.1 million. You will promptly be arrested and charged with 'holocaust denial'. Any number smaller than six million also automatically gets you classified as an 'antisemite' under US DHS rules. As the old English proverb has it, one might as well be hanged for a sheep as for a lamb. Perhaps the old English knew something that you don't.

Reply (Peter M.):

Then why hasn't Hilberg been prosecuted?

I think you'll find that those people who HAVE been prosecuted have not only denied the 6 Million figure, but also denied the Genocide Program and the Gas Chambers. That's what they're REALLY being prosecuted for.

The Lobby got Norman Finkelstein out of his job; but I doubt that he'd be prosecuted if he went to Germany.

As for me, who can say? As you know, I take an anti-Denier position. But I would not set foot in Central Europe, just in case. The Legal mind likes to find technicalities. They might object because my website even presents the other side - the side I oppose - in the Debate webpages. Toben is in there. Don't you think they'd get me for that, even though I'm refuting Toben's position?

(15) Soviet period - why not Khrushchev?

From: Joe Fallisi <flespa@tiscali.it> Date: 07.05.2009 08:15 AM

I's true that Khrushchev's father was a peasant and Khrushchev himself, probably "a peasant at heart". But it's sure that the same Khrushchev was, (not only) in his early years, a true traitor of Ukrainian peasants, collaborating to their genocide in 1932-33 (he was young and he had a small role in that, but he had - cfr. http://www.topix.com/forum/world/russia/ T8I87EVT26L1R3BM8). Then he betraied Stalin - and even probably, together woth Molotov, Kaganovich and Beria, he killed him. Nevertheless in his famous speech he didn't say, of course, anything about the Great Famine, the most horrendous mass slaughter accomplished by bolschevism-stalinism. No, I don't have admiration for this man. Neither for Gorbachev (on this subject I agree with Patrick Henry McNally).

Reply (Peter M.):

Yes, those sins are on Khrushchev's soul.

We all have a Debit side and a Credit side on our Ledger. What Eric Walberg & I were talking about is the Credit side of Khrushchev's Ledger.

If you look at what happened to the Soviet republics after 1991, then the Soviet system had its good side. Eric is saying that Khrushchev got rid of the Totalitarian features (as Gorbachev did later, after Brezhnev), but kept the economy strong and resisted Western propaganda.

The Ukraine famine happened because peasants resisted the Collectivization of their land.

Gorbachev wrote in one of his books - one I don't have - that in the East European communist countries the peasants were allowed to keep their own small farms: there was no Collectivization. This implies a lesson learned over Collectivization in the USSR.

So why did they collectize? It was part of Communist theory. You may remember that hardline Communists - not only Mao but many in the West - condemned Khrushchev as a "Revisionist", for allowing some private ownership and initiative.

In Stalin's time, Trotsky was on the sideline, calling the shots as it were. Since he branded Stalin a Traitor to the Revolution, Stalin had to prove himself. Collectivization was part of that.

When the Germans occupied Ukraine, they retained the Collective Farms. By that time, apparently, they were working well.

It may have been a mistake to break them up after 1991, if they were working well then too.

Even my Polish Catholic friend recently admitted that Poland's Communist Government was not too bad. "They let the people keep their small farms," he said. "And the Church still managed to function."

(16) Elie Wiesel and the Catholics - dialogue or monologue? Dispenser of Jewish Light?

From: Charles Krafft <whodareswings@yahoo.com> Date: 07.05.2009 11:52 AM Subject: Re: Elie Wiesel articles

http://www.culturewars.com/2004/Weisel.htm

Elie Wiesel and the Catholics

by David O'Connell

This article was published in the November, 2004 issue of Culture Wars magazine. Order

Elie Wiesel is widely admired by many of the Catholics who wield power in the diocesan chanceries and the administrations of the nation's Catholic schools and universities. He has received honorary degrees from a number of Catholic institutions, including Georgetown, Notre Dame, Fordham and Marquette. He is also fawned over by assorted Catholic intellectuals. He is accorded this treatment despite the fact that he plays a prominent role in exploiting the abusive relationship that exists between the representatives of the major Jewish Organizations and those Catholics who "dialogue" with them. In the 40 years since Vatican II, this alleged "dialogue," well intentioned at the beginning, has actually turned out to be a monologue in which the Jewish side ritually denounces Catholics and Catholicism while the Catholic representatives nod in approval. No serious criticism is ever made of Jews or Zionism. The dialogue, for instance, is strangely "silent" about the unrelenting Israeli war against the Christians of Palestine. In 1948, 18-20 percent of Palestinians were Christian. That figure is down to about 2 percent today. The Christian population of Bethlehem, once 95 percent, has dwindled to about 15 percent. Even worse, the "separation fence" now under construction cuts through many places that are holy to all Christians.

The role that Wiesel has assumed in the abusive relationship is to exploit his privileged access to the media to attack high value Catholic targets. In 1979, he attacked the Pope for not mentioning the word "Jew" while visiting the Auschwitz victims' monument, which also omitted the word. He also attacked the Pontiff for not mentioning the word "Israel" on his visit to the U. N. When the Pope invited him to come to Rome for a personal visit, Wiesel turned him down. Then, in 2000, he rebuked the Pontiff because his apology to Jews for past persecutions was not good enough.

His attacks against Cardinal O'Connor of New York, an honest, sincere and terribly naïve man, began in the 1980s. When O'Connor visited Jerusalem in 1987, he broke down in tears over Jewish suffering during World War II. Upset, he stated that this was a "gift." What he meant was that, in Catholic terms, it was a possible occasion of grace, as is all suffering. Wiesel and other New York Jewish figures ripped him in the media for his supposed bigotry and insensitivity. He and Wiesel then became "friends" when Wiesel came to visit him.1 Wiesel then convinced O'Connor to do an "interview" book with him. It was called Journey of Faith (1991), and in it the Cardinal was on the defensive from cover to cover. In 1997, he talked O'Connor into helping him dedicate the Jewish Holocaust Museum in New York City. While there, the Cardinal took it upon himself to "apologize" for all Catholics who had contributed to past Jewish suffering.2 Then, on September 8, 1999, very sick and not far from death's door, he wrote Wiesel a personal letter in which he made the same kind of "apology." Wiesel then paid $99,000 to turn the cardinal's private missive into a full-page ad in the Sunday New York Times on September 19. Strongly implied in each of O'Connor's gestures was the idea that Jewish suffering of World War II replicates the sufferings of Christ in the 20th century, an idea that a faithful Catholic simply cannot accept.3

Wiesel's relationship with Cardinal Jean-Marie Lustiger of Paris followed the same pattern in the 1990s. First he attacked Lustiger because he had converted to Catholicism as a boy, then he achieved reconciliation and finally "friendship" with him.

