Support 911Blogger


O’Reilly Sicks FBI on Fetzer, Barrett

O’Reilly Sicks FBI on Fetzer, Barrett

Friday October 13th 2006, 7:33 pm

Kurt Nimmo, Another Day in the Empire blog

Bill O’Reilly, the scurrilous “phone sex” deviant and prime time bully, wants nine eleven researchers and investigators arrested—or, more accurately under the so-called detainee bill, disappeared into Gestapo torture dungeons—and presumably brought up on treason charges, marched before a secret military tribunal, and sent to the gallows.

O’Reilly did not say as much when he abused and talked over Jim Fetzer last night, characterizing him as a “disgrace” to the country for not buying lock, stock, and barrel the official Grimm Brothers fairy tale version of events of what did and did not happen on September 11, 2001. Not only did the reprehensible O’Reilly, who had the academic Dr. Sami al-Arian arrested and charged as a terrorist, slander Fetzer and by extension anybody else who questions the government, he also demanded Fetzer be tailed by the FBI.

“I’d put the FBI on you and that nutty [professor Kevin] Barrett and find out what the hell you guys are up to,” threatened O’Reilly, basically insinuating that scholarly research is a crime, as of course “everything changed” after nine eleven, including the right to exercise the First Amendment. But then, as we know, or some of us know, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are now effectively dead and, increasingly, it is a crime to question the government, especially in an academic setting, same as it was after the Nazis took over in Germany...

Continued at link - Thanks, Kevin.

Fetzer and O.reilly

I guess O'reilly is in what you you call the violent rejection stage of acceptance.

Well they keep baiting the

Well they keep baiting the players at least a couple times a month...so someone at the top is giving the order to put them on...why you ask?--- Safety valve..."we were by no means supressing this possibility"...cant you just hear orally say this...

I have to say, I find it

I have to say, I find it strange that suddenly now O'reilly is taking this on. That's a first for him isn't it? Even rush Limbaugh said something about Alex Jones being a left wing democrat on his show. Not to mention the southpark coverage. Surely they can't be just getting around to damage control now on this. I don't know what to make of it, but it seems that they all got word to start covering it. But at the same time, it seems they have to know at this point all it will do is get more people to look into it. Who knows.

I wouldn't overestimate the

I wouldn't overestimate the stategic abilities of FOX et al on this issue. I think they are still in shock that the "ignore it completely" stategy is starting to fail, and they don't really know what else to do about it.

They are moving quickly towards the "they are crazy and dangerous" startegy, but way too late. The timing seems completely wrong and it looks desperate.

I don't think either

I don't think either O'Reilly or Fetzer is helping with regards to the truth.

The media has reported plenty of instances that warrant for a new real investigation. The problem is, nobody pays attention nor do they care. It's either believe the government or believe complex conspiracy theories. Stick to the facts, not conjecture. Assume the towers fell due to the planes and assume a plane hit the Pentagon -- arguing otherwise is pointless. Until there's solid credible physical evidence, don't bother because you won't convince anyone and it doesn't change the truth.

9/11 could have happened exactly like the Government says, but they could have still -allowed- it to happen or -made- it happen. The wargames, the lack of NORAD's response, the Pakistani ISI financing, and the pre-knowledge shouldn't be eclipsed by impossible intricate conspiracy theories.

Stop trying to convince people its MIHOP rather than LIHOP.

Either First Degree or Second Degree murder, it doesn't matter if it was premediated or not. The U.S. Government has carelessly initiated terrorists plots (e.g. WTC93), they have stopped them, and they have committed them overseas. As for 9/11, we know they knew something was going to happen, and they did nothing. There's little difference in letting it happen and making it happen.

Stick to the facts

"Stick to the facts, not conjecture. Assume the towers fell due to the planes and assume a plane hit the Pentagon -- arguing otherwise is pointless. Until there's solid credible physical evidence, don't bother because you won't convince anyone and it doesn't change the truth."

In one sentence you say "stick to the facts" and in the next you tell people to "Assume the tower fell due to the planes". Seems like a contradiction, how can you "stick to the facts" while your busy "assuming" things. Sorry, I prefer to "stick to the facts" of the towers collapses. They speak for themselves. The collapses themselves are the solid credible evidence your looking for. The Official version of the collapses defys the laws of physics.

"The proof that 9/11 was an 'inside job' is not that the buildings collapsed, it is that all of the major structural components of these buildings collapsed at exactly the same instant. The east, west, north and south sides of all three buildings collapsed at once in perfect synchronization. The perfectly symmetrical descent of the three buildings is a sure sign these collapses were controlled, especially considering the non-symmetrical impact damage and fires."

You have no facts. There is

You have no facts. There is no proof. Just because it looks like it, doesn't make it so. It could have collapsed in a symmetrical fashion from the buildings' design. If any of this was "proof" you'd have numerous structural engineers substantiating the facts in a peer reviewed journal.

Furthermore, if I even concede the possibility that WTC7 was taken down from explosives, then I'm expected to believe that a missile hit the Pentagon, that we shot down Flight 93, that possibly no planes at all hit the WTC, then all of the sudden I'm down the Morgan Reynolds rabbit hole of insainity. It's great for science fiction, but not for the truth.

Again, focus on the FACTS. Don't just talk about what's interesting, fun and intriguing to speculate about.

No facts

"You have no facts. There is no proof. Just because it looks like it, doesn't make it so. It could have collapsed in a symmetrical fashion from the buildings' design."

I'm sorry but your wrong. As I stated the collapses themselves show what happened. You need to do a little bit of research. Your comment about conceding the possibility of WTC7 coming down causing you to be expected to believe then that a missile hit the Pentagon makes no sense to me, again I'm sorry.

