I thought this deserving of a separate thread from:
article referred to here:
Prof McNally's comments in bold &brackets, [ ____ ] after Mathis text.
Courtesy of http://www.ReportersNotebook.com
Hello Michael at ReportersNotebook.com:
I was both amused and disgusted at the cheap yellow journalism and fatuous flatulent gossip that Mathis wrote so I deleted it when you first sent it out. I am even more amazed that the guy wants it seriously considered. So here goes!
Paraphrases and comments are interspersed in [brackets] below. Relevant portions of the Mathis original have been retained and only uncommented-on portions deleted.
Prof. Patrick H. McNally
January 27, 2005
*Prof. Andrew E. Mathis is the author of The King Arthur Myth in Modern
American Literature (McFarland, 2002). The author gratefully acknowledges his colleagues and fellow board members Albrecht Kolthoff and Gordon McFee of the Holocaust History Project (THHP) for helping to translate some of the German material here, as well as Harry W. Mazal and John Zimmerman, also of THHP, for their help in interpreting Nazi-era documents.
[Prof. Patrick H. McNally is a grade school graduate. He gratefully
acknowledges his elementary school teachers for providing him with the basic principles of informal logic so essential to bullshit detecting. The fact that he also has a PhD in philosophy, MA in German and Russian Literatures, MS in Accounting, and MBA is irrelevant in dealing with the trash currently under consideration.]
"Do the arguments of the Holocaust deniers have any credibility? Here is an opportunity for us to use the principles of general semantics to put such claims to the test."
[Do the arguments of the Holocaust affirmers have any credibility?
Here is an opportunity for us to use our grade school education to put such claims to the test.]
[In fact, the orthodox historians have no arguments or solid forensic
evidence. Only bogus "testimony" of professional perjurers like Rudolph Vrba and psychotic liars like Elie Wiesel. They imprison and threaten with death serious researchers like Germar Rudolf and David Cole. Everyone needs only to see Cole`s DVD about the Auschwitz Labor Camp and read Rudolf`s monumental "Lectures on the Holocaust." to be adequately protected from the Holocaust virus.]
GENERAL SEMANTICS AND HOLOCAUST DENIAL
[Basic Arithmetic and the New Holocaust Math: (6.0M - 2.9M = 6.0M)]
CERTAIN GROUPS claim the Holocaust never happened.
[Rather certain specific individuals make these claims. They should be cited and not simply slandered and libeled.]
Almost from the beginning of the discovery of this widespread destruction of European Jewry before and during World War II, Nazi apologists, anti-Semites, and self- styled “skeptics” have tried to discredit the accepted history of this period.
[This is a filthy lie. The first holocaust deniers were socialists and Jews
who actually spent time in the camps and were outraged by the lies being spread by the embryonic "Holocaust Industry."]
While originally an obscure movement, since the rise of the Internet
in the mid-1990s, Holocaust denial has grown significantly, and new adherents continue to set up web sites dedicated to “debunking the myth.
[and writing serious scientific investigations for which they get imprisoned, threatened with death, or loose their careers.]
The upside to the growing awareness of Holocaust denial is that organizations and individuals have taken up the task of preserving the basic truths of the Holocaust, while exposing this period to continuing historiographical scrutiny, thus promoting a better and more complete understanding of the Holocaust.
[The upside to the growing awareness of the Holocaust is that organizations and individuals have taken up the task of exposing the basic lies of Holocaustomania, while exposing liars like Elie Wiesel to continuing historiographical scrutiny, thus promoting a better and more complete understanding of the sick, greedy, and evil minds that sucked the Holyhoax out of their thumbs.]
The challenges that the deniers apply to the generally accepted history vary widely in size and scope. For instance, they dispute the death toll at
Auschwitz-Birkenau, resurrect early allegations about the Holocaust and Nazi atrocities that are now known to be untrue, e.g., soap production from human fat, and they claim that the Nuremberg trials were a sham and a perversion of justice.
[Mathis` paragraph shows the sad and ironic fate of revisionists who first
expose the holocaustomaniacs` lies and then watch as those exposed claim to be the exposers and take the credit for the work of the revisionists.]
Furthermore, they pore over documents from the Nazi era,
[because they can actually read German and think that documents are
important. Has Elie Wiesel ever read a single document?]