Wiesel also delights in desecrating what is for many Catholics the beloved memory of Pope Pius XII, routinely trashing him for his supposed "silence" during World War II. No other Jewish media voice even comes close to Wiesel in terms of the frequency and the vitriol of his insults to the Catholic memory of that Pope. Wiesel has been claiming for the past 35 years that Christianity died at Auschwitz. As early as 1971, he stated: "The sincere Christian knows that what died in Auschwitz was not the Jewish people but Christianity."4 Yet, the Catholic press, intellectuals and hierarchy treat Wiesel with reverence! To Wiesel (as well as to our disproportionately Jewish mediarchy), Jewish suffering during World War II has replaced the sufferings of Christ as the functioning paradigm of the post-Christian era. It is the media's benchmark, the sacred "burnt offering" of the secularists. As Rabbi Jacob Neusner has pointed out, "the Judaism of Holocaust and Redemption" has become the civil religion of America.5 Hardly a day goes by without the Judeo-corporate media producing an article, report, TV show or movie of some kind on the subject of the Holocaust and the dubious "lessons" we are supposed to draw from it. Media propaganda, both against Catholicism and in favor of the "specificity," or superiority of Jewish suffering, never stops.

Over the course of his career, Wiesel has told many tall tales about his alleged experiences during World War II. They can be called "true lies," since they are meant to edify and are told with supposedly good intentions, even though they are not true. In the following pages, I shall examine closely one of these "true lies." It has to do with his internment at Buchenwald. As I tell the story, it will become apparent to readers that I avoid using the word "Holocaust."6 Since that term is has become a media code word that is all too often used as a justification for the Jewish war crimes and crimes against humanity that are routinely committed in occupied Palestine, it is tainted. It is also associated with the scams and manipulations of various Jewish holocaust profiteers, of whom Wiesel himself is probably the most flagrant example. It also serves the purposes of the pro-Israel Judeo-corporate power structure, since it justifies foreign adventures to "prevent another Holocaust."7 I refer instead to the Jewish Ordeal of World War II (JOW) to describe the Nazi persecution of innocent Jews.

Wiesel's Credibility

But who is Elie Wiesel, and how is he related to the JOW? One Jewish commentator, Pierre Vidal Naquet, whose father died at Auschwitz, wrote of Wiesel: "For example, you have Rabbi Kahane, the Jewish extremist, who is less dangerous than a man like Elie Wiesel, who says anything that comes to mind ... You just have to read parts of Night to know that certain of his descriptions are not exact and that he is essentially a Shoah merchant ... who has done harm, enormous harm, to historical truth."8 Another Jewish voice made the following comments on Wiesel's self-righteous autobiography: "Elie Wiesel's memoir is written by a man whose inner postures have gone so long unreviewed he cannot persuade us he is on a voyage of self-discovery, the first requirement of a testament. His book, I am sorry to say, gives being witness a bad name."9 Christopher Hitchens, taking issue with Wiesel for his silence about Jewish war crimes in Palestine, wondered out loud: "Is there any more contemptible poseur and windbag than Elie Wiesel? I suppose there may be. But not, surely, a poseur and windbag who receives (and takes as his due) such grotesque deference on moral questions."10

From November 1947 to January 1949, Wiesel worked for Zion in Kampf, the newspaper of the terrorist gangsters of the Irgun. The Irgun extermination of innocent Arabs at the village of Deir Yassin took place on April 8, 1948, while Wiesel was on the payroll, yet he is always appalled by Palestinian "terrorism." Likewise, while he was actively campaigning for a Nobel Prize in the 1980's, he made a trip to South Africa. Of course, the New York Times was there with him and recorded his ritual denunciation of apartheid. Yet Wiesel now strongly favors the apartheid wall being built in occupied Palestine even though it will impose additional inhuman hardships on the Palestinians. Even worse, he has attacked Pope John Paul II for proposing that what the Middle East needs is bridges, not walls, writing: "From the leader of one of the largest and most important religions in the world, I expected something very different, namely a statement condemning terror and the killing of innocents, without mixing in political considerations and above all comparing these things to a work of pure self-defense. To politicize terrorism like that is wrong."11 Ironically, the same Wiesel who accuses Pius XII of "silence" now wants Jean Paul II to be "silent" about Jewish war crimes in Palestine.

Wiesel and François Mauriac

Wiesel's claim to fame is his problematic "autobiography," Night, which is actually a novel, since it contains a good deal of invented material. It was first published in French in 1958, and was based on a much longer Yiddish version, which he had published under the title And the World Forgot (Und Di Velt hat Geshveyn) in Buenos Aires in December 1955. At a reception held at the Israeli embassy in May 1955, which Wiesel attended as a reporter for an Israeli newspaper, he approached the well-known Catholic novelist, newspaper chronicler, man of letters, and 1952 Nobel Prize winner, François Mauriac (1885-1970), and asked if he would consent to be interviewed.

Mauriac was a French right-wing nationalist by birth and upbringing. In his family in the early days of the 20th century, they referred to the bedroom's chamber pot as "le zola," since the Mauriacs were convinced, like many French people, that Dreyfus had been guilty despite the media campaign in is favor. But he changed political stripes in the mid-1930s, becoming a strong supporter of world Jewry. He continued this support through the war years and after, when he favored the creation of Israel. Then, in 1951, he was the first Catholic to accuse Pope Pius XII of "silence" during the war years. Amazingly, just two years later, when his career seemed dead, for he had not published a major piece if fiction since 1940, he was awarded the Nobel Prize for LiteratureÑfor his novels! The Parisian literati were stunned! How could this be, they wondered, especially at the height of the "existentialist" craze? One question they did not dare ask was the possible role of the Jewish lobby, so powerful with the Nobel Committee, in this decision. Was the Nobel Prize a payback for his support of Jewry through the years of World War II, as well as for waving an accusatory finger at Pius XII, who was still very much alive? I have not yet been unable to resolve this question.