Here's some points to consider:

(1) the impact of the planes cannot have caused enough damage to bring the buildings down, since the buildings were designed to withstand them (as Frank DeMartini, the project manager, has observed), the planes that hit were very similar to those they were designed to withstand, and they continued to stand after those impacts with negligible effects;

(2) the melting point of steel at 2,800*F is about 1,000*F higher than the maximum burning temperature of jet-fuel-based fires, which do not exceed 1,800*F under optimal conditions, so the fires cannot have caused the steel to melt, which means that melting steel did not bring the buildings down;

(3) UL had certified the steel in the buildings up to 2,000*F for at least six hours before it would even significantly weaken, where these fires burned too low and too briefly--about one hour in the South Tower and one and a half in the North--to have even caused the steel to weaken, much less melt;

(4) if the steel had melted or weakened, the affected floors would have displayed completely different behavior, with some asymmetrical sagging and tilting, which would have been gradual and slow, not the complete, abrupt, and total demolition that was observed;

(5) there was not enough kinetic energy for the collapse of one floor to bring about the collapse of the next lower floor, even if the impact of the planes and the ensuing fires had been enough to cause the steel to weaken, which means that, even if one floor had collapsed due to the impacts and the fires, that could not have caused lower floors to fall;

(6) there was not enough kinetic energy for the collapse of one floor to bring about the pulverization of the next floor, even if the impact of the planes and the ensuing fires had been enough to cause the steel to weaken and one floor to collapse upon another, which required a massive source of energy beyond any that the government has considered;

(7) heavy steel construction buildings like the Twin Towers, built with more than 100,000 tons of steel, are not even capable of "pancake collapse", which can only occur with concrete structures of "lift slab" construction and could not occur in "redundant" welded-steel buildings, such as the towers, unless every supporting columns were removed at the same time;

(8) the destruction of the South Tower in 10 seconds and of the North in 11 is even faster than free fall with only air resistance, which would have taken at least 12 seconds, which would have been impossible without extremely powerful explosives;

(9) pools of molten metal were found at the subbasement levels three, four, and five weeks later, an effect that could not have been produced by the plane-impact/jet-fuel-fire/pancake collapse;

Steel handles fires very well. Thats the reason frying pans are made of steel as well as ovens. When businesses have to cut steel they use cutting torches which have a mixture of oxygen and gas. The oxygen helps to increase the temperature of the fire. An open air fuel fire does not burn hot enough to weaken steel. This isn't my opinion it's a scientific fact. You should know this if you've ever cooked with an oven.

The Twin Towers were both 110 stories tall, as such they had to be designed to withstand high winds. They both had 47 inner steel columns. The fires from the jet fuel were localized and not hot enough to cause damage to the 47 steel columns. Again, this should be obvious to anyone who has seen ovens at work. If you turn your oven on to broil it's going to get very hot, but your not going to melt the steel in the oven. The fires did not get hot enough and they did not last long enough to damage the 47 inner columns. The fires being localized and not hot enough and not burning that long could not have caused the perfectly timed collapse of all three buildings on that day. The collapse was timed at close to free-fall speed in a vacuum, which is impossible based on the Official story because you had 47 inner support columns as well as the floors which would have offered resistance to the momentum even if there had been a collapse. Like I said before the "Official" story defys the Laws of physics, if you don't believe that and you don't want to do the research then you'll continue to be decieved.

LIHOP vs MIHOP

Unfortunately, from an intelligence stand point(that's FBI, MI6 intel, not IQ) to let it happen you have to help it happen. Why? You don't want anything else BUT the targets hit. And if you're helping it happen, sorry, as far as the public is concerned you did MAKE it happen.

You're right about sticking to facts. The fact is this administration, by destroying evidence and tampering the investigation, have made themselves accessories after the fact to murder.

You're wrong about the physical evidence. Short of a whisle blower with access, the bastards will NEVER let an investigation they can't control near whatever is left of the physical evidence. The fact most of it has been desroyed/recycled and the rest they refuse to release, is evidence enough of culpability.

WHITE HOUSE AID: "Can I help you, officer?"
DC COP: "I've got a warrent for the arrest of five men and one woman at this address for accessory to murder."

I can dream.

That is a beautifully sane

That is a beautifully sane statement. We need more like it... way more like it!

the next time should be different!

Fetzer (or any scholar) should say to the host, "and what are your qualifications?" and, "are you saying that your academic prowess is above ours?" Don't get manipulated! The incredible skill of the scholars should not be challenged, period like this - only in an open and "balanced forum. I heard Hanity say that, "the plane hit the towers, they caught on fire, and that's it . . . you can believe what you want." Now this is crazy talk and I think it's high time to stop gatekeepers before they get on a roll and ask "their" qualifications in physics, math, science, etc., they are empty bladders of hot air. There's no argument when you can't argue your point. Next interview - stop it dead in its' tracks - let's use some psychology on this, they can't argue absurdity - they control the microphone, turn off the guest speaker, you all know the game.

Thank you Fetzer

I sent a polite email to Bill (what a swell fella') thanking him for having Fetzer on his show and asking that he have more guests like Fetzer in the future: our country's future depends on it! I am sure that irked him more than if I scolded him (which he would get-off on).

By the way, I am a big big Kurt Nimmo fan but I do not like his constant harping on the Nazis as the standard of all evil in the world. I do not think this is historically accurate, and not that I am a neo Nazi or apologist, but this sort of inaccurate historical analysis/comparison drawing is very amateurish and helps deflect blame from the Allied powers who deserve huge blame for helping to START WWII and that the Americans and the Soviets were much worse torturers than the Germans, etc. Some of Nimmo's references to the Nazis are vague as he goes into NO DETAILS of how evil they must have been for killing millions of Jews (in fact, about half a million died during the war, but were not murdered), and that is wise of him since the Holocaust has been debunked by revisionists such as Germar Rudolph (Dissecting the Holocaust; Lectures on the Holocaust). Jurgen Graf has an essay on how the Nazi prison camps were much better and safer than US prison camps after the war where they let millions of Germans die.

I hope Nimmo is reading this but I suspect he is too proud to go beyond quesioning the conventional "wisdom" in this matter (and he has no email address that I know of). Nimmo does a disservice to his writing to constantly refer to the Nazis as the standard of all evil, when in reality WWII was a complex conflagration of forces. You don't hear him ragging on Churchill or Roosevelt either who were more than happy to start a war for their own cynical reasons. Wake up Kurt and smell the delousing chambers for what they were!

O'Reilly is going to call

O'Reilly is going to call the FBI? I thought he only used the telephone to sexually harrass young professional women who spurn his advances. What a frigging joke that clown is. lol

think again

I'm not sure if you are defending Hitler and the Nazis here. The Nazis are emblematic of the current situation, as it appears Bush is using the Enabling Act as a playbook.