Looking at such Holocaust-denial tactics through the lens of general
semantics, we can find at least three main shortcomings:
[Looking at such Holocaust-affirmation tactics through the lens of common
sense, we can find at least three main shortcomings:]
1. Over- and Under-Defining the Holocaust. The use of “the Holocaust”
as an over/under-defined term, allowing for the “disproof” of victim
numbers and atrocity stories.
[1. Defining the Holocaust in stone and insisting on the mystical number of 6,000,000. Mathis here unconsciously exposes holocaustianity as a totally unscientific pseudo-religion because he does not allow for "disproof" of victim totals. Just like Christianity does not allow for proof that Jesus never rose from the dead. But Christians are honest and intelligent enough to acknowledge that the Resurrection is an unprovable belief and not a scientific fact.]
2. Extending the Definition over Time. The inability (or refusal) of the
deniers to accept multiple time-based definitions of the Holocaust, as
seen in their reading of the Luther memo.
[multiple time-based definitions = new lies to replace the old! Mathis is
writing utterly dishonest and ignorant nonsense here. Rudolf`s book is filled with examples of different and incompatible "multiple time-based
definitions." The old lies are abandoned as revisionists expose them.]
3. The Two-Valued Orientation. The overwhelming use of the two-valued
orientation in presenting the so-called revisionist version of the
Holocaust, for example, in their allegations about Nuremberg.
[This is stupid pseudo-academic jibbering and jabbering. In any criminal
trial Aristotelian two-valued thinking is basic: guilty vs. not guilty.]
A strong working definition of the Holocaust with consideration of its
development over time, along with the exposure of two-valued orientations wherever they are used, can enable us to see the faulty logic on which Holocaust denial is built.
[A good understanding of how holocaustomaniacs have changed their stories over time can enable us to see how this shabby filthy lie has survived and even thrived.]
1. Over- and Under-Defining the Holocaust
Were we to approach a random person on the street who happened not to have any specific knowledge of Holocaust history, and were we to ask that person to define “the Holocaust,” that person might reply, “Hitler gassed six million Jews to death."
[That person might also reply, "Blow your bullshit out an anatomical aperture of your choosing! Don`t give me any of your TV talking heads strawmen!]
Furthermore, the definition at hand neglects an equal number of non-Jewish victims of the Holocaust, such as Gypsies, Poles, Soviet POWs, homosexuals, and political prisoners.
[No, not true! The Holocaust is a "Jews-only" event. Gentiles are only
collateral damage included for PR purposes. Elie Wiesel severely attacked Simon Peres for calling Hiroshima a holocaust.]
This is because of the tendency among deniers to refer to the Holocaust as a single event.
[More dishonest and ignorant nonsense! The reader is encouraged to peruse Germar Rudolf`s "Lectures on the Holocaust" to see how he treats it as a myriad of events.]
What we must understand is that, in the words of Michael Shermer and Alex Grobman, "The Holocaust was a myriad of events in a myriad of places and relies on myriad pieces of data that converge on one conclusion.” (Shermer and Grobman, p.33)
[What we must understand is that, in the paraphrased words of Robert
Faurisson and Arthur Butz, "The Holocaust was a myriad of fantasies in a myriad of sick minds and relies on myriad pieces of fiction that converge on the one conclusion that the whole Holocaust fable is the filthiest blood libel in human history.]
Nevertheless, the idea of human soap production remains a fundamental belief of some people when they consider the Holocaust.
[This is just more gossip which is so characteristic of the whole Mathis piece.]
Another longstanding over-definition of the Holocaust is that the death toll
at Auschwitz-Birkenau was four million people. This is also false. The death toll at Auschwitz-Birkenau can best be estimated at somewhere between 1 million and 1.5 million. However, from 1946 until 1989, an official commemorative plaque at Auschwitz-Birkenau listed the death toll at four million. Although the number was lowered after years of inquiry into the topic by historians and finally after the liberation of documents from the Soviet archives, the mass media still routinely reports that four million people died at Auschwitz-Birkenau.
[Welcome to Holocaust arithmetic! With this massive reduction in the
Auschwitz total shouldn`t the whole Holocaust total be reduced? Not with the holyhoax where: 6,000,000 - 3,000,000 = 6,000,000]
With the Holocaust thus over/under-defined, ample opportunity exists for
deniers to exploit the term.
[With the Holocaust definition constantly changing, ample opportunity exists for affirmers to make up new stories and run away from the old lies.]