In any case, Mauriac invited Wiesel to his home. They talked about the war years and the concentration camps. In fact, it seems clear in retrospect that this was the only subject Wiesel wanted to talk about. The two men became friends, and Mauriac told Wiesel he would help him find a publisher for his book. But his book was not only written in Yiddish, it was also several times longer than what would eventually become La Nuit. How did the transformation take place? Did Wiesel rewrite it, as he has always claimed, or did he get help from Mauriac? The answer to this question could probably be found in their voluminous correspondence, but Wiesel is in possession of both the letters received from Mauriac and the ones he wrote to his friend and benefactor. Wiesel sits on this correspondence and refuses to publish the letters, despite the entreaties of his rather naive liberal Catholic admirers.12

La Nuit became Night when it appeared in New York in 1960. With the backing of the ADL, it became mandatory reading in high schools shortly thereafter and has sold millions of copies since then. It contradicts Jewish holocaust dogma on many key points, and in fact is guilty of "holocaust denial" in this respect. Nevertheless, it remains the only "holocaust memoir" with any redeeming literary qualities (which brings us back once again to the question of who actually wrote the final draft of the book). In the meantime, Wiesel moved to New York, where he continued to work as a correspondent for an Israeli newspaper. Shortly after his arrival, he was struck by a car near Times Square. Given to exaggeration by nature, he later claimed: "I flew an entire block. I was hit at 45th Street and the ambulance picked me up at 44th. It sounds crazy. But I was totally messed up."13 Then, after the success of Night, he was awarded a tenured teaching position at a public institution, Hunter College. Despite his claims over the years about having studied philosophy and psychology at the Sorbonne and doing a two year internship at the Hôpital Sainte-Anne in clinical psychology, he actually never enrolled for any credit-bearing course at the Sorbonne, or any other branch of the University of Paris. Even worse, there is no evidence that he ever earned a French secondary school diploma. Yet, he now earns a huge six-figure salary as a year as a Mellon Professor of Literature at Boston University, a position that theoretically requires a Ph.D.

During the years from 1960 to 1967 the two men kept up a regular correspondence. After the conquest of Palestine in 1967, Mauriac voiced concern in his Bloc-Notes column in Le Figaro that the Israelis were now behaving more and more like Nazis. During the war, Mauriac had been obliged to give shelter to several German soldiers in his home for over four years, and he knew what occupation did to both occupier and occupied. The two men quarreled, and there were harsh words committed to paper. Wiesel would prefer nowadays not to revive this issue, for he probably wrote some things he is now ashamed of. Yet, for years he proclaimed he was going to some day publish the letters.14 But I believe there might be a much more important reason for the suppression of the correspondence, for it could possibly reveal Mauriac's active role in the redaction of La Nuit. After all, as Naomi Seidman has pointed out, La Nuit differs dramatically from the Yiddish original in length, tone, basic themes and meaning. She rightfully attributes this difference to Mauriac's "influence."15 But how do we define "influence?" While the Yiddish original appears to be hated-filled, dripping with a Jewish desire for vengeance against goyim, the latter is more oblique and restrained. In a word, it is a work of literature and, as such, implies the presence of a mature literary hand, like Mauriac's. Conversely, when one compares La Nuit to the many novels that Wiesel has written since then, the absence of a mature literary hand, like Mauriac's, is obvious. In France, La Nuit is mandatory reading in state-sponsored indoctrination classes, but none of his other novels are read in schools or taken seriously by critics. The same situation prevails in this country. In a word, La Nuit is totally different from anything else that Wiesel has written, and it is fair to ask if in fact Mauriac's influence went beyond the level of mere suggestion and advice. {cut short} ...

David O'Connell is a professor of French at Georgia State University in Atlanta.

Notes 1. Ari L. Goldman, "For Cardinal, Wiesel Visit Proved a Calm in Storm Over Trip," NYT, February 15, 1987, I, 67. 2. Brian Caulfield, "Holocaust Memorial: Cardinal Asks Forgiveness for Christians Who Turned Their Backs on Jews," Catholic New York, September 18, 1997, 14-15. 3. Brian Caulfield, "University Award: Cardinal Honored for Promoting Catholic Jewish Relations," Catholic New York, November 13, 1997, 12. "Although many Christians were persecuted by the Nazis, the cardinal said, only Jews were killed mainly because of their ethnic background. He stressed that he is 'passionately committed' to making the truth about the Holocaust known.'" Of course, this statement is absurd, for Nazi ideology was equally scornful of the Catholic Poles, whose country was supposed to provide living space for the Germans. Furthermore, an archbishop's primary responsibility is to proclaim Christ, not to tell the Jewish holocaust story. 4. "What is a Jew? Harry Cargas Interviews Elie Wiesel," U.S Catholic/Jubilee, September 1971, 28. 5. Jacob Neusner, "American Jews Embrace a Religion of Memory," St. Petersburg Times, April 12, 1999. This is why the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee, the New York Times and other media outlets were so one-sided and hateful in their attacks on Mel Gibson's Passion. He was not only reiterating the centrality of Christ's suffering for the redemption of all mankind, but in doing so he was also undermining our country's civil religion. It was no accident that various mediarchs repeatedly accused him of "Holocaust denial" for reasserting Christ over "Holocaust." It should be noted that the capital H in Holocaust underlines the racist assumption that other holocausts, whether they refer to the millions of victims in Ruanda, Armenia, Cambodia, the Stalinist Ukraine (in which Jewish commissars played a major role) or Palestine, are not important. 6. Limitations of space do not permit a description of how Wiesel, with the help of his mentor at the NYT, Abe Rosenthal, created the word in 1968 as a cover for the 1967 conquest and occupation of the rest of Palestine. Catholic victimhood at the hands of the Nazis, well documented at Nuremberg, was declared by Wiesel to be henceforth inoperative. Only Jews could be true victims of the Nazi "holocaust." 7. Bob Woodard, Plan of Attack, (New York, Simon & Schuster, 2004), 320-1. Woodward recounts Wiesel's visit to the White House in late February 2003, when Bush was still allegedly wavering in his decision to attack Iraq. After hearing Wiesel tell him that Israel's security was at stake, Bush made the decision easily. Americans must fight to protect Israel. Did Bush know at the time that Wiesel is on the CIA payroll, as he boasts in his autobiography? Wiesel, of course, had previously been a leading supporter of Clinton's bombing of Yugoslavia in 1998. 8. Pierre Vidal-Naquet, Zero [monthly magazine], avril 1987, 57. "Par exemple, vous avez le rabbin Kahane, cet extrémiste juif, qui est moins dangereux qu'un homme comme Elie Wiesel qui raconte N'IMPORTE QUOI ... Il suffit de lire certaine description de La Nuit pour savoir que certaines de ses descriptions ne sont pas exactes et qu'il finit par se transformer en marchand de Shoah ... Eh bien, lui aussi, porte un tort, un tort immense, à la vérité historique." 9. Vivian Gornick, "The Rhetoric of Witness: All Rivers Run To the Sea: Memoirs by Elie Wiesel," The Nation, December 25, 1995. 10. Christopher Hitchens, "Wiesel Words," The Nation, February 19, 2001. 11. Anon. "Wiesel Slams Pope's Comments," News24.com, November 17, 2003. 12. Eva Fleischner, "Mauriac's Preface to Night: Thirty Years Later,' America, November 19, 1988, 411, 419. 13. Clyda Haberman, "An Unoffical but Very Public Bearer of Pain, Peace and Human Dignity," NYT, March 5, 1997, C1. 14. Isreal Shenker, "The Concerns of Elie Wiesel: Yesterday and Today," NYT, February 10, 1970, 48. "The two became close friends, and Mr. Wiesel plans to publish a volume of their dialogueÑwhich have had strongly polemical moments, notably on the subject if Israel." 15. Naomi Seidman, "The Rage That Elie Wiesel Edited Out of Night," Jewish Social Studies, December, 1996. {cut short} ...

