> this particular research - what is horrible is not > merely the position > taken, but that it was taken more in a wish to stand > out from the pack, > do a little Jack Horner, in fact, than to establish > the truth, to do > politics of the far right, in other words, not to do > history. Rather > like some recent posts. Think about it, Jack.
And this is what worries me so much. I remember that one of those characters once claimed that there was no holocaust because there was no budget for it. He didnt realize that the holocaust was a self-financing enterprise: forced labour and exploitation of, err...human bodies paid for it. As someone who has met a few survivors (not many, I hasten to add) and some who knew very well what was going on at the time, let me say this: Please, let's not restart debates about whether it happened and how the holocaust was exploited by "the Allies". There has been enough suffering and as we can see from the outbursts of a certain Middle Eastern (elected) head of government, there is much mileage to be made out of ignorance. Similar, and even more protracted debates are going on in Turkey regarding the Armenian genocide. And I am waiting for the first Hutus to say that the Tutsis all died of the flu virus. -frank > > --- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Frank > > > > I think this has gone way out of hand. > > > > If you read my original comment: > > > > > So this guy was convicted based on comments he > made in 1989, under > a law > > > that wasn't enacted until 1992, by which time > his view had changed > based on > > > 'new evidence'. > > > > > > He may be a moron (and does look like a nazi), > but that's not a > crime... so - is > > > he a criminal or victim of politics in a world > where people like > Kurt Waldheim > > > could become UN SecGen and President of > Austria? > > > > I reiterated my question in a subsequent post: > > > > > My question is, if he made his comments based > on his original > research, which > > > he retracted based on new evidence, is it right > in convicting him > under a law > > > which wasn't passed until a couple of years > after his comments? > > > > Instead of presenting your case (i.e. he did not > retract his views > and continued to push his original case after 1992), > which probably > would have ended my doubts right there and then you > chose to flame me > for even daring to suggest he could be a victim. > > > > Then you asked if I thought "They were all liars, > yes?" to which I > said there was that possibility (and you yourself > admitted that there > is a possibility that not all the statements > collected from the > survivors were 100% true). > > > > And now you're giving me a lecture on appropriate > forum behaviour... > > > > Yes, I do believe an apology is in order, but I'm > not going to push > for one. > > > > > > > > Frank Pohlmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- calvin wrote: > > > > > Frank > > > > > > > ok, how about I saw some of the German > language > > > documentation and talked to survivors? They were > all > > > liars, yes? > > > > > > Possibly, how'd you know they weren't? > > > > I am afraid that this is not the style of > discussion > > we are accustomed to on silkilist. If you have an > > argument to make, make it. If you have no > evidence... > > > > So it > > > shows you did some research on which you are > basing > > > your opinion, nothing more. > > > > Thats interesting. In that case, we all have just > > opinions. Nothing can be considered true or false. > I > > am not sure whether the dead and injured would > agree. > > I find this line of argument rather sad and very > > insulting to the survivors as well disrespectful > to > > those 50 million who were killed as a result of > the > > 2nd WW and the holocaust. > > > > I think an apology is in order. > > > > I didnt do "some research". I spent years studying > the > > phenomenon. I have a degree in Middle Eastern > history > > and read literarlly hundreds of books and read > > thousands of pages of original documentation. If > you > > want to participate in discussions on this list, > > please show some respect and ask for evidence and > do > > not assume we or the witnesses we cite are all > liars. > > Some of the are, there is no doubt. But not all > > survivors lied. > > > > -Frank > > > > > > > > -Frank > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > > Yahoo! Mail > > > Use Photomail to share photos without annoying > === Message Truncated === > > > Indrajit Gupta > 'Ramsharan', 396, TT Krishnamachari Road, > Teynampet, > Chennai 600 018. > > +914455511138 > +919884375777 > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ > > Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner now. Go to > http://yahoo.shaadi.com > > ___________________________________________________________ Win a BlackBerry device from O2 with Yahoo!. Enter now. http://www.yahoo.co.uk/blackberry