In fact, if you bother to read my blog, you will see I give pretty much all leaders a hard time, including Roosevelt and Eisenhower. For instance:

Here I criticize Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and yes, FDR:

http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=507

and here, Mao and Stalin:

http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=312

More on Stalin:

http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=300
http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=467
http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=342
http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=140
http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=222
http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=258

"In other words, Weiner is calling for an act of genocide that would best Mao’s “Great Leap Forward” into mass murder (49,000,000), Stalin’s various famines and purges (13,000,000), Adolf Hitler’s Nazi killing spree (12,000,000), and Pol Pot’s “Year Zero” (1,700,000), to list the most infamous."

http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=343

I write about Winston Churchill's slaughter of the Kurds and his use of mustard gas, probably too much:

http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=471
http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=86

"It was Winston Churchill, as colonial secretary, who remarked, “I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favor of using poison gas against uncivilized tribes,” for instance the Kurds in northern Iraq. Churchill was also responsible in part for drawing the current borders of Iraq, carved out three Ottoman districts—the northern mostly Kurdish district administered from Mosul, the middle predominately Sunni Arab district, including Baghdad; and the southern largely Shiite district, whose major city is Basra. It was indeed the “imperial arrogance” of the British that angered the Arabs (and Kurds) of what is now Iraq and motivated them to revolt."

http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=35

I write about "Mad Bomber Harris" and how he used incendiary bombs against German civilians. "Harris micromanaged the bombing of Cologne and Dresden—directly targeting civilians—the latter raid one of the most barbaric acts of mass slaughter in modern history (a war crime enthusiastically supported by Churchill, a demented little man who earned his reputation gassing “niggers” in the British “colony” of Iraq during the early 1920s)."

http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=86

I'm not sure what more you want. But then sometimes it is difficult to please all the people, all the time.

You sound like one of those historical revisionists who declare nothing particularly bad happened under the Nazis, sort of like Benjamin Freedman, who places the blame for what happened to the Jews at the doorstep of the Jews themselves. I have consistently argued that certain aspects of the Holocaust are inaccurate and, of course, hyped, having called it a "dog and pony show" for Israel, as a way to shake the collection plate in the faces of guilt-ridden Germans and other Europeans, most who were not even alive at the time.

For this I am now called a "Holocaust denier" and "antisemite."

It seems, no matter what you do, you get it from both sides. According to the mental case, Eric Huffschmid, who was at one time a sterling nine eleven researcher, now a crank, I am a "crypto-Jew" and part of some ill-defined Zionist network.

But then, I suppose, when you are right much of the time, you can expect to be attacked, and often relentlessly, as I am here.

Incidentally, my email address is on this page:

http://www.kurtnimmo.com/video/

Not that I feel good about pointing to it, as I suffer crank and threatening emails--and yes, loads of spam, including unwanted subscriptions filled out in my name to David Horowitz's newsletter and mailing lists from the Jewish World Review. Again, all of this comes with the territory, including consisent defacing of my Wikipedia entry and some miscerant posting insults against me on numerous IndyMedia sites using my wife's name.

That appears to be the current atmosphere of political discourse in this country.

I guess it beats the sort of beating and murder meted out by the Nazis... but there I go again, insulting the poor Nazis, who got a bad rap.

Think again

Dear Kurt, Thank you for all of the references in what I agree is you basically very thorough, very knowledgable and even handed approach to pointing out the corruption in the world. I am not a closet Nazi however I notice that you seem to (overly?) rely on the Nazi metaphor to describe modern political events, which seem to me to coincidentally support an orthodox view of history. If I didn't say so in my first post, of course the Nazis deserve plenty of blame for WWII, however, what is foremost in the minds of most people when they are reminded of WWII is the "Nazi genocide of the Jews". I notice that you do not go so far as to repeat the Holocaust Myth, but neither do you deal with the issue clearly, as far as I have read. Unless you are in the Norman Finkelstein camp, who does not deny the Holocaust, but documents how it has been exploited. I have read many of your columns over the last year and can't recall one on this topic (if you can site one be glad to read it and I stand corrected otherwise). I sympathize with your "getting it from both" sides, your's is not a easy job. Having said all this, I really am a huge fan and very impressed. I suppose if you were to dwell too much on how the HOLOCAUST IS A FRAUD this would bring you even more grief from the ZIONIST ATTACK DOGS. Good nite and good luck.

baiting on holocaust?

I'd have to say you're attempting to bait me on the Holocaust. In today's political landscape, there are few crimes considered as bad as "Holocaust denial," an absurd situation. In Europe, you can be imprisoned for questioning the official version of events, the state-sanctioned orthodoxy. I don't claim to know how many Jews died in Europe at the hands of the Nazis. Some say the death camps were a hoax, that far less than 6 million died, that the Zyklon B traces at Auschwitz are disputed, same at Majdanek, Dachau, Mauthausen, etc. For simply raising such questions, I will be considered a vile "antisemite" and "Holocaust denier." If we read the official history, we come away thinking Nazism was nothing more or less than hatred of Jews. In fact, it stood for intolerance of disparate people, including socialists, communists, Roma ("Gypsies"), homosexuals, "deviant artists," and in fact anybody who opposed fascism. I really don't want to dwell on the "Holocaust," it is an over-played card. I am more concerned with the current version of authoritarianism -- fascism, call it Nazism if you must -- and don't find a whole lot of utility in arguing about events in depth that occurred more than sixty years ago.

baiting

I understand, however, what you write above simply reinforces my point, relying on the tired old worn out overly simplified analogy of Nazis Nazis Nazis only serves to make the ZIONIST ATTACK DOGS happy because it conforms to the orthodox version of history (I applaud your many articles that deal with Israeli crimes and your searing analysis). I can see how a writer needs rhetorical devices to fill the space, but if you are going to constantly pull this device out of the bag expect to be validly questioned for reverse Holocaust baiting regarding the unstated premise that everyone believes, that the Nazis murdered 6m Jews.

baiting

PS: Kurt, I realize you can cover only so many topics (and when I say you are a great writer I mean it), but an area you may also want to delve into in more detail would the Israel Lobby issue. As you know, Jeff Blankfort covers this issue assiduously on his mailing list (the great Left scholar, James Petras now has a book on the topic), and Tony Judt earned the wrath of the US Jewish "community" for daring to question the Lobby's power (which ironically proved his point). Watch out for that topic if you also do not want to earn the wrath of the ZIONIST ATTACK DOGS!