(17) Six Million? The importance of the numbers

From: DP Date: 07.05.2009 06:52 PM

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php/topic,3293426.msg31835966.html#msg31835966

The Sacred Nature of Six Million in the Judaic Religion

Why Six Million Victims cannot be Questioned

Michael Fishwick - 11th February 2009 (Our Lady of Lourdes)

After the destruction of the Temple (70AD), the rabbinic exegesis had replaced faith in the Mosaic Messiah with that of the 'collective messiah', which is the Jewish people. Christianity cannot accept the Jewish sacralization of the holocaust without the denial of its identity and faith. The only Holocaust is the sacrifice of Christ. To accept another 'holocaust' of salvation and 'meta-historical act' next to that of Jesus would be an act of apostasy. Unfortunately, the new Judaic theology of the council, and after the council, has taken hold of progressive Catholics. We hope and pray that this does not pollute Tradition. It is therefore a duty to warn the faithful shepherds. - Don Curzio Nitoglia, translated from Il Caso Williamson, 28 January 2009

Introduction

Some commentary on the statement of Fr. Nitoglia may be instructive in regard to understanding why the figure of Six Million Holocaust victims is sacred to the Jews.

The 'unquestioanable' number of Six Million Jewish holocaust victims is not based upon documented historic fact, not even particularly on demographic estimation, but above all is a mystical number that relates in a fundamental manner to the religious belief system of Judaism.

The New York based museum of Jewish heritage, for example, in regard to "the memory of the six million Jews who perished" reveals that: "Zachor, to remember, it is a sacred obligation" (my bold emphasis).

Examples of religious phraseology in regard to Six Million victims of The Holocaust are plentiful and easily found by simple internet searches.

On a purely natural level a Christian can understand that Jews might consider the suffering and death of Jewish victims of the Shoah (catastrophe) to be 'Kiddush Hashem' ­ 'martyrs'. Further investigation using the Jewish chabad.org Knowledge base reveals that, for Jews, the concept of 'Kiddush Hashem' has a much deeper meaning in that it is like "sanctification of G-ds Name".

What is not so commonly realised, or understood, by Christians is how the Six Million figure relates integrally to the occult teachings that the Jewish religion is based upon.

Before proceeding further it will be necessary to distinguish between two commonly used words that are often used interchangeably with resulting obfuscation of the subject.

'Shoah' is an anglicized spelling of Hebrew word that means 'catastrophe' or 'calamity'. That millions of Jewish people suffered horrific calamity involving widespread persecution and many deaths during World War two is in dispute.

Holocaust, by contrast, is a word of Greek origin meaning 'burnt whole' and is defined in the dictionary as a "a sacrificial offering that is consumed entirely by flames." The anglicised Hebrew word for 'burnt offering' or 'burnt sacrifice' is 'Olah' (pronounced 'o-olaw'). It derives from the Hebrew word for 'elevation'. That the corpses of many thousands of Jews (and others) were burnt in crematoriums in Nazi concentration camps after suffering deaths from typhus and other disease is not at issue either.

What is disputed is the claim that Six Million Jews were murdered by cyanide gas in purpose built homicidal gas chambers in Nazi concentration camps.

If it is true that Jews, as Jews, collectively suffered genocidal extermination and cremation in concentration camps, then 'holocaust' is indeed a valid historic, as well as Judaic religious description. If it is not true, then the description of 'holocaust', as well as the 'sacred' figure of Six Million, belongs entirely to Jewish religious mythology and must be opposed by Catholics both as a matter of historical truth and religious truth.

The enormous amount of data from diverse fields of research that indicates very strongly that homicidal gas chambers did not exist in Nazi concentration camps is not the purpose of this study, and will not be summarised here. Rather, the purpose of this study is to reveal, largely from Jewish sources, that the fabled 'Six Million' is a religious mantra recited by Jews as an integral practice of the Jewish religion.

The Sacred Six Millions

The Jewish religion is based upon:

1) 'Written Torah' ('Tanukh') which consists of books of the Old Testament; 2) 'Oral Torah' ('Mishnah') which Jews believe God taught to Moses and was handed down orally through the generations until being compiled in book form in the second century). 3) Later rabbinical commentaries on 'Mishnah' called 'Gemara', which were compiled together with 'Mishnah' in the 5th Century and became known collectively as 'Talmud'. 4) 'Midrashim' which are anecdotal stories expanding upon written or oral 'Torah'; 5) and 'Kabbalah' which is the mystical teaching of Judaism, the primary body of which is known as 'Zohar'.

