Mike, You wrote precisely what I quoted and displayed as your factual email. I did not make it up There is then no more a closed book than a closed mind Goodbye my friend; we are not so far apart but take different paths I wish you well Ray From: patriots-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:patriots-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Green Sent: 23 September 2014 12:18 To: patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [patriots] Re: Fwd: CD No it is not what I rote Ray. I wrote "those who make claims that something took place". That covers a lot more people than those you refer to as "victims", most of whom are, unfortunately, dead. Mike. On 23/09/14 12:12, Rays1 wrote: Mike Green wrote: 23 sept 2014 06:19... [Ray] "... the onus is NOT on the part of the victims to show evidence as you imply. [Mike Green] "That is not what I wrote Ray, however if you truly believe the sentiment behind your statement then I'm done. Mike." ----------------- Oh but, Mike, that IS what you said...... recall this? .... From: Mike Green [mailto:mikegreen247@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: 22 September 2014 16:16 To: Rays1; patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [patriots] Re: Fwd: CD "Ray, The onus is on those who make claims that something took place to provide evidence, not the other way round" ------------------------------------- Mike , How can it be for the victims, the dead and - or the suffering - to "provide evidence" of their misfortune? Indeed, how may they do so when already dead or dying? Their remains are the only evidence they may realistically leave as mute testament - and this they did in large number. You are making claims concerning those remains that they were NOT killed by "gas ovens" and contrarily, asking me to provide evidence to the *contrary* - and only after the fact that has long occurred: clearly unreasonable, is that not? The logical approach is for YOU to show evidence - NOT the other way around However, the abiding fact remains that I simply made a reasonable request for us to discuss this,- in private-, as engineering professionals yet you do not respond - you just keep posting, publicly, your now shall we say, 'dubious' denials of your own words. (see above) We all make mistakes Mike, myself often, and may even write things we don't truly feel- we are all human after all But, I'm quite sure; you have a great intellect and it's pointless for us to get bogged down in fruitless argument; your intellect may probably prevail over mine if you persist...and so what? I'd rather spend my time helping my country's future- which is at the greatest mortal risk - yet the mass population remain unaware of it This now seems to be all degenerating into us old(er) men wasting our time reverting to the level of children bickering about playground trivia I have no interest in this. I don't want to bait "The Joos", or any other sector (well, maybe the paedo muslims just a bit) I want friends and comrades I can rely upon to be by my side as we fight this monster that is being imposed. Sadly, I have then to ask that I be taken off this list with immediate effect (copy to Jack) since I recognize only a few of those here Ray From: patriots-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:patriots-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Green Sent: 23 September 2014 06:19 To: patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [patriots] Re: Fwd: CD "... the onus is NOT on the part of the victims to show evidence as you imply." That is not what I wrote Ray, however if you truly believe the sentiment behind your statement then I'm done. Mike. On 22/09/14 23:24, Rays1 wrote: Mike, True, in part, but the onus is NOT on the part of the victims to show evidence as you imply. The camp victims have shown evidence aplenty of that; many times over - and we have all seen it. The victims race, creed or religion matters not a jot; their suffering lays testament. A murder victim shows no evidence other than their remains It is the other way around- as you say yourself. If you dispute them then the onus is on you to show us evidence of these "crematoria" as you call them - not the other way around as you imply. I offered to look at your evidence in private with you; and who knows? you may have succeeded in proving that case and I may have then well supported you and added my support to the case you make. That has'nt happened and so, this is now becoming a circular argument without any useful or foreseeable end I wrote: ... "The question, with most respect Mike, is not the mechanics of "how or why did the victims die" as you proposed since that is to presuppose and prejudicially accept that those victims deaths were thus 'righteous' in some way...therein lies more Nazi, Stalinism horror, ultimately You replied, Mike: ..... " Sorry Fred but I have no idea what you mean by this statement. The question of how or why the Jews died is what the whole Holocaust is about for goodness sake, so if you do not think it is of the utmost importance then I am at a loss as to what to say. In fact it beggars belief. Mike" But, you are now (again) confusing Fred and I. It was me (Ray) that made that comment, Mike, - NOT Fred I thought I'd made this point clear already but apparently not, so I'll try, one last time, to make it clear........ Mike, the means of killing people, whether by starvation, gassing, or a bullet through the head - makes them dead regardless. The question is the (political or dogmatic) motivation as to WHY the people were made victims. It is not so much the mechanical means; if you see what I mean ? Anyway, could you first re-read the comments and distinguish between Fred and myself if we are to go further but, frankly, I see little point in it now tbh Ray From: Mike Green [mailto:mikegreen247@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: 22 September 2014 16:16 To: Rays1; patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [patriots] Re: Fwd: CD Ray, The onus is on those who make claims that something took place to provide evidence, not the other way round. If you have evidence that the Germans used "gas ovens" to kill people then please let us all see it. As for the crematoria, anyone can go to Auschwitz and no doubt other camps as they exist today and examine them for themselves. They are crematoria. Perhaps you can also explain the fact that the infamous Auschwitz chimney, out of which Jews still claim to this day that smoke and ashes poured 24 hours a day, isn't even attached to any furnace or building. It is a dummy built by the Russians after the liberation of the camp. In other words it was built for effect, pure propaganda. The allies took many high definition aerial photographs of Auschwitz throughout the war and there is no chimney to be seen so someone is telling porkies. The Russians also rebuilt the roof of the so-called "homicidal gas chamber", the one with the holes in it through which the Germans apparently sprinkled the Zyclon B crystals (a ridiculous idea as they only produced gas when heated up to the required temperature), again after they liberated the camp. If you are prepared to accept evidence then watch this video, made by a Jew, during which Dr Franciszek Piper, Director of the