You seem to just be

You seem to just be recycling various bits of Cold War propaganda and World War II propaganda and hoping that they will balance themselves out somehow.

As far the Hoaxoco$t goes, the three basic points of falsification at issue are "gas chambers ... six million ... extermination plan." You can find a lot of general evidence of greedy and oppressive practices by the Third Reich, but there is no substantive evidence to support these three specific claims. Carlo Mattogno and others have totally exposed the technical evidentiary basis for the alleged "extermination camps" as a chain of falsehoods many of which are just technologically impossible.

But then you try to counter that by rehashing lies from the Cold War. Just to take one, the Great Leap Forward and the Chinese famine of 1960. Many people shoot off comments about this without looking at the actual demographic data on which such claims are allegedly based. The prime source for Chinese demographics in the relevant period is Judith Banister, CHINA'S CHANGING POPULATION. One can also check the official Chinese statistics as they were published in the STATISTICAL YEARBOOK OF CHINA 1986. Banister's mortality rates are generally higher than those in the official statistics, but they follow the same pattern. Between 1949 and 1957 the mortality rate in China dropped to about half of what it had been before the revolution. A slight rise in mortality occurs in 1958, another slight rise in 1959, a steep rise in 1960 places the mortality rate above that of 1949, the mortality drops down in 1961 to just slightly above the 1957 level, and then in 1962 it is once more back down below the mortality rate of 1957. Whether you count this using the 1949 mortality rate as a yardstick for measuring "famine" (as opposed to "normal") deaths, or whether you use 1957 as the baseline, does make a huge difference in what is computed as the "famine" deaths. Banister's figures would suggest a famine toll of 4.35 million if measured by the 1949 standard and 25.4 million if measured by the 1957 standard. The claims of "49 million" have never had any demographic basis at all, but even with the 25.4 million figure one has to note that this only holds to the extent that the greatly reduced mortality of 1957 as treated as normal and something to be hereafter expected. In fact overall mortality in China declined enormously because the revolutionary changes brought about Mao. The efforts by Cold War propagandists to give people the impression that more people were actually dying during the years 1958-61 than had been the case in previous Chinese famines are based on a total lie. The death count of 4.35 million which one computes when using the 1949 mortality standard is not at all out of line with traditional famines in China. See Walter Mallory, CHINA: LAND OF FAMINE, if you just need general background on pre-revolution famine problems in China. The gap between that 4.35 million and the 25.4 million just comes from deaths occurring in the years 1958-61 which are just still well under the bounds of what would have been considered "normal" deaths until 1949, but over the mortality rate achieved in 1957 and after 1961.

All of these questions should be analyzed separately from the Hoaxoco$t which opens a whole other bag of worms in itself. Mattogno has traced the various claims about Auschwitz more thoroughly than anyone else and I won't try to subsist here for in-depth studies such as AUSCHWITZ: THE FIRST GASSING, AUSCHWITZ: OPEN AIR INCINERATIONS, THE BUNKERS OF AUSCHWITZ, TREBLINKA: EXTERMINATION CAMP OR TRANSIT CAMP? (co-authored by Mattogno with Jurgen Graf). Just try looking them up. But be careful that you don't get arrested for looking at a book the way Germar Rudolf has been shipped off to Germany for incarceration by the thought police.

Patrick S. McNally

No words

Mr Watson accuses me of being "sick" but does not deal in facts or rebuttals. Have you read Germar Rudolph's books Mr. Watson? If not, why are you wasting people's time with your meaningless slanders?

Listen up, because I'll probably only be nice to you once...

Sunshine:

You're right --Hitler and the Nazi's should not be used as a standard of evil. It obsfucates the causes of corrupting power that all people have. HItler went into politics, was good at it so he got into a possition where he could have people killed. If he'd been a butcher, it'd have been 'ol Adolf who" you know, goes on about his potty ideas, but he's harmless. And get us some ham while your there, love."

Your next point: the allies we're no choir boys. True, sad to say. Both Ford and IBM supplied the Third Riech, even after the States entered the war, and America's reasons for entering had very little to do with fighting fascism, and a whole lot to do with big business opportunity. But most soldiers did believe they were fighting fascism.

And yes, many Jews had died before the war--by starvation in ghettos, I think-- I believe due to Nazi policy?

But you loose it , mate, when you say the Holocaust has been debunked. HItler, the rat bastard himself, said that if Germany wasn't up to his final solution, she deserved distruction. He was using trains to herd Jews to camps while the conscripted soldiers in the feild went without food and supplies. There's another parrallel with our times.

I haven't read Germar Rudolph either, but I do know, thanks to IBM, the Reich's activities were extensivley documented. It was by using IBM's information tech of the time that the Final Solution became the efficient killing machine it was. So what are you saying: the allies at Nurumberg PLANTED the documentation of millions processed in the camps?

And lets not play the oppresssion olympics--who tortured whom worse. It was ALL inexcusable.

Listen up

We agree in the first part, but in part two you seem to be conflating complex issues and base it on IBM's documentation. I do not claim to be THE expert on the Hoaxacost but if you read several of the essays in Dissecting the Holocaust edited by Germar Rudolph I am sure you will find it to be quite an education. The level of lying about the Holohoax is incredible, and anyone who tries to research the topic in France or Germany is imprisoned for "thought crimes."

The revisionists are not saying that Germany was innocent but trying to find the truth in the matter, which has been grotesquely distorted by orthodox historians and Cold War propagandists. If you read for example Jurgen Graf's essay on the concentration camps, he does a thorough job of answering important points you raised.

http://vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndGraf.html

Regarding torture, your point is taken but remember that a lot of the testimony at Nuremberg was extracted by torture, thus the origins of the Holyhoax fable:

see Manfred Kohler, The Value of Testimony and Confessions Concerning the Holocaust, pg. 85, from Dissecting the H...

Okay, I'll be nice to you more than once while you're civil.

There goes my tough-girl rep.