A fundamental constituent of Jewish mystical gnosis is the practice of Gematria, a type of numerology that assigns numerical value to the characters of the Hebrew alphabet. It involves the calculation of numerical equivalence and relationship between letters, words, and phrases in order to find mystical insights and hidden teaching that the Jews believe God planted into 'Torah'. Rabbi Harav Yitzchak Ginsburgh explains that: "Since the world was created through God's 'speech', each letter represents a different creative force."

Certain letters and the corresponding numerical value, are considered in Judaism to have greater mystical power than others because of the frequency with which they are found in 'Torah'. One such value, the expression of which holds a predominant power in the Jewish psyche, is the Hebrew letter 'vav' which has a numerical value of six. As well as its obvious relationship to the six days of creation and the Jewish Sabbath Rabbi, Harav Yitzchak Ginsburgh reveals much of its esoteric connotation in his book The Alef-Beit: Jewish Thought Revealed Through the Hebrew Letters. For example, one learns that: "the consummate structure of six (as in the form of the Magen David [Star of David], the outer area of whose six 'wings' equals, and therefore folds onto, the area of the inner hexagon), reflected by the six orders in the Mishnah, finds its source in the dimensions of the Tablets given by Moses at Sinai. They were cubes measuring six handbreadths in each direction." A cube has six faces, of course.

The superstitious 'power' of 'six' in the Jewish mind, can be found, for example, in the fact that the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington D.C. was purposely designed so that the display floors of photographs and artefacts of the Permanent Exhibition cover a floor space of 36,000 square feet. In 'Gemtaria' it is understood that this represents six thousand multiplied by six thousand. At the end of the tour the visitor enters the six thousand foot Hall of Remembrance, which has six sides symbolising the six-pointed Star of David, and six 'extermination' camps where 'Six Million' Jews were slaughtered. One can also find a collection of six thousand children's hand-painted tiles. Yaffa Sonenson, a member of the U.S. Holocaust Commission donated, according to a sympathetic review in the museum penned by Barbara Beckwith for the online St Anthony's Messenger, a collection of six thousand photographs.

We learn from the spirituality section of chahad.org in its 'Letter of Light ­ Vav' that: "Six also represents completion, because something that is surrounded on all its six sides ­ north, south, east, west, above and below ­ is complete. Similarly we find that when the Jewish people left the land of Egypt, G-d surrounded then with six Clouds of GloryÉThe number six also signifies the six hundred thousand Jewish men aged 20-60 who left the land of Egypt. It additionally represents the TorahÉThee are six hundred thousand letters of the Torah, and if one letter of the Torah is missing or broken, or cracked, G-d forbid, the entire Torah scroll is declared not kosher ­ unfit to be read. Similarly, if one Jew strays form the path, or is missing or defiled, the entire Jewish nation is likewise lacking or defiled. We are rendered incompleteÉWe find another instance of 'six' when the Jewish people were in Egypt and oppressed with backbreaking work. Pharaoh devised many plot against the Jewish people to keep them form multiplying. Yet the Jews continued to propagate at an unbelievable rate. Indeed, the Torah tells us that the Jewish women bore six children one at a timeÉThus the vav teaches us the monumental effect we have on the world by being connected on high and bringing down The Torah to earth in our thoughts, speech and actions."

Rabbi Ginsburgh reveals that the secret of the word 'truth' resides in the 'triangle of 'six' and, for that reason, the Hebrew letter 'vav' is known as "the letter of truth", its numerical value 'six' being "the power which links together the souls of Israel." The triangle of six instantly reminds one again of the six-pointed Star of David that is composed of triangles. It also brings to mind the fact a triangle consists of three sides or three points. Three points consisting of six? 666?

Judaism teaches that God created six hundred thousand Jewish souls and these souls, according to the rabbis, correspond to six hundred thousand letters in the written 'Torah'. In a translated text entitled "600,000 Souls, 600,000 letters" Rabbi Rabbeinu Yaakov Abuchatzeira reveals that:

'The word 'Israel' can be read as an acronym for 'Yesh Shishim Ribo Oriot LaTorah', meaning: "Thee are six hundred thousand letters in the Torah'. Therefore, Israel did not leave Egypt until there were six hundred thousand of them, in order for each soul to be 'supported' by one letter in the Torah, as we have written in a number of placesÉSince the name 'Israel' alludes to the fact that the number of letters in the Torah corresponds to the number of souls, it follows that when the Jewish People come to count their souls [take a census], the accuser comes and accuses them saying, "Master of the universe, didn't Israel only reach this size population in order to match the number of letters in the Torah which are hintedat in their name? And now they are negligent in [the Torah]!" This becomes the substance of the accusation. Furthermore, the word 'negef' meaning a 'scourge', has the same numerological value as 'Samael', the Angel of Destruction, short two. ('Negef' equals 133 while 'Samael' equals 131. The missing two allude to the two Torahs (Oral and Written). When Israel are [?] lax in the two Torahs, two powers are added to those of the forces of evil, and it becomes, 'negev', a scourge, and afflicts them, G-d forbid.'

Rabbi Zev Reichman, in a partly published online book named Chassidus confirms the rabbinical teaching of 'six hundred thousand souls, six hundred thousand letters'. In footnote, 19, of 'Lesson Six, the Body Can Complement the Soul, the rabbi states plainly that Jewish souls are "pieces of the Divine", part of God Himself.

'The Zohar teaches that God, Torah, and Israel are one. In truth, God clothed himself in the thoughts and words of Torah, and Jewish souls are pieces of the Divine as well; thus Torah, Israel and God are linked in an intrinsic manner. Rabbi Levi Yitzchok of Berditchev (1740-1810) explained a Scriptural ambiguity with this principle.

