dbrown@watarts.UUCP (Dave Brown) (04/02/85)
All right, Mr. Black; I can no longer sit on the fence on this anymore. I have said that you were not worth attacking. You are not. But you are worth rebutting. I do hope you reason, as that is what I am trying to do. In article <1385@decwrl.UUCP> black@nisysg.DEC writes: > >>Mr. Black's articles have always been churning with passionate >>convictions with little evidence. But I think he has gone a little >>too far this time. Is he really subtly suggesting that 6 million Jews >>were not massacred in WW II? > > No, I'm not saying anything subtly. I'm saying right out that I >personally do not believe the story of the Holocaust. > >>>> From Don Black: >>> Some interesting points were raised, including the fact that the >>> judge failed to take judicial notice that the Holocaust actually took >>> place thus placing the burden of proof that it took place on the plaintiff. This is due to the wording of the law, not the judge's opinion. The wording of the law will be changed. History should not be proven in the courts. >>> Scientific and forensic evidence was presented by Zundel that it never took >>> place. Alleged eyewitnesses to the event were time and again proven >>> to be telling falsehoods. Falsehoods are in the eye of the beholder. Can you refute the films? The verdict proved that there was some evidence for the plaintiff. >>> >>> This is exactly the thing that Constitutional reformers want for the >>> United States. They don't want anybody to go digging around in Orwellian >>> Memory Holes, so they can spout only their version of history. The question of the trial was the history. However, the charge was on inciting hatred of a racial group. Mr. Black, you do realize that you are condoning hatred, don't you? Then, as a Christian, what do you think of Matthew 5:43-48? Agreed truth should win out; but, I question Zundel's motives. >>> Granted, >>> some horrible things took place during World War 2. But at least let's >>> get at the truth, whatever it may be. I agree, let's get at the truth. But, let's not hate people because we think they MAY have done something. I didn't see your postings for awhile; all I heard was your detractors. I condemned what you said, but I didn't and still do not hate you. >>"Granted some horrible things took place"! Mr. Black if you want why don't >>you go to Germany and visit Auschwitz at first hand for yourself. Read >>"The Diary of Anne Frank", read William Shirer's account of the rise and >>fall of the Third Reich. The figure of 6 million Jews killed may be >>more or less than the actual number. That millions were killed and the >>rest persecuted by the Nazis is a fact which cannot be reasonably disputed. > > Oh, yes, I CAN dispute the "millions killed." Just because something is >repeated over and over, it isn't automatically the truth. I'd love to go to >Auschwitz to do my own research. I'm sure that the story of the Holocaust >will stand up against scientific forensic evidence. Assuming you ment that the Holocaust would not stand up against your investigation, I would like to see you try and do this investigation WITHOUT your prior bias. I realize that every historian has a bias, but you have called for the oppression of the people who you are researching. Your bias is acute. Other historians are biased as well, but hatred?!? Admittedly, there would be some hatred of the Nazi-regime. But, recently, (the name and place are lost from me right now) a war-criminal in the U.S. calmly said "Yes I did it. But, you have to understand the times." I do not understand the times, as he would put it, but I do understand the first phrase. Is that unbiased evidence.(I believe that this story was in the March 30, Globe and Mail or the March 31 Toronto Star; I'm sure someone can check it out and give the full details of the story). > I could accept six million war casulties, but not six million of one group. Is this because of your prior bias, or was this non-acceptance arrived at scientifically? You have to accept something for evidence. History is based on documentation, not on theory. Apart from your "Holocaust Hoax" material, where is your evidence? >>>Why is it that American blood gets shed >>> every time some little banana republic has a revolt? We get engaged in so >>> many petty quarrels that we fail to see the real issues, the problems >>> here at home that are destroying our own society. The U.S. hasn't sent a "real" peacekeeping force, under the U.N.'s banner, for years. You've been to busy worrying about your own problems in Grenada, in Vietnam, in Bierut, in Guatemala.... > >Are you telling me that Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt were "Communist >>conspirators"? You do realize that Roosevelt was as much as anyone else >>the founder of the United Nations don't you? > > About the only thing you missed is that the Comintern and the elected >US government was at the time, and still is, controlled by the international >banking cartel in New York. Prove it. With unbiased evidence of course. > >>I'll bet you didn't know Mr. Black that actually our whole society is going >>to pot because it's been infiltrated by *aliens from outer space*. >>How do I know? Well, I leave it to you to prove otherwise. All I have to >>do is make the statement, *I* don't have to present any evidence for it. > > You miss the true source of the Aliens. Whereever they originate, >they're streaming into the country across our southern border, and nobody >has any inclination to stop them. It doesn't matter that they're placing >a tremendous burden on the American public, or they they are carrying >diseases such as tuberculosis, leprosy, and plague. It doesn't matter that >they have occupied Los Angeles, Miami, and Chicago (by official INS figures). >(Aahhhh-- Black is anti-Hispanic, too! So I set myself up for more >denunciations. What else is new? Sorry, Charley! In this case, my >information is the PUBLIC RECORD of the Federal Immigration and Naturalization >Service. Stick that one in yer ear.) Excuse me here, but he did ask where your proof is. Mr. Black: Jews and Hispanics and athiests, and communists and socialists, and democrats, and yes, even the bankers of New York are all people. Do you believe that there is a hierarchy of humanity? Hey, I'll let you in on a secret. White Protestant Americans are just as low in God's sight as the rest of us. *** Romans 3:22-25 *** Of course, you may ignore that as Paul was a Jew, Galatians 1:13, don't ya know? >>Please present your evidence that >> 1)Roosevelt was a Communist >> 2)our society has *not* been infiltrated by *aliens from outer space* >>tim sevener whuxl!orb > >>> I also believe that anyone, no matter what his political or religious >>> beliefs, has the right to have his views heard and considered. That's >>> still contained in the Constitution, the last time I looked. I agree about your right, although I do not think Constitutions should be written in stone, never to be changed. But, you do not have the right to incite hatred of Jews, Hispanics, bankers, etc. That is an abuse of privelage. >> tim sevener whuxl!orb >> democratic socialist and proud of it! > > Nowadays, it's a heckova lot easier to smear somebody's reputation by >calling him a "Nazi" or a "racist," or by even suggesting that he's anti- >semetic. It's quite fashionable to be a Communist, a socialist, etc. I >guess people figure that if they identify with the One-World-Government >conspiracy, they might be treated better when it gets here. First, have you read any Marx? No not Groucho(a little bit of humour don't ya know; he was Jewish as was Marx)! There is a difference between socialism and communism. And, in today's thinking there is even more of a difference between the two. Witness, the socialist government in B.C.; it's roots are in socialism but it's head is in conservatism. And witness, the various socialist governments in Europe; most are purging themselves of any communist influence. And, as for your One world government theory, the commies in Europe are not, I repeat not, taking orders from Moscow anymore. I'm no lover of the communist system, as I would be oppressed as much in it as under you guys, but, if some people had their druthers, we would live in a capatalist One World Government. Neither is any good. > But God help >those who oppose it. God helps everybody, even Gorbachev. *** Romans 3:22 *** If they want it. > > By the way, the term "Nazi" is derived from the Nationalsozialistische >deutsche Arbeiterpartei, or the National Socialist German Workers' Party. >Socialist workers party--Hmmmm, where have we heard that term before? Social Credit comes from a socialist idea of the 1920's. Do you think they, the most conservative government in all of Canada, are in on the conspiracy to? If so, prove it. > I can see you haven't done too much homework on Humanism, Tim. >Humanism was defined for the first time in 1933 in the booklet "The >Humanist Manifesto," which was signed by (amongst others) R. Lester >Mondale (does the name Mondale ring a bell?) Just an aside. That's one reason why I kind of laughed every time I heard Mondale say, "I was a preacher's kid." He was but, not the type of preacher most people think about. >and the "renowned" educator >John Dewey. There are actually at least two booklets in the series, >Manifesto I and II.) Humanism was recognized as a religion by