Monday, April 1, 2013

Revisionist blast Holocaust Controversies kooks

Extract from the blog post:

 Jürgen Graf, Thomas Kues, Carlo Mattogno: response to the Holocaust exterminationists bloggers Jonathan Harrison, Roberto Muehlenkamp, ​​Jason Myers, Sergey Romanov and Nick Terry

The propagandists who manage the Aktion Reinhard Camps website may be dishonest, but are not simply crazy. Just like Yitzhak Arad, Raul Hilberg or authors collective Neue Studien zu durch nationalsozialistischen Massentötungen Giftgas, they highlight the technical and logical absurdity of the Holocaust story, but silent. They shy away from any discussion of the historical accuracy official version of events, because they know exactly what such a discussion would open the proverbial Pandora's box [26] . This, certainly not the hateful language or obscene Nicholas Terry Roberto Muehlenkamp, ​​is the real reason why they abhor the Holocaust Controversies blog and put "warning everyone to avoid being fooled by these individuals."
4) The tactics of the "Controversial Bloggers"
Almost all the historical books probabilemnte contain some errors. If the copyright notices, or if you are reported to him by friends or adversaries, he usually correct them in the next edition, if there is one. It is obvious that the revisionist books are no exception to this rule.
The tactics implemented by "Controversial Bloggers" are basically simple: go in search of errors in the books of their opponents - an error on p. 82, a second on p. 175, third on p. 243 - and then try to use these errors to discredit the entire book. To illustrate this method just one example.
In my cririca to Hilberg [27] , have falsely asserted that they did not put forward any reference to his statement that October 12, 1941 the Germans shot 10,000 Jews in the cemetery of Stanisławów, Poland. In fact, Hilberg had actually mentioned a source (completely unreliable), the statements of some self-styled "eyewitnesses." My mistake, obviously due to the negligence led Nicholas Terry wrote:
"Graf chose to omit the contents of the note on the same page and to claim that was not raised any evidence. Therefore Graf is authentic liar " [28] . But why in the world I "s Celtic to omit the contents of the note"? The question of the alleged shooting of Stanisławów is not of particular importance, if I had not mentioned at all, my criticism of Hilberg would not have lost none of its force. In fact, the embarrassment that I could derive from the fact that such an elementary mistake could be highlighted by an opponent, has clearly than any benefit they could hope to receive from an intentional deception.
Ironically, Terry commit similar mistakes twice when he attacks me in the essay antirevisionistico Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka. Holocaust Denial and Operation Reinhard, co-authored. The first error in the person of Erich Bauer, the alleged "Gasmeister" (head of the gas) of Sobibor. In the book of this field written by Thomas Kues, Carlo Mattogno and myself[29] , I stated:
"What is the basis for this assertion [that Bauer was the" Gasmeister "]? In the first eyewitness accounts of Sobibor, Erich Bauer or not mentioned at all, or is mentioned only marginally. His name does not appear in the two reports Pechersky and even in the testimony of Leon Feldhendler - which, in the end, it lists by name 10 SS. Zelda Metz reported a total of seventeen SS stationed in Sobibor [whose names are listed in my note 494, Bauer is the fifteenth in the list] but he did not ascribe any specific crime "(p. 172, 173).
This does not prevent Terry to write: "Typically, Graf accentuates the absence of Bauer in the testimony of a witness [Feldhendler], and omit its presence in the subsequent declaration of its source [Metz]" (p. 76).
Well the ARC folks are not at all dishonest nor are we kooks and nutbags like Nick Terry and his ilk