Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Revisionismo

San Francisco Historians Condemn 1906 Earthquake Deniers
SAN FRANCISCO—In an event that sparked outrage across the historical
community, deniers of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake convened last
weekend to share their controversial theories about what actually
occurred on that tragic day more than a century ago.
The 1906 Earthquake Deniers, a group reviled by Californians and
scholars alike, held three days of lectures and roundtable discussions
over what they call a "century-long hoax" of exaggerated seismic
activity in the Bay area, and part of a conspiracy to bring the
World's Fair to San Francisco in 1915. Historians protested the
conference, saying the organization's statements denying any major
seismic activity in 1906 are reprehensible and out of line with all
available geologic data from the time.
"On Apr. 18, 1906, an earthquake measuring 7.8 on the Richter scale
killed 3,000 San Franciscans and devastated a growing metropolis,"
Professor Richard Kasper of the University of California, Berkeley,
told reporters Tuesday. "It was a massive, massive earthquake. To say
otherwise is to callously ignore not only the suffering of the
disaster's victims, but also a mountain of photographs, video footage,
and eyewitness reports."
Added Kasper: "And I find it personally offensive to suggest that a
single malfunctioning trolley car could have wiped out 490 city
blocks."
Pamphlets distributed during the symposium, which brought together
some of the world's most notorious 1906 Earthquake Deniers, raised
numerous questions about the so-called "myth" of the 296-mile-long
rupture in the San Andreas Fault felt from Oregon to Los Angeles.
"If an earthquake of that size really did strike downtown San
Francisco, then where is all the rubble?" read one pamphlet, entitled
"After$hock$: Truth, Lies, And The Business Of Earthquakes," obtained
by reporters. "Where are these alleged 3,000 dead? And why does the
mayor refuse to answer questions about the fires that mysteriously
started moments after the supposed 'earthquake' occurred? Ask
yourself: Who is he protecting?"
The early 1906 Earthquake Denier movement began shortly after World
War I, when historian Michael P. Harrison published an article
alleging that the Chinese government and San Francisco Mayor Eugene
Schmitz devised a plan to purposely light the city on fire to acquire
funds for a new Chinatown. The modern day movement, however, gained
momentum in 1971 with Professor David Compson's controversial book
Earthquake?, which argued that the inability to freely question the
disaster was "the equivalent of mental rape."
Compson has also gone on the record with similar remarks about the
1889 Johnstown Flood and, more recently, Hurricane Katrina.
"We're not saying that there weren't a few tremors on the morning of
4/18, but we do question whether 'earthquake' was the proper term to
classify them," said Compson, adding that he sees himself as more of a
1906 Earthquake Revisionist than a 1906 Earthquake Denier. "These
geologists and their fancy-looking, detailed seismic readouts simply
aren't telling us the whole story."
Self-acknowledged 1906 Earthquake Denier and radical seismologist Dr.
William Pletcher rebuffed angered historians by stating that the goal
of the conference was neither to prove nor deny the earthquake of
1906. Rather, said Pletcher, it was held to "facilitate an appropriate
atmosphere in which the hidden and unhidden angles of the most
important geological issue of the 20th century could become more
transparent."
"This so-called 'violent shift in the earth's tectonic plates' is
nothing more than a thinly veiled lie, perpetrated by the San
Francisco zoning commission in secret conjunction with the Freemasons
to demonize the San Andreas Fault," Pletcher told reporters outside
the conference. "The government won't acknowledge our findings because
they fear the truth."
While the group has numerous critics, their most outspoken opponents
have always been the earthquake survivors themselves. San Franciscans
who lived through the event have often countered the Deniers theories
by pointing out that on the morning of Apr. 18, at approximately 5:15
a.m., the ground dramatically shook, large crevasses formed in city
streets, and buildings crumbled and fell.
"It was an earthquake," said 109-year-old survivor Saul Bloomfield.
But earthquake deniers claim that these personal testimonies are
littered with inconsistencies. They have also asserted that Anne
Mitchell's Diary Of A Young Girl In The Great San Francisco Earthquake
Of 1906, a book that has been translated into 44 languages, was
completely fabricated.
"San Franciscans need to wake up and smell the lies and deceits
they've been fed for the last century," Earthquake Denier Jared Meeder
said. "If a giant earthquake did actually occur, why would anyone in
their right mind rebuild a city knowing full well that another
earthquake could easily come along and destroy it again?"
"Think about it," Meeder added.
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/san_francisco_historians_condemn


non c'era qualche leghista in rappresentanza dei negazionisti del
terremoto del 1908 a Messina, che come tutti sanno fu un complotto
terrone per mandare miliardi di lire di tasse del popolo padano a
ingrassare la mafia?