the US >Supreme Court in Torasco vs Watkins (367 US 488). Check the footnotes >on the decision for more information and references. > > Now, assuming that Humanism is defined as a religion, why is it OK >for the Left to require that Christianity be purged from the schools, but it >is not OK for the "ranting right" to complain about Humanism? Isn't that >rather hypocritical? (Why is it that the Right is always "ranting" and >"raving?" I don't understand.) I submit that it might be better if the >government schools stuck to the teaching of reading, writing, and arithmetic, >and left the teaching of ethics, values, religion, sex, et alia to the parents, >where it belongs. I wish I could agree with you on this, but religion will NEVER be purged (good communist word that, nyet?) from the school system. The teaching of values is an important part of the school system. It is one reason why schools exist. > As for persecution because of a belief in Humanism, you shouldn't have >any problem, so long as nobody messes with the Constitution. Freedom of >religion and all that good stuff, you understand. Now, mess with the >Constitution, and I promise there will be many p*****-off patriots out >in the streets carrying Chairman Mao's source of power. Note: I remember in the beginning of this discussion,Mr.Black, you wrote that you would edit all obscenities. Question: Why are you using them? Crummy witness. Admonishment, don't ya know? Now, persecution happens with and without a constitution. One of the fallacies of the U.S. is that a constitution brings human rights. Constitutions are not read by everybody. With or without a constitution, people will be persecuted, both Christians and Humanists. Life is like that. > I mourn the loss of Freedom of Speech and Expression in Canada. Well, >your constitution was the decision of the Canadian people. You voted it in, >you live with it. Some day it will bite you. And then it might be too late. Seems to me YOUR constituition ain't much better. Some freedom of religion, when you can't even put up a creche of the nativity, if you vote for it. Our constitution has a proviso which says that parliament can overturn, with the consent of the provinces, any of the constitutions parts. I believe you have a similar proviso on your ammmendments. The difference is we have a smaller system of government, which, by consent of the people, has been given a lot of free reign to do what ever they want. We trust our governments; you guys trust your constitution. > Can you imagine if we had similar laws here in the States? Louis >Farakhan would be behind bars, for sure. And then we'd have ten million or You overestimate Farakham's sway. >so of his followers holding New York City as ransom for his release. And >you know what? I'd be there helping! The J.D.L. would have been run out >of town years ago. We never would have been able to whip up enough patriotic >fervor to win either world war ("Why fight 'em? Ain't we supposed to >love 'em?"). I could make a plea for Christian pacifism here; but let me just mention a few verses. Matthew 5:38-48 Psalm 11:5 Deuteronomy10:19(aliens) Mark 9:50 Romans12:17-21 Hebrews 12:14 >John Brown's material probably would have been banned thus >prolonging the agonies of slavery. So be grateful. The pendulum swings both >ways. John Brown incited hatred; he killed people. No evil is worth the death of others. > It's a shame that Communists (that is, the little guy out in the trenches) >don't understand that they are the pawns of the very capitalists they are >supposed to be destroying. The same people that financed the Bolshevic >Revolution are the exact same people that bought out the Wilson administration, >and they've bought out every national election since. Communism is only >the facade for bigger, worse things. They need a diversion, an external >threat, while they play their little mind games and consolidate their power >internally. Americans only see the handwriting on the wall when their >backs are to it. Proof, please supply dicumentation that does not start with that assumption and then tries to prove it. > > For more information on Communism, I recommend the publications of >the John Birch Society, whose addresses are Nice unbiased material there, eh? > > Don Black Mr. Black, in summary: 1. Provide documentary, unbiased material. Don't make an idea and try to prove it. That's bad history. And answer the qustion. Don't go off on some tangent. 2. If you call yourself a Christian, read your Bible with an eye towards what God will tell you, not what you will let Him tell you. In admonishment, DAVE BROWN I CORINTHIANS 4:14 I AM NOT WRITING THIS TO SHAME YOU, BUT TO WARN YOU, AS MY DEAR CHILDREN.