From: dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren)
Subject: THE HOAXER PROJECT, Ralph spews out 2842 lines of garbage!
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 04:21:07 GMT

cwilkins@irscscm.UUCP (Charlie Wilkinson) adds:

Just a quick note while the flames are heading my way:
In my followup to Garret's post I failed 
to mention a few things that I consider 
(Sorry, terrible with names here...)  I pretty much agree with Mr. Wilcox,
going by my experience.  The beliefs, biases, etc. of Ralph are in this
case irrelevant.  Scream at him for something else, but posting Mr.Wilcox's
article might just be Ralph's one shining moment.

  That is the *only* article in Ralphie's pile of toxic waste that is 
  not blood libel, Holocaust denial or NAAWP propoganda. Nobody's
  perfect. However, a dark cloud hovers over this "shining moment": Ralphie
  posted that article *only* because it serves his purpose of attacking
  minorities (in this case both Blacks and Jews). He didn't post it
  in order to enrich our minds, but to spread more hate. Therefore,
  even if the article has some value (and it did seem more serious
  than the Goebbels style trash we usually get from B-CPU) Ralphie
  deserves no credit.

As much as Ralph may piss you (and me) off, we *NEED* people like him to keep
the rest of us honest.  If there weren't a few people to raise questions on
sensitive topics, amoral opportunists could easily use these sensitive areas
to their own ends. The people who are extremely hostile towards Ralph scare
me more than he does, for as much as I may disagree with him (and I really do),
at least I *know* what Ralph is about.  What's *your* agenda?

  You touch a few topics. Do we *need* Ralphie? Holocaust historian Raul
  Hilberg made the interesting comment that these Nazi KKKooks actually
  *help* keep the memory of the Holocaust alive, as the constant debate
  they provoke exposes the truth of the Holocaust. I remember one guy
  writing in this newsgroup "after reading all the discussions here about
  the Holocaust, I am more certain than ever that it really happened". About
  a year ago, I posted a humoristic (well I thought it was funny!) article
  about how one of the most rabid antisemites on the net is really a 
  mossad agent, planted to link anti-Israeli and antisemitic propoganda
  to ignorance and racism. However, I find it hard to believe that 
  Ralphie and the gang are working for the Wiesenthal institute.

  As for Ralphie's agenda: it is totaly obvious - to erect the fourth
  Reich right here in the good old US of A. Have no question about it;
  The IHR is *exactly* repeating the Pre-WW2 Nazi propoganda. The Jews
  (and other minorities) are lying to us; they are taking our money;
  they rule the media; they rule the banking system; they control us;
  they will be punished. The similarity is striking. This is Goebbels
  reincarnated.

  As for the people who attack Ralphie - what do you expect? Someone
  spits on the memory of millions of people, tells jokes about "bannana
  peels dropped in the gas chambers so the Jews would slip and kill
  themselves", mocks Holocaust survivors and you want people not to
  react with anger??

So IMHO, regardless of Ralph's motives or conclusions, the fact that he is 
raising these questions is a good thing.

  Not accurate. He is not raising question, he is spreading vicious and
  horrible lies. And you cannot disregard his motives. They are part
  of the package. 


I can fully understand people being upset with him, as no one likes old wounds
to be opened up again, especially under such unfeeling scrutiny.  The Holocaust
is a still a nightmarish memory for many, and the ultimate symbol of man's
inhumanity to man for others.  It's no great wonder that many fine people don't
want this incedent dragged through the dirt and I empathize with them.  But
who can seriously deny that there might be just one individual out there
somewhere who feels his or her interests are furthered by using the event to
maintain victim status for all eternity, and that that status might somehow be
threatened by any attempt to question numbers?  (oops, I've gone and done it
now...)  Perhaps the question shouldn't be about numbers at all, but who
considers revisionism to be a threat and why.  The rest of you have every right
to feel insulted by the concept.  If I were a female who had just been raped
by 6 guys, I wouldn't be too thrilled about some clown coming along saying
"I can only find proof for 2."  But I wouldn't feel threatened and I certainly
wouldn't view it as the first step towards being gang raped again.

  Here I think that you are wrong. It is not "I can only find proof for two".
  It is "you are a liar, you have lied for years about this alleged rape,
  you have used it to generate unjustified sympathy and manipulate us,
  and furthermore you *deserved* to be fondeled (not raped!) because you
  behaved provocatively. Now, you will pay for your lies". Remember,
  the revisionists *justify* the deportation of the Jews to the camps,
  "because the Jews declared war on Germany". 


One might ask why should we bother dredging this up to revise numbers, when
it's all too painfully obvious that governments, religions, and other 
organizations have lied since the beginning of time to further their own 
interests and that there was more than likely inflation of figures in this 
case as well.  I personally suspect that there might have been some "padding" 
of numbers, but nothing like the gross inflation (1m vs. 6m) suggested by
Ralph.  Such a thing could hardly go unnoticed and without protest, don't you
think?

  What does "I suspect" mean here? No offense, but are you a historian?
  Have you done serious reading? The official figure, arrived at by
  the Anglo-American committee for studying the matter, is 5.7 million.
  I can send you the exact breakdown, country by country. Some estimates
  are lower; some are higher (up to 6.25 million). But this is the
  magnitude in question.


-Danny Keren.

Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy:6348 talk.politics.misc:18261 soc.culture.filipino:1540