'As God commanded Moses he counted then (The Jews) in the Sinai Desert." (Numbers 1: 19) Once can ask, it should have been written, "He counted them in the Sinai desert as God commanded Moses?" Behold. God gave the Torah to the Jewish people, and the souls of the Jews are The essence of the Torah, for there are 600,000 Jewish souls and 600,000 Jewish letters in the Torah scroll. In fact, the name 'Yisrael', Israel is an acronym for 'Yesh shsishim ribo otiyot latorah', there are 600,000 letters in the Torah. Therefore, Jews are the Torah, for each Jew is a different letter to the Torah. When Moses counted the Jews he was learning the Torah. This is why the verse was changed from its usual formulation to hint "As God commanded Moses he counted the people", like the Torah that God commanded Moses was the (experience of) counting of the nation. (Kedushas Levi parshas Bamidbar s.v Caasher).'

Examples of the Kabbalistic religious use of numbers relating to 'vav', "the power that links together the souls of Israel", and especially of six hundred thousand abound virtually everywhere one cares to look and it become obvious that 'six' is related in a very special manner to the Jewish concepts of 'kiddush hashem' and 'olah', of holocaust. 'Kiddush hashem', one will remember, means to the Jew 'martyrdom' and the sanctification of G-ds Name". One will also remember that the Jewish religion teaches that Jewish souls are themselves "pieces of the Divine." Therefore one begins to understand that in the Jewish religion the concept of 'martyrdom' and 'sanctification of G-d's name' is in fact the collective 'sanctification' of the Jewish people, of the six hundred thousand souls.

The concept of 'olah' is described by Rabbi Harav Yitzchak Ginsburgh's teaching thus: "The Sages reply that the olah is first in theT orah recitation. However, in the order of sacrifice the chaiai proceeds the olah. According to Kabbalah and Chassidut, the recitation reflects a drawing down of the Supernatural Infinite Light from above to below ­ as a person calls to his friend to come down to him, or as a small child calls to his father to come down and join him. In contrast, the actual sacrifice reflects an act of spiritual elevation from below to above ­ the secret of the sacrifice ascends to the secret of the infinite One."

This 'olah', 'holocaust', involves a religious mantra of recitation aimed at "a drawing down of the Supernatural Infinite light from above to below."

As a side note, one may ask, how can it be that only six hundred thousand Jewish souls exist when it is evident that many millions of Jews have existed in time?

The rabbinical explanation appears to be that the 600,000 souls are 'root souls' and that all other Jewish souls are 'offshoots', intrinsically connected and, perhaps, somehow, generated from them.

Some examples of the sacred connection that exists in the Jewish religion between religious recitation of the mantra of 'Six' ("the power that links together the souls of Israel"), the 600,000 Jewish souls, martyrdom ­ Divine sanctification' that draws down Supernatural infinite light from above to below" and holocaust, may be instructive. The religious objective of this 'divine' mantra is obviously meant to culminate in the eventual arrival of the long-awaited Jewish 'Messiah':

Notes

* 70 AD: Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus on the destruction of Jerusalem, the Temple, and the slaughter of Jews ­ "We are told the number of the besieged, old and young, men and women, amounted to 600,000." * 135 AD: Roman historian Cassius Dio is told and records that 600,000 Jews are slaughtered when Rome finally crushes the Bar Kokhba rebellion. * 18th Century: Ukrainian pogrom where 'reliable accounts' record that 60,000 Jews were slaughtered by Gaidmak Cossacks according to the Jewish People's Relief Committee Report of 1921, mentioned in The Slaughter of the Jews in the Ukraine in 1919, by Elias Heifetz. * 1880: The New York time editorial of 27 February states that: "The war, which has for some time raged in Germany between the natives and the Jews, seems rather to increase rather than diminish in intensityÉThe charge is made that of the 600,000 Israelites in the empire, hardly any engage in agriculture or mercantile pursuits, but that they control trade, rule the money markets and are eating up the country with their avarice and usury." * 1900: The New York Times of 11th June reports extracts from an address given by Rabbi Samuel Wise, founder of the Federation of American Zionists, that "there are 6,000,000 [six million] living, bleeding, suffering arguments in favour of Zionism." * 1916: The American Jewish Committee publishes a book entitled 'The Jews in the Eastern War Zone' in which it claims that eastern Europe is a: "a kind of prison with six million inmates, guarded by an army of corrupt and brutal jailers." * 1917-1920: 60,000 Jews were murdered in pogroms in Poland and Russia according to the authors of The Jew in the Modern World. * 1918: The New York Times of October 18th carries a full page advertisement from the Joint Distribution Committee of the American Funds for Jewish War sufferers to collect one hundred million dollars to 'Rebuild Jewry' and states that "6,000,000 Jews need Help" (Six Million) * 1919: The American Hebrew of 31st October carries an article entitled 'The Crucifixion of the Jews Must Stop!" It claims that "Six million men and women are dying" in what it describes as a "threatening holocaust." This was is over for everyone but the Jew. The knife is still at his throat and unreasoning and unreasonable century-old lust for Jewish blood opens his veins." * 1936: Chaim Weitzman, president of the World Zionist Organisation, testifies in front of the Peel Commission, on November 25th, that: "It is no exaggeration to say that six million Jews are sentenced to be imprisoned in this part of the world, where they are unwanted, and for whom the countries are divided into those where they are unwanted, and those, where they are not admitted." * 1937: Chaim Weitzmann reports to the Zionist Congress of London that "the hopes of Europe's six million Jews are centered on emigration" according to the document 'Holocaust Victims Accuse' published by anti-Zionist Jews. * 1943: The New York Times of 2nd March reports, on page 4, Rabbi Joseph Hertz, Chief Rabbi of the British Empire, stating that "appalling is the fact that those who proclaim the Four Freedoms have so far done very little to secure the freedom to live for 6,000,000 [Six Million] of their Jewish fellow men by readiness to rescue those who might still escape Nazi torture and butchery." * 1946: The Jewish Black Book Committee, a venture between the Soviet Jewish Anti-fascist Committee (JAC) and US Jewish organizations publishes The Black Book. It states that: "Four million Jews ­ about two-thirds of the six million who perished in Europe at the hand of the Nazis ­ were murdered at Osweicim [Auschwitz] and its subsidiary camps." * 1948: Rabbi Menachem Kasher, in the introduction to Koi HaTor in HaTekufah HaGedolah, reports a statistic relating to the year of the establishment of the Zionist State. He states that 1948 was the first year in centuries that there were 600,000 Jews living in 'Eretz Yisrael'. * 1948: 600,000 Jews living in Arab countries were forced to flee from surrounding Arab lands to the newly established Israeli State claim the Children of Jewish Holocaust survivors Laos Angeles organization and their political director Omri Ceren, in a press release dated 7th July, 2008. * 1948: 600,000 Holocaust survivors moved to Israel during the early years of the State, reports Judy Siegel-Itzkovich for the Jewish Weekly News of northern California, in a story entitled Holocaust Survivors; Handle with Care, on 21st March, 2008. * 1967: Rabbi Menachem Kasher, in the introduction to Koi HaTor in HaTekufah HaGedolah, reports a statistic relating to the year of the Six Day War. He states that in the first year in centuries there were 600,000 Jewish males above the age of 20 living in 'Eretz Yisrael'. * 1999: The Independent reveals in a story of 4th March entitled Holocaust Trial Opens in Croatia that the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust states that 600,000 were killed at the Jasenovac concentration camp, but that Croatian historians think that 35,000 died. * 2004: Hungary's first Holocaust Museum opens in Budapest on the 60th anniversary of Hungarian Jews being sent to concentration camps. 60,000 names have been inscribed on the inside wall surrounding the museum in order to remember 600,000 Hungarian Jewish victims. * 2004: A memorial of the "600,000 Jews who were killed in gas chambers" at the Belzec 'death camp' in Poland is solemnly opened on the 3rd June as a Joint project of the American Jewish Committee and the Warsaw-based Council for the Protection of the Memory of Combat and Martyrdom. * 2005: The Yad Vashem Holocaust museum in Jerusalem announces on October 10th the figure of 600,000 visitors in the six months since the opening of its new Museum complex. * 2006: A New America Media report on 14th November entitled Israel Encourages Citizens to Return to Homeland, written by Stacey Palevsky, states that "more than 600,000 Israelis live elsewhere. And Israel wants them backÉAbout 6,000 return each year." The report further reveals that the Israeli Minister of Immigration Absorption, Ze'ev Boim, was visiting as "part of the six-city campaign." * 2007: Sidney Zabludoff tells the US House Committee on International Relations: Subcommittee on Europe and Emerging Threats, on 3rd October that "Currently there are approximately 600,000 Holocaust survivors worldwide.. * 2008: A libel case heard in Jerusalem District Court, initiated by the Claims Conference, reveals that 600,000 Holocaust survivors worldwide have received over $50 billion. * 2008: German Culture Minister, Bernd Numann, and the chief of the German Foundation for Remembrance, Responsibility and Future, Martin Salm, present to the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial site in Jerusalem a complete list of the 600,000 German Jewish population between 1933 and 1945.