I don't claim to be an expert either, but, much like 911, there are basic points of common sense you can't defy:

All those people with numbers tatooed on their arms: was that a Hassidic fad of the thirties?

And it's not IBM's documentation; it's the Third Reich's documention using IBM equipment they purchased.

And those photographs of bulldozers pushing starved bodies into mass graves.-faked? They didn't have Industrial Light and Magic in those days.

If I am conflating complex issues(which of course I don't think I am) at least I admit they are complex issues, including the industrial capacity to build concentration camps, their use for slave labor as well as extermination, the chemicals used, the survivor's destroyed health. You, however seem to be bassing most of your arguments on Herr Rudolph's work. Unlike 911(where physical evidence has been destroyed) there is a mountain of physical evidence available from various sources in various countries, to prove there was an active program of exterminating disidents in Germany.

So, sorry, I doubt the allies would feel the NEED to torture the top Nazi's to make a case. That and it's a known fact that the OSS, precurser to the CIA, was packed with German ex-pats. Seems to me that if the powers-that-be want to call anything about the Holocaust a thought-crime, it's their documented, but so far ignored(by MSM), culpability.

>>>And those photographs of

>>>And those photographs of bulldozers pushing starved bodies into mass graves.-faked? They didn't have Industrial Light and Magic in those days.

The scenes of bulldozers pushing bodies are dramatically doctored scenes made by the Allies after the war. The camps where these scenes were taken were not extermination camps but experienced a massive outbreak of typhus at the war's end. The US/UK forces tried to dramatize these scenes by filming the bodies pushed by bulldozers, but once you understand that the camps where these photos were taken are not any longer claimed to have been death camps then the picture changes. One could have made films anywhere across Europe actually. People were dying of disease in huge numbers all across the continent at that time. Pretending that these films are evidence of "death factories' is pure BS. The usual sources for such films are Dachau and Bergen-Belsen, neither of which is regarded any longer by Jewish historians as having been a death camp.

>>>Unlike 911(where physical evidence has been destroyed) there is a mountain of physical evidence available from various sources in various countries, to prove there was an active program of exterminating disidents in Germany.

Actually, the same problems which arise over the WTC and its amazing collapse also arise over the claims that 4000, 6000 or even 10000 bodies were cremated daily at Auschwitz. It's not physically possible. No one has ever been able to produce evidence of a gas chamber, apart from testimonials which are always in contradiction with known scientific facts and yet are not allowed cross-examination. Instead they at most play the game of deflecting the issue the way that you did with the reference to German dissidents. Sure there was a political crackdown on all dissidents of whatever stripe in Nazi Germany, sure that calls for an independent critique in itself. It does not, however, come close to constituting evidence of a planned attempt to exterminate all Jews, allegedly resulting in six million deaths. Nor does it represent evidence of the existence of gas chambers anywhere. These are separate issues. The question of political repression in many states around the world and throughout history, Nazi Germany included, could be made the subject of a separate study all on its own. But the claims that racial extermination policies killed six million Jews are false.

Okay, smarty pants--

But you don't address the tattoos.

As for it not being physically possible to cremate thousands of bodies a day, industrialized kilns beg to differ. The figures you use, 4,000 to 10, 000 are very broad. Rendering factories process animals in those numbers; part of the reason it was so effeicient is that the industrial revolution made it possible to do any adapted process quickly and cheaply.

So you think those are pictures of thyphus victims, fine. Except typhus, if it kills you, doesn't last long enough to reduce you to a human skeleton. And even if they did have such an epidemic that mass graves were needed--you do realize the last time things were that bad was the Black Death-- it doesn't explain why the bodies are all naked. Or do you think the allied soldiers were put to work stripping bodies? Don't you think we'd have heard about that from the soldiers themselves by now?

"Instead they at most play the game of deflecting the issue the way that you did with the reference to German dissidents."

I honestly don't know what type of game you think I'm supposed to be playing; guess you're cleverer than me that way. But I will tell you that if you're thinking about taking advantage of my calm understanding nature(NO LAUGHING, YOU LOT!) you'll have earned yourself a right kicking. You've been warned.

Meanwhile, I'll give it a rest and read up a bit, but honesty it doesn't look like we'll either of us(or is it three now?) be convincing each other soon.

>>>As for it not being

>>>As for it not being physically possible to cremate thousands of bodies a day, industrialized kilns beg to differ.

The average expected cremation time for one normal thin, not overweight, body is one hour. Carlo Mattogno provides extensive details about the exact technical models of crematoria which existed at Auschwitz and what their performance capacity would be. There were a maximum of 46 cremation muffles at Auschwitz in working order at any one time, and many of these were frequently out of order. If we ignore the need to close the crematorium down in order to clean it out and keep it running efficiently, we may allow a 24-hour operating time for all 46 muffles with one body on average consumed per hour. That would mean 24*46 =1104 as a theoretical maximum number of bodies cremated.

>>>The figures you use, 4,000 to 10, 000 are very broad.

This is what you will find within the standard literature. Filip Muller, EYEWITNESS AUSCHWITZ, claims 10000 bodies cremated in a single day. Azriel Eisenberg, THE LOST GENERATION, claims 6000 but then quotes an alleged eye-witness that on some days 42000 bodies were cremated. The discrepancies within the literature put out by various "Holocaust Memorial" outlets are very broad.

>>>it doesn't explain why the bodies are all naked. Or do you think the allied soldiers were put to work stripping bodies?

If you calmly go through a substantial number of books where pictures are included you will found for yourself that there are many photos of healthy looking fully dressed prisoners. For example, Robert Abzug, INSIDE THE VICIOUS HEART: AMERICANS AND THE LIBERATION OF NAZI CONCENTRATION CAMPS. The photo on pages 98-9, entitled "Liberation Day at Dachau," shows many sprite prisoners in the striped uniforms which they were given by the camp administration. The story of human skeletons is an old one. Here I'm looking at Corelli Barnett, THE GREAT WAR, page 170, top right picture: "An Indian soldier captured at Kut, after release under an exchange of prisoners, showing effects of malnutrition." This Indian soldier looks just like a human skeleton. But there were no gas chambers involved, there was no extermination plan involved. The Indian soldier is just experiencing the consequences of war.