2. Extending the Definition Over Time
One way to better understand how Holocaust deniers are able to exploit
historically valid statements to advance their agenda is to track the
definition of the Holocaust over the course of time.
[One way to better understand how Holocaust affirmers are able to exploit historically bogus statements to advance their agenda of profit and political power is to track the definition of the Holocaust over the course of time.
The original paragraph in Mathis is a good example of what Sigmund Fraud called "projection." There is no one single agenda among the ideologically widely divergent revisionists but there is an agenda among the "Holocaust Industrialists" and hoaxobelievers. And even if revisionists did have a single agenda, it would be an irrelevant "argumentum ad hominem" if the hoaxocosters harped on it to avoid dealing with the revisionists` arguments. If Einstein had been a pedophile, would that be relevant to evaluating his arguments in physics?
Please read Rudolf to see how he has done a superlative job of "tracking the definition of the Holocaust over the course of time."]
Even during the initial months of the war, the idea of setting up a massive
Jewish ghetto on the island of Madagascar was given consideration by the Nazi leadership.
[Even before the initial years of the war, the idea of setting up a massive
Jewish ghetto on the Palestinian land was given consideration by the judeo-Nazi leadership.]
It was not until the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union that mass killings of
Jews began in earnest by the Einsatzgruppen, or mobile killing squads.
[This is the latest fairy tale pushed by the Harvard Prof. Goldhagen to
substitute for the disintegrating myth about the homicidal gas chambers.]
In a memoir written while he was hiding in Argentina, Adolf Eichmann,
[Perhaps he wrote it in prison in Israel with the help of his captors?]
Clearly Endlösung is a term whose meaning changed drastically between
1935 and 1941,
[Clearly "Hooplacaust" is a term whose meaning changed drastically between 1945 and 2006,]
Using the general semantics device of dating, we can begin to distinguish x between the differing meanings and connotations of Endlösung thus:
[general semantics device of dating = using our grade school dictionary]
A testament to the amount of misinformation introduced into the initial
historical accounts about the Holocaust is The Black Book of Polish Jewry,
published in 1943.
[This was not "misinformation" but an unsuccessful lie. The whole history of the holocaust is a story of unsuccessful lies, but the liars never quit. They suck new lies out of their thumbs and rely on naive careerists to spread them.]
For instance, in the “Report of Dr. I[gnacy] Schwarzbart”included in the
Black Book, it is stated that “The methods applied in this mass extermination are, apart from executions, firing squads, electrocution and lethal gas-chambers.” (Apenszlak, p.131, emphasis mine) In the chapter on Treblinka, the killing processed is described thus: “When the execution chambers are filled the doors are hermetically closed and the slow suffocation of living people begins, brought about by the steam issuing from the numerous vents in the pipes.” (Apenszlak, p.145, emphasis mine)
[Mathis here gives a valuable list of several lies that revisionists have
exposed and then his fellow travellers come along and grab credit.]
The normative history of Belzec and Treblinka....
[normative = kosher certified]
Reitlinger writes: Nevertheless the wildest legends surrounded the place
[Belzec]. Dr. Guérin, in a prisoner-of-war camp only twenty miles along the line [train line between Lwow and Lublin], heard that Jews were killed by an incredible electric current passed through water, and this story reached London in November, 1942. It was only after the war that a real survivor appeared to describe the miserable diesel engine which had supplied the carbon monoxide. (Reitlinger, p.140)
[Hah! Hah! This is absolutely hilarious and exposes Mathis as a complete
ignoramus. Please read Germar Rudolf on diesel engines and carbon monoxide. I am laughing so hard at Mathis` ignorance that I find it hard to type.]
Similarly, neither Reitlinger or his next great successor in Holocaust
historiography, Raul Hilberg, used the four million casualty figure for Auschwitz mentioned above.
[These two holocaust giants have already been exposed in a book, "Giants with Feet of Clay."]
As for the “steam chambers,” despite their being entered into the record
(directly from the Black Book) at Nuremberg, a survivor of Treblinka, Jankiel Wiernik, in a Yiddish memoir published in 1944, A Yor in Treblinka, definitively identified the chambers as gas chambers.
[And Wiernik was also lying or fantasizing and did not understand the
different between insectical gas chambers used to save Jewish lives and non-existent judeocidal gas chambers.]
Therefore, to make as stark a contrast as possible, Endlösung1946 might
include steam chambers at Treblinka, electrocutions at Belzec, and a death toll at Auschwitz of four million, while Endlösung1989 would include none of these elements.