Should any further consideration be necessary to determine the 'sacred' relationship between the Six Hundred Thousand Jewish Souls and The Six Million it is only necessary to remember that 'six' is the number of 'truth' and represents 'completion'. It is "the power that links together the souls of Israel" of which there are 600,000. When multiplied by ten we arrive at Six Million.

The number 'ten' in the Jewish religion relates to Sefiroi (enumerations) by which, Jews believe, God manifests himself in the physical and metaphysical planes. 'Ten' is believed by the Jews to be the number of 'divine projection'. Therefore, the 600,000 souls of Israel, which are 'pieces of the Divine', when multiplied by 'divine perfection' come to Six Million.

"The Hebrew word for 'ye shall return'(TaShuVU), seems to have been spelled incorrectly. Grammatically it requires another (vav). It ought to read (TaShUVU). Why is it lacking the letter (vav) which stands for six?. [TaShuVU] without the vav is a prediction to the Jewish people of ultimate return to their national homeland. TaShuVU in numbers adds up to 708: tav=400, shin=300, vei=2, vey=6. When we write the year, we ignore the millennia. In 1948 on the secular calendar, we witnessed the miracle of Jewish return to Israel. On the Hebrew calendar it was the year 3708. That was the year predicted by the incomplete word (TaShuVu), you shall return. We did return, lacking 6 ­ an all important 6 million of our people who perished in the holocaust. Yet the fulfillment of the prediction of return in precisely that year implied by the gematria of TaShuVU gives us firm hope that the words of the prophets for Final Redemption will come true as well."

- Rabbi Benjamin Blech, the Secret of Hebrew Words, pp 214-215.

The Same Rabbi Blech who, along with rabbis Barry Dov Schwartz and Jack Bemporad, conferred a 'rabbinical blessing' upon John Paul II, in the Apostolic Palace, on 18th January, 2005.

(18) REPLY TO Six Million? The importance of the numbers - Peter M.

Firstly I check the historical figures, then turn to the general argument.

Tacitus gives the 600,000 figure for the Uprising of 66-70 AD not on his own authority but as anecdotal:

"We are told that the number of the besieged, old and young, men and women, amounted to 600,000."

(The Histories, by Cornelius Tacitus. The Jews. Book Five (1 -13) http://www.ourcivilisation.com/smartboard/shop/tacitusc/histries/chap18.htm)

Wikipedia says <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Kokhba_revolt>

"The Bar Kokhba revolt (132­136) against the Roman Empire was the third major rebellion by the Jews of Iudaea Province (also spelled Judaea) and the last of the Jewish-Roman Wars. ...

"According to Cassius Dio, 580,000 Jews were killed, and 50 fortified towns and 985 villages razed. The Talmud, however, claims a death toll in the millions. ..."

Cassius Dio gives a figure of 580,000:

Cassius Dio, Roman History, book LXIX [summary] <http://ziontruth.blogspot.com/2005/05/cassius-dio-also-dio-cassius-on-bar.html>

"Fifty of their most important outposts and nine hundred and eighty-five of their most famous villages were razed to the ground. Five hundred and eighty thousand men were slain in the various raids and battles, and the number of those that perished by famine, disease and fire was past finding out."