>>>I honestly don't know what type of game

Inserting "dissidents" in place of the classical charge of "racial extermination" is a game. Maybe it's just one which you've picked up reflexively from other people without understanding it, that happens. But when an inquiry is made about whether or not six million Jews were killed by a Nazi extermination program which used gas chambers, then it is a game to turn the question over to one of political dissidents. Political dissidents certainly were hunted down and persecuted within the Third Reich, just as political dissidents have often been hunted within any Latin American government which receives support from Washington. But that is not evidence of gas chambers, six million or a racial extermination program.

>>>honesty it doesn't look like we'll either of us(or is it three now?) be convincing each other soon.

Try slowly reading through something like DISSECTING THE HOLOCAUST, edited by Germar Rudolf, or more in-depth specialized works by Carlo Mattogno, and you should be able to gradually begin convincing yourself of some things all on your own.

You still don't say boo about the tattoos

"If you calmly go through..."
"Try slowly reading through something like DISSECTING THE HOLOCAUST, edited by Germar Rudolf,..."

Try not to be a patronizing git.

"Maybe it's just one which you've picked up reflexively from other people without understanding it, that happens."

How very "understanding" of you. I chose my wording because a) I wanted to include everyone targeted by Hitler; and b) because this isn't a bloody term paper and I'm not standing for office, and it's late so maybe I'm not as precise as I could be. Now if you're as clever as you think you are, you'd know the difference between late night writing and "playing games".

Which makes me start to think it's YOU who's so wound up over the Holocaust you're seeing manipulation where none is. Thanks for being civil and all, but clearly we aren't communicatiing.

If you want something to read slowly through, and I AM NOT using "slowly" perjoratively here, because I promise you it will be slow(book's in desparate need of an editor), try "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", by William L. Shirer.

I give you 10,000 was probably an over estimate; my recent reading indicates 6,000 was the max and only near the very end of the war. The commandants compeated with each other, and often inflated figures by a couple thousand to look better.

I've got nothing more to say until you address the survivor's tattoos.

Shirer's book has long been

Shirer's book has long been regarded as outdated even at the time it was written. He repeats stories about soap and lampshades as stories taken from the Nuremburg trials, but which official historians such as Raul Hilberg were openly discarding even in the early 1960s when Shirer wrote. As for tattoos, it's not even really clear just what that is supposed to prove. Do tattoos somehow prove the existence of a gas chamber? Even so, the tattoo stories have their own problems and are likely to a large degree the result of an innovative marketing scheme made after the war among former camp inmates. Some of the relevant contradictions in the official tattooing story are addressed by Carlos Porter at:

http://www.cwporter.com/tattoo1.htm

http://www.cwporter.com/tattoo2.htm

http://www.cwporter.com/tattoo3.htm

http://www.cwporter.com/tattoorecord.htm

But apart from this, it isn't clear just how tattoos, even if they could be verified as authentic, would prove anything about an extermination plan.

As for the numbers cremated at Auschwitz, if one assumes that all 46 cremation muffles were in working order (which was often not the case) and that we operate 24 hours straight (a manner of procedure which is totally unsustainable since machines have to be cleaned out and given time to rest) then 6000 bodies in one day implies that 5 or 6 bodies are being consumed on an hourly basis by one muffle. Not possible. You could consume one body in an hour, but not 5 or more. That would overload the machine and things would break down really fast.

>>>So, sorry, I doubt the

>>>So, sorry, I doubt the allies would feel the NEED to torture the top Nazi's to make a case

The fact remains that they did. Rupert Butler describes how Rudolf Hoess was captured and then tortured for a confession in LEGIONS OF DEATH, pp. 235-8. The capture of Hoess was accomplished by threatening his wife that her and sons would be turned over to the Russians to be sent to Siberia. Once Hoess was captured "He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where it seemed to Clarke that the blows and screams were endless... It took three days to get coherent statement out of him. But once he started talking, there was no holding him." Guantanamo-style investigations brought to you by the Nuremburg tribunal. Butler, by the way, does not indicate any disapproval for the procedure. He seems rather proud of the whole thing when writing about it. Obviously someone important felt that torture was NECESSARY to get the "evidence" for these trials.

OT

Hey Andrew, the music for "Improbable Collapse" was fantastic!

Neither of the two camps

Neither of the two camps which you list, Dachau and Bergen-Belsen, is regarded any longer as having been a death camp. That point does not even require that you look at any revisionist studies. The ordinary authors such as Raul Hilberg, Lucy Dawidowicz, Paul Berben and others will very clearly tell you that the camps which were alleged to have been extermination camps were all located in Poland. There were 6 alleged death camps in Poland. But in regards to the camps in the west, it is freely admitted by official Jewish historians that the scenes of death found by the British and American troops at the end of the war really were just the result of the conditions of war and were not evidence of a death camp. The bombing of railroads across Europe made it impossible to deliver anything to these camps and with all of the prisoners from the eastern camps coming west there was a huge overcrowding as well. The result was a massive outbreak of typhoid and that created the ugly scenes captured on photograph at the end of the war. This, it has to be stressed, is not at all disputed by the official histories produced by Raul Hilberg and others. Where a dispute with Hilberg and the court historians arises is over the eastern camps within Poland, not over Dachau or Bergen-Belsen.

Patrick S. McNally

It's pretty far-fetched

It's pretty far-fetched to make a big point to distinguish between "Hey, we put them in ovens" to "Hey we just worked them 15+ hours per day, gave them little or no food, no medical treatment - (should they unfortunately get sick under these conditions which included crowding), not give them warm clothes in the winter and beat them or shoot them if they stop working."

"But we didn't murder them" ??!?!"

You'e trying to stress a LIHOP in the cases of the camps outside of Poland that didn't have crematoria?!

But it was genocide.

It's just a coincidence people died under such conditions? It wasn't pre-meditated? But just an accident? Incompetence theory?

Um no.

It might look nicer than to tell people they're going to get a nice shower and then gassing them in a large group - if too many workers are coming in and you don't have the capacity to work ALL of those newcomers to death?

It may be a fall back position just as, "Hey we covered the trucks bringing people to the work camps (or to the trains), so village, town and country people wouldn't be reminded too strongly about what is going on."

"Why dirty such beautiful minds?"