[and Endlosing2010 will include nothing of anything.]
Keeping in mind that Luther was an attendee at the Wannsee Conference, the minutes of which contain euphemisms like “relocation” and “evacuation” as terms for genocide, and having already ruled out emigration as a means to achieve a final solution, the “territorial final solution” mentioned in this memorandum is clearly the mass murder decided on months earlier.
[More outdated nonsense from Mathis who cannot keep track of which lies have been given up. Consult the Rudolf book for an on-target quote from Mr. Holocaust himself, Yehuda Bauer, on the Wannsee Conference!]
Eichmann himself admitted both at his interrogation in Israel before standing trial and on the stand in Jerusalem that the Wannsee Conference dealt with the mass murder of Jews.
[Poor Eichmann! One almost has to feel sorry for him. After the war everybody thought he was dead and so they turned him into the scapegoat for the whole debacle. If the Nurnberg Show Trial folks wanted a confession from an SS officer, then the whole guilt could be laid on Eichmann. Perhaps in Jerusalem he hoped to get off by affirming some fairy tales? An interesting but irrelevant side question.]
3. The Two-Valued Orientation
To review briefly, the two-valued orientation may be termed “black or white thinking,” i.e., the belief that there is no middle area between what we hold to be “right” and “wrong.”
[To review briefly, the two-valued orientation may be termed “guilty or
innocent thinking,” i.e., the belief that there is no middle area between what we hold to be “guilt” and “innocence"; between what we hold to be
"pregnant" and "not pregnant.”
My paraphrase immediately above sums up in a nutshell the whole nonsense of the Mathis piece. If anybody is guilty of Mathis` nonsensical idea, it is people like Baby Bush and Elie Wiesel.]
Deniers seize on such lies by Nuremberg prosecutors to conclude that all
testimony offered against Nazi defendants was perjury, whether it was offered by the Soviet Union or not.
[No, they do not do this. Just another example of Mathis` shoddy and
Few would deny that all sides during World War II committed atrocities of
[Mathis can only speak in terms of platitudes and plongitudes.]
That the Soviet prosecutors tried to blame some or their own atrocities
on the Nazis does not mean that the Nazis did not commit atrocities
[Whow! What powerful logic Mathis assails us with. Whom is he attacking?
Obviously just another one of his strawmen.]
Although the principal Soviet prosecutor at Nuremberg, Iona Nikitchenko,
tried to enter the Katyn Massacre as a Nazi war crime in the indictment, the American and British prosecutors, already aware that the Soviets had carried out the massacre, refused to take judicial notice of the massacre as a Nazi crime.
[But did the Americans and the British object to the patent Soviet lie? No,
so it seems there is honor not only among thieves but among liars as well.]
Therefore, despite the claims of the deniers that the Nuremberg proceedings were entirely tainted because of the guilt for Katyn being assessed to the Nazis, no such guilt was ever assessed.
[The deniers do not make this stupid claim. Mathis foists it on them and then uses it as a strawman. Why does Mathis never even mention the torturing, the blackmailing, the bribing of witnesses?]
The Holocaust denial movement relies on the relative ignorance of the average person regarding the minutiae that makes up much of Holocaust historiography.
[The Holocaust affirmation movement relies on the complete ignorance of the average professor regarding the overall nonsense that makes up much of holyhoaxotoxification.]
However, much more dangerously, the deniers rely on several of the
semantic traps that Korzybski and Hayakawa exposed decades ago.
[However, much more dangerously, the affirmers rely on several of the
semantic traps that our grade school teachers exposed decades ago.]
While ongoing historical inquiry on the history of the Third Reich will
continue to shed light on this tragic period in human history, the application of the principles of general semantics to the propaganda of Holocaust deniers and other Nazi apologists can do much to discredit their claims.
[While ongoing historical inquiry on the history of the witch trials will
continue to shed light on "The Hoax of the Century," the application of the
principles of common sense and basic human decency to the lies of Holocaust maniacs and industrialists and other judeo-Nazi apologists can do much to discredit the shabbiest and filthiest of blood libels.]
WORKS CONSPICUOUSLY NOT CITED BY MATHIS
1. Butz, Arthur. The Hoax of the Century.
2. Cole, David. Auschwitz Labor Camp, DVD.
3. Rudolf, Germar. Lectures on the Holocaust.
All of the above titles can be ordered from: http://www. Tadp.org