Question on Leuchter and Rudolf

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Question on Leuchter and Rudolf

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 4 months ago (Thu Jul 09, 2009 1:01 am)

I think I remember hearing somewhere that some of Leuchter's work was outdated and that there were some mistakes that were pointed out by extermination theorists, but then Rudolf came along, and showed where Leuchter made his mistakes and then corrected them and that these corrections disproved the response of the extermination theorists and only strengthened the revisionist side.

Can anyone confirm this and if so, can they provide references to these corrections made by Rudolf?

Thesaint
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: England

Re: Question on Leuchter and Rudolf

Postby Thesaint » 1 decade 4 months ago (Thu Jul 09, 2009 1:14 pm)

Welcome to the forum Drew.
I would suggest the "Rudolf report" in which he specifically addresses the deficiencies of the earlier "Leuchter report".
It`s on sale here or available for free download.
"We didn't call survivors," says Lipstadt, "because first of all we didn't want to subject them to cross-examination by this guy. He (Irving) would have destroyed them."
- Jerusalem Post 6/16/00

grenadier
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 9:07 am

Re: Question on Leuchter and Rudolf

Postby grenadier » 1 decade 4 months ago (Thu Jul 09, 2009 1:36 pm)

Hi Drew.

Leuchter made some mistakes but I'd say the core of his case was sound. Besides the Rudolf report there is also a revised Leuchter report where Rudolf points out where he made mistakes and corrects them. It's called the Leuchter reports: critical edition. Great books but not light read. You should be able to download them in PDF format free of charge from:
http://vho.org/dl/ENG.html

Hope this helps,
Best regards.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Question on Leuchter and Rudolf

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 4 months ago (Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:03 pm)

Thanks a bunch!

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Question on Leuchter and Rudolf

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 4 months ago (Fri Jul 10, 2009 1:09 am)

I have another question on Rudolf. Has anyone seen this?
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot. ... urces.html

Wednesday, January 09, 2008
How Deniers Distort Quotes
A classic denial strategy is to take a quote from a historian and pretend that the historian is saying what the denier wants him to say. It's a subtle form of lying that we define as quote-mining. Here's an example.

Germar Rudolf wants us to believe that historians have doubts about gas chambers, so he quote-mines Arno J. Mayer as follows:

The tendency in recent historiography seems to be more and more to abandon the gas chambers, for which the sources are "at once rare and unreliable", as Prof. Arno J. Mayer put it.


Was Mayer really abandoning the gas chambers, as Rudolf claimed? Rudolf clearly knew that he wasn't, because Mayer's full passage stated this:

Sources for the study of the gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable.. .there is no denying the many contradictions, and ambiguities in the existing sources. These cannot be ignored, although it must be emphasized strongly that such defects are altogether insufficient to put in question the use of gas chambers in the mass murder of Jews at Auschwitz.


This same quote-mine was employed by the late, but not lamented, Canadian denier, Doug Collins in 1993-1994, as part of a series of articles that led to a complaint being made to the British Columbia Press Council. On the issue of Collins' quote-mining of Mayer, the Council adjudicated:

The Press Council upholds the complaint on these points and finds that they breach the Code of Practice, Article One, in that they mislead the reader and misrepresent the original authors.


Quote-mining by deniers was thus exposed over a decade ago by a public authority, but deniers continue to practice the vice.

posted by Jonathan Harrison at 7:55 PM

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Question on Leuchter and Rudolf

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 4 months ago (Fri Jul 10, 2009 1:14 am)

This is a good question. Why would Germar Rudolf quote Mayer in such a way? I think it was not to mis-represent Mayer's own personal views, but rather to quote an admission of a Jew about contradictions and problems with the gas chamber story. However, by failing to provide the rest of the statement, Rudolf doesn't let the reader know if this is a free thinking Jew who thinks like David Cole, or if it is a brainwashed Jew who admits scientific flaws, but holds on the gas chamber story and makes ad hoc excuses to help sustain his religion of holocaustianity. So that was a mistake on Rudolf's part. While it's goot to quote someone in full, it's also important to note that Rudolf wasn't trying to figure out whether Mayer was another David Cole or not. I don't think Rudolf intended to have Mayer appear like David Cole. Rudolf wasn't interested in looking for 'backup', but rather showing how IT HAS BEEN ADMITTED BY PEOPLE by implication that the work Rudolf is doing is correct and overall sound. Therefore, his quotation of Mayer, small as it is, shows that Rudolf has been and is correct in his work.

Therefore those fools at holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com need to give their heads a shake.

grenadier
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2004 9:07 am

Re: Question on Leuchter and Rudolf

Postby grenadier » 1 decade 4 months ago (Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:28 am)

Well Drew, if someone is "quote-mining" anything here, is the poor Jonathan Harrison... Rudolf was NOT making use of Mayer in the strict sense that he was giving up the ridiculous gas chambers, what Harrison did was he quoted Rudolf completely out of context, that is, he lied subtly. I've read a lot of what Rudolf wrote and the passage sounds familiar, he was probably mentioning the attempt by the hoaxters to move the holocaust further east into the Soviet Union, putting more emphasis on a "holocaust by bullets" as opposed to the traditional gas chamber myth.
Jonathan Harrison is either an idiot who cannot read, a liar, or a combination of both.

Another point is that some of the more serious - if I can really use such adjective - holocaust "historians", have made many admissions against interest. Such have been mentioned by revisionists to demonstrate that even from the orthodox perspective, though they won't admit it, there is much room for doubt. Such admissions oftentimes harshly contradict what the very authors are stating, as is the case of Prof.Mayer.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Question on Leuchter and Rudolf

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 4 months ago (Fri Jul 10, 2009 3:54 pm)

Just as I thought. Grasping at straws.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: borjastick and 9 guests