Just like now it's illegal to take pictures of the caskets coming back from Iraq?

Your argument reeks by being so close to justification or apologia.

It's just human nature not to want to look at the truth or to hide it from others when this kind of thing is going on.

Most people only think of the killings by the Germans during WW2 when they think of genocide, when there are many cases of genocide.

All cases in turn were covered up and denied by those who gained advantage - much as 9/11 is covered up and denied by many 10's of thousands who believe, probably most of them only subconsciously, that is its somehow to their advantage for our country to be making these wars.

"And even if the "Arab Terrorists" did not do it, they would have," a woman "Liberal" had the nerve to argue to me.

Implication being, if we ourselves *did* do 9/11 as a pretext for war, we needed that pretext, since they hated us anyway.

These are the kind of justification one hears for genocide. Absolutely irrational and therefore obviously molded by subconscious motivation.

Genocide is not aberant human behavior. It happens all the time. Unfortunately most of the time it doesn't get much Press, because not too many fof the victors, who write the history books, care hear about it, or be reminded of it.

cf. Jared Diamond, "The Third Chimpanzee" He catalogs genocides throughout history.


>>>You'e trying to stress a

>>>You'e trying to stress a LIHOP in the cases of the camps outside of Poland that didn't have crematoria?!

You are confusing "crematoria" with "gas chambers." The propaganda of the last several decades has frequently overlapped these two points. Crematoria are used for burning bodies. Crematoria are useful for limiting the spread of diseease during either a war or an epidemic. Crematoria are not a device for execution. Crematoria were present at all of the prison camps across Europe.

The charge aboui gas chambers is something else. It claims that gas chambers were used as a device of mass-execution at 6 of the Polish camps. No evidence supports this charge.

The camps in the west are, as I've pointed out, not even claimed to have been death camps within the official literature.

We can read Paul Berben's listing of deaths of all types from all causes in Dachau on a year-by-year basis from 1940-5:

1940 1515
1941 2576
1942 2470
1943 1100
1944 4794
1945 15384
-- Paul Berben, DACHAU: THE OFFICIAL HISTORY 1933-1945

Notice how by far the highest number of deaths occurs in just the few months of war that happened in 1945? That sharp steep rise in mortality is the result of war conditions, not "genocide."

Then there's Bergen-Belsen, another camp frequently cited as a source of ugly photographs. Raul Hilberg describes the context quite well:

"By February and March the front lines began to disintegrate. More and more soldiers surrendered, major cities were given up, labor camps and concentration camps had to be evacuated. From east to west, transports with forced laborers and camp inmates were rolling inward. Some of the railway cars were shunted to side rails and abandoned to Allied bombers."

"In Bergen-Belsen the camp administration broke down. As tens of thousands of new inmates were dumped into the camp (in the single week of April 4-13, 1945, the number was 28,000), the food supply was shut off, roll calls were stopped, and the starving inmates were left to their own devices. Typhus and diarrhea raged unchecked, corpses rotted in barracks and on dung heaps. Rats attacked living inmates, and bodies of the dead were eaten by starving prisoners."
-- Raul Hilberg, THE DESTRUCTION OF THE EUROPEAN JEWS, Volume III, Third Edition

This too is primarily a consequence of war conditions. One can, as i've already noted in a previous message, find evidence of many oppressive practices and policies carried on by the Third Reich. But there is simply no evidence of a plan to exterminate all Jews, the documents themselves generally say "evacuate." Given the declining birth rates among the world Jewish population of the last 6 decades, it is impossible to reconcile any of the population estimates made in the decades after World War II with a sudden abnormal loss of six million during 1939-45. Neither is ther any evidence to support the claims of gas chambers having been used in Poland. The showers really were just that, showers. The maximum number of bodies which could have been cremated at Auschwitz during its working lifetime is about 162000, well under the million victims frequently claimed in propaganda.

You also seem to seek a way out by falsely balancing the propaganda of World War II with other bits of propaganda. It is now well-established by Mark Tauger and others that the famine of 1931-3 in the USSR was primarily of natural origin and was not part of any plan by Stalin to commit "genocide" the Ukrainians or anyone else. There have been lots of distortions and lies in the history of the last century. The Hoaxoco$t is just one of the more prominent.

The camps in the west are,

The camps in the west are, as I've pointed out, not even claimed to have been death camps within the official literature.

That doesn't prove anything even.

9/11 isn't admitted as an inside job either.

Lucy Dawidowicz, Raul

Lucy Dawidowicz, Raul Hilberg and other Jewish authors have no interest at stake in denying an alleged gas chamber where they can help it. The Yad Vashem Museum in Israel has no interest in this either. They could sue for a whole new batch of reparations to be paid to israel if it were somehow possible to claim that the camps in the west had been death camps with gas chambers. The fact that such authors have had to admit that none of the camps in the west were extermination camps is simply because the claims there were too blatantly false, not because it was at all in their interest to cover up any hypothetical gas chambers. While the Cold War dragged on it was possible to take advantage of the east-west division and claim that extermination camps had existed in Poland which could not be forensically checked as long as Poland was sealed away on the other side. But now the stories for those camps are also crumbling. It's a very poor comparison to invoke 911 with the implication that, just as it would be against the interests of the US government to acknowledge that this was an inside job, it should somehow be against powerful interests to claim that gas chambers existed at Bergen-Belsen or Dachau. A better parallel would be "The Auschwitz gas chamber hasn't been officially admitted as a fraud, and neither have the Arab hijackers been admitted as such." But both are frauds.

Gas chambers

I think you're putting too pretty a point on it.

Even if the gas chambers *were* are fraud. The work/death camps were still genocide.

Also, first you say the only gas chambers were in Poland. Now you are saying they didn't exist there either.

I think people have many reasons for wanting to deny genocide. The idea that Jews and other "undesirables" were rounded up by the Nazi-s in World War 2 and....say "arranged" to be put into situations where it's unlikely they would live, is pretty well established. From outright shooting to working to death.

I myself knew survivors. One friend's mother had the tatoo. And her twin sister and she were objects of "medical investigations."

To me the kinship between 9/11 denial and genocide denial is this: It is in certain people's interest to cover up the truth.