Turning to Holocaust numbers, one needs to disentangle

a. the history (what really happened)
b. the religion (the theological overlay or interpretation)
c. the industry (reparations, museums, media campaigns, political lobbies)

With regard to b, the Jewish religion presents Jewish history as a series of holocausts, the focus of its holy days each year:

Exodus from Egypt (commemorated at Passover)
Destruction of the First Temple, Exile of leaders in Babylon
Esther's vistory over Haman in the Persian Empire under Xerxes (commemorated at Purim) Victory of Judah Maccabee over Syrian and Greek armies of 167 B.C. (commemorated at Hanukkah)
Uprising against Rome of 66-70 AD, culminating in Masada. Israeli army recruits are inducted at Masada
Christian persecutions against Jews
The Nazi holocaust, the foundation stone on which the modern state of Israel is built, and whose pivotal point in history is marked by the word "The". The terminology "The" holocaust is reminiscent of "The" crucifixion, and suggests the interweaving of history with theological interpretation.

No other religion presents its history this way; the implication is that the persecution testifies that the Jews really are God's people.

Does "denial" mean

a. denial of the physical events
b. rejection of the theological overlay
c. opposition to the industry, and to making the Palestinians pay for what others did, as the victims' victims?

Norman Finkelstein affirms the physical events, but Lipstadt calls him a "SOFT Denier" for rejecting b & c.

Numerology is part of the Jewish religion; one can't argue with those who believe it. Interpreting the Nazi Holocaust via Numerology is part of the theological overlay. It's also a case of Overstatement.

The "6 Million" has become part of religious formalism (Jewish theology); THAT's the reason they won't modify it. On the other hand, Hilberg's 5.1 Million is scientific. It's only an approximation, as he says. The Census method, which he says is favoured, only tallies the numbers of Missing Jews. That's not necessarily the number of victims of extermination programs; it includes those who were just victims of the invading army.

The article on the 6 Million focuses on the Overstatement, and having exposed that, goes a step further and, by implication, denies the underlying historical events, i.e. that Nazis had a program of exterminating Jews.

There's Overstatement and Formalism on both sides - Denial itself is an example too.

Hitler's Table Talk details, in Hitler's own words, plans to settle Germans in Ukraine and exterminate Jews: http://mailstar.net/holocaust-debate04.html

Some years ago, when I was sitting on the fence, a Denier sent me (by email) a book claiming Resettlement in Ruthenia (ByeloRussia, White Russia).

In the Hungarian case, this was not realistic. Resettlement only made sense if the Germans were going to keep that land in perpetuity; it was meaningless if the Russians were about to re-take it.

To move several hundred thousand people late in the war was a major undertaking.

That is the population of the greater Canberra area (the capital of Australia), which took decades and a lot of $ to build. It's a waste of resources, late in the war.

If those Hungarians were only sent to work in the Auschwitz factories etc, you would do the Selections in Hungary, and only send those suitable for work. You would exclude women with young children, old men, old women, the sick, the disabled etc.

But that's not how it happened. Selections were done at Auschwitz instead: http://www.scrapbookpages.com/auschwitzscrapbook/History/Articles/HungarianJews.html

Deniers cannot just place the onus of proof on the Affirmers (Faurisson's line); they themselves must explain and account for the millions of Jews (& others) transferred to these sites.

This is the weakness in their case. Once one realises that, one reads Pressac, Browning, Provan, van Pelt, Hoss, Vrba et al.

(19) Jews complain that Pope said "millions" instead of "6 Million"

From: ReporterNotebook <RePorterNoteBook@Gmail.com> Date: 13.05.2009 10:21 AM

Survivors angered by pope's 'lukewarm' Yad Vashem speech

By Jonathan Lis, Nadav Shragai, Jack Khoury and Cnaan Liphshiz

Haaretz, May 12, 2009

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1084939.html

The speech by Pope Benedict XVI Monday at Yad Vashem drew criticism from staff members of the Holocaust memorial, who described it as disappointing and lukewarm.

The chairman of the Yad Vashem Directorate, Avner Shalev, said he expected the pope, "who is a human being, too," to draw on his personal experience to issue a stronger condemnation of Nazis and Germans, who were not directly mentioned in the speech. The pope grew up in Nazi Germany and served in both Hitler Youth and the Wehrmacht, before deserting from the army in 1944. Shalev, however, said the speech was "important," especially in its criticism of denial of the Holocaust.

The pope spoke at length about the importance of remembering the victims of the Holocaust. "One can rob a neighbor of possessions, opportunity or freedom. One can weave an insidious web of lies to convince others that certain groups are undeserving of respect. Yet, try as one might, one can never take away the name of a fellow human being," he said.

"May the names of these victims never perish! May their suffering never be denied, belittled or forgotten! And may all people of goodwill remain vigilant in rooting out from the heart of man anything that could lead to tragedies such as this!"

The chairman of Yad Vashem, Rabbi Yisrael Meir Lau, himself a Holocaust survivor, complained of the pope's usage of the word "millions" instead of the more specific "6 million" when speaking of the Holocaust's Jewish victims, as well as over his use of the word "killed" rather than "murdered."

"There's a dramatic difference between killed and murdered, especially when a speech has gone through so many hands," Lau said.

Lau also said that the speech "didn't have a single word of condolence, compassion or sharing the pain of the Jewish people as such. There was a lot about the pain of humanity, cosmopolitan words," Lau said. Lau, the chief rabbi of Tel Aviv and a former Ashkenazi chief rabbi of Israel, also described the speech as "beautiful and well scripted and very Biblical," however. ...

{end of bulletin 25}

Nahum Goldmann, like Arno J. Mayer but in advance of the event, expected Nazi reprisals against Jews as a consequence of losing the war:

Wikipedia reports of Goldmann:

{quote} In the spring of 1942, he said, "Who can foretell what the Nazi regime, once brought into the position of the surrounded killer, will do in the last moment before it goes down to shame?" [14]

14 Aaron Berman (1990) Nazism, the Jews, and American Zionism, 1933-1948 Wayne State University Press, 1990 ISBN 0814322328 pg. 96

{endquote - last modified on 31 May 2009) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nahum_Goldmann

Back to the Holocaust Denial Debate menu: holocaust-debate.html.

The Memoirs of Rudolph Hoss (Hoess), Kommandant at Auschwitz: Hoss-Memoirs.html.

The Origins of the Final Solution - Christopher R. Browning. How Nazi policy changed from Ethnic Cleansing to Genocide: browning.html.

Write to me at contact.html.

HOME