Follow Up: Comments on the Debate

Peter Myers, February 9, 2009; update May 9, 2009.

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

You are at

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

Back to the previous bulletin in the debate: holocaust-debate23.html.

{start of bulletin 24}

Debate to go online; participants may wish to suppress name & email address

I will put the debate online in a few days. Participants may wish to have their names and email addresses withheld.

Options would be: - leave name & email as they went out in the debate - leave name but withhold email address - withhold both name and email address; replace with a code eg "John", "JS", "J".

Please let me know. If you choose a code, please suggest one (but not an ideological one).

(1) to (7) Comment on Debate - from Shamir, Captain May, RW, Frederick Toben, Syd Walker, Mark Weber, John

(1) Comment on Debate - Shamir

From: Israel Shamir <> Date: 28.02.2009 01:58 AM

Peter, it would be a great service if you were to place this discussion on the web, to make it available; or even as an e-book. I can't abstain from contributing one line: Discussion of facts is of interest to experts only. It is ideology and theology of holocaust cult that should be vigorously denied.


(2) Comment on Debate - Captain May

From: Captain May <> Date: 28.02.2009 11:46 AM You have done a commendable job in putting forth a wide array of scholarly material related to the Holocaust. At the end of it all, it may be that no one has a changed opinion, but everyone should have a more informed opinion. Bravo sir! Captain May

(3) Comment on Debate - RW

From: RW Date: 28.02.2009 08:56 AM

I realize the debate is finished. But I would like to point out that Finkelstein himself is in the Jewish camp and not the dissident radical the Jewish controlled Left in the US likes to portray him. It's true he criticises Israel, as if that makes him some kind of hero. He also affirms that the Jewish Lobby is an irrelevant issue (he lost the debate on that to Petras and exposed himself as a closet Zionist); and he will also not identify Jewish Racism as the core issue as to why Israel behaves the way it does. Of course, I think he lost the debate with Lady Renouf about the Holocaust conference. He relies on an arbitrary definition of what makes a scholar (maybe for him it is someone who is Jewish) as an excuse not to attend the conference. I have never read one word from him refuting anything Faurisson has ever written. His debate with Lady Renouf was circular, he cannot present a case for gas chambers or any other supporting data other than to cite Hilberg and insult revisionists. Finkelstein is another Jewish Supremacist who is embarrassed by Israel's behavior but denies Jewish Racism is at the core of many of these problems. I could site many other Jews on the progressive Left that fit this mould.

(4) Comment on Debate - Frederick Toben

From: Adelaide Institute <> Date: 28.02.2009 09:33 AM

Peter, I repeat, how can I be a denier when you haven't proven the three pillars on which the Holocaust-Shoa rests: 1. Official state policy to exterminate - there is no written order to prove it happened, and you know any bureaucracy does not do things without a written order. 2. The six million figure claim - has not been proven. 3. The murder weapon - where is it? Your failure of moral and intellectual nerve is clear - you are falling in line with the believers' syndrome of labelling those that disagree with you, which is an infantile and rather Marxist-perfected response to shut those up who disagree with you, who dare to disssent. This battle-of-the-wills is unproductive because you came from being a skeptic to a believer without proving the three points above. When Irving and Hayward re-canted I asked them for the material that caused them to change their views - I am still waiting for them to deliver the goods. If I had you in my class I would give you full marks for busy work but zero/fail for attempting to deceive yourself and others that "it happened". Fredrick

(5) Comment on Debate - Syd Walker

From: Syd WalkerDate: 28.02.2009 08:33 AM

Perhaps I should not make too much of what was probably just an offhand remark on your part, but I was interested when you wrote, in reply to Fred Toben:

> Denial just makes people think you'd do it again if you got power.

Has Dr Toben run for public office? Is he planning to?

My impression was that he may be more pre-occupied, at present, defending himself from legal attacks by Jeremy Jones and the folk from AIJAC, who apparently dislike his opinions so much that, unusually in our democracy, they are seeking to make a criminal out of him and curtail his free speech (courtesy of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Act).

Compared with AIJAC, I suspect Toben's pull on Parliament Hill, Canberra is rather slender, don't you?

Doesn't your point, therefore, suggest just a tad of paranoia? "Reds under the bed" kind of stuff. Perhaps "Nazis inside the ballot boxes" is the modern equivalent?

(6) Comment on Debate - Mark Weber

From: Mark Weber <> Date: 28.02.2009 07:38 PM

The Elusive 'Six Million'

Mark Weber

... the Six Million figure is hammered into the public consciousness, not only in newspapers, magazines, motion pictures, and television, but also routinely in our schools ... An information sheet issued by the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council describes the grand Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC, as a "living memorial to the six million Jews and millions of other victims of Nazi fanaticism who perished in the Holocaust." Just what is the basis for this familiar figure?

(7) Comment on Debate - John

From: John Date: 28.02.2009 06:11 PM

Most of those who aim to prove that Hitler and the Nazis had no intention to exterminate Europe's Jews, seem to also be aiming for advocacy of discriminatory prejudice against Jews.

Most of those who aim to prove that Hitler and the Nazis DID intend to exterminate Europe's Jews, seem to also be aiming for the irrational demonization of anyone who dares to speak any legitimate heresy against questionable dogmas concerning the historicity of various WWII events.

Both sides of the issue seem to be obsessed with maintaining very antagonistic approaches; and those approaches seem to be the functions of their supremacist prejudices against each other.

If both sides would endeavor to genuinely humble themselves, and combine their energies in a long-term, public, comprehensive, open-minded, benevolent, and good-faith historical research project, without any preconceived conclusions, then they would actually be able to arrive at a gentlemanly concensus regarding all of their unresolved disputes.

The discussions and presentations occurring throughout the course of such a project could be filmed, and the findings and documents generated during such proceedings could be published.

{end of bulletin 24}

The Debate wouldn't Die - Some extra bits: holocaust-debate25.html.

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.