You seem to have an interest in denying that jews were the object of persecution in Europe. Is there some psychological reason for that?

>>>Also, first you say the

>>>Also, first you say the only gas chambers were in Poland. Now you are saying they didn't exist there either.

The part about gas chambers allegedly having been used as a mass-execution device in Poland is what is claimed by Jewish professors writing on the subject such as Raul Hilberg, Deborah Lipstadt and the like. There is no evidence of gas chambers having been used in any of the concentration camps, but the official story maintained by such authors is that gas chambers did exist as a mass-murder device in Poland. I simply pointed out that none of these authorities claim that gas chambers were used in the west. If you want an analogy to make things simpler, the question of whether or not death camps with gas chambers existed in the west is analogous to the question of whether or not Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass-destruction ready to go off on 45 minutes notice. It's been admitted as bogus even by official sources, albeit quietly admitted. The question of whether or not gas chambers existed in Poland is analogous to the issue of whether or not Arab terrorists masterminded 911. The official story still says yes, but the available evidence says no.

Survivor of war committs

Survivor of war committs suicide years later, musician permanently affected by scenes of war and prison, family members lost to the secret police. All of this and much more is going on in Iraq right at this very moment. However, none of this constitutes evidence of a gas chamber being used as a means of mass-execution. None of this constitutes evidence of six million abnormal deaths, over and beyond natural mortality under conditions of war and imprisonment, occurring within the world Jewish population. None of this constitutes evidence of a planned attempt by the government of the Third Reich to physically exterminate all Jews down to the last survivor within the domain of occupied territory. If one was to try substantiating these claims one would need first of all to produce real forensic and documentary evidence of gas chambers and an extermination plan. No one has ever been able to produce this evidence.

talkin' WW3 blues...

///////////////////// 911dvds@gmail.com - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

Hey...

I mentioned you in my interview.
___________________________________

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this."

Another HUGE, HUGE thing

virtually ignored by the media. Tragic. Wrote a letter to my ed about this - haven't heard back as to whether it will be published.

I'm sorry, "HUGE, HUGE thing" is not very eloquent but I seem to be running out of "outrage" adjectives . . .

Dr. Sami al-Arian is not an

Dr. Sami al-Arian is not an "academic", he financed terrorist acts. He pled GUILTY in a deal to helping fund and protect the identies of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. These are his own words: "I ask others to support them [Islamic Jihad and Hamas], but I don't support them personally."

The real conspiracy lies in the U.S.'s relations with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

Check out the article by John Loftus on the Muslim Brotherhood, the Nazis, and Al-Qaeda:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15344

"So I had all my friends in the FBI and CIA send in these files. I said, “Why haven't you prosecuted this guy? You've known about him since 1989.” “We'd love to. We've tried to prosecute him but we were told we couldn't touch him because he gets all of his money from the Saudis, and we are all under orders not to do anything to embarrass the Saudi government.”

I said, “I don't mind embarrassing them.” You know what I did? I donated money to the charity that was the terrorist fund, because under Florida law, that gave me the right to sue the charity to find out where my money was going. It was hilarious.

In early March, 2002, I drafted a long lawsuit exposing Professor Sami al-Arian, naming all the crimes he'd committed, all the bombings in Israel, the fundraising in America with terrorism. I mentioned how his money got to him from the Saudis and how the Saudis had convinced our government not to prosecute him for political reasons. Because of my high-level security clearances, everything I write is sort of classified material and has to be sent back to the government before publication, for censorship. So I sent my long lawsuit complaint to the CIA, and they loved it. They said, “Oh, great. We don't like the Saudis either. Go sue them.”

Three days later two FBI Agents showed up at my door, saying, “You know, there are only 21 people in the U.S. government that knew some of this information, and now you're 22. How did you find out?” I said, “I'm sorry, I can't tell you, attorney-client privilege.” That's why my clients pay me $1.00 each."

one man's terrorist

Sami al-Arian was employed in 1986 as a professor in the Computer Sciences Department at the University of South Florida in Tampa. I'd say that makes him an academic.

He was acquitted on eight of the 17 charges against him last December and on April 14 of this year he pleaded guilty to a single count of conspiracy to provide services to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and agreed to be deported. In return, federal prosecutors agreed to drop the remaining eight charges against him. On March 2, 2006, al-Arian secretly pled guilty to one count of conspiracy "to make or receive contributions of funds, goods or services to or for the benefit of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a Specially Designated Terrorist [sic], in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371."

In order to be fair, we may want to find all the people who donated to the IRA, arrest them, throw them in dungeons, convict them of donating to a terrorist fund, and deport them.

And while we're at it, we may want to find every person who has ever donated to Israel, a nation guilty of killing more Palestinians than the Palestinian Islamic Jihad has ever dreamed of killing Israelis.

Since that is virtually every American taxpayer, I'm afraid the deportation process will be quite protracted.

Of course, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad is wrong to kill Jews indiscriminately, as it is a war crime to kill civilians, but killing soldiers is quite another matter. It should be noted that the the Palestinian Islamic Jihad has its origins in the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and the latter is a creation of the Muslim Brotherhood, long ago penetrated by western intelligence. No doubt the Nazis are involved, but then the Nazis built the CIA from scratch, and the Bush crime family was intimately involved with the Nazi party in Germany.

If we're going to be fair, let's arrest Ehud Olmert for killing well over a thousand innocent Lebanese civilians last summer. I'd say that's more than Sami every helped kill.

If we're going to get rid of terrorists, let's get rid of the whole lot.

Show "At some point, you have to" by Anonymous (not verified)

picking sides

If you bother to read the thread, I was responding to somebody saying al-Arian was not an academic. He was an academic.

As for choosing sides... nice of you to break it down in such a Manichean fashion.

I'll "pick" the side that is resisting occupation. Obviously, you are pciking the side that engages in democide.

Just so we know where we stand.

Incidentally, Palestinian nationalism is not a threat to America, unless you consider America Israeli occupied territory.

And of course an argument can made for that.

Thank you Kurt Nimmo

The important thing is never to stop questioning.

O'Reilly

HONESTOGOD, cannot believe anyone is still listening to this man. We need somebody a tad sexier than Fetzer up there to shake him up a little bit. Give me the talking points and I'll do my best Ann Coulter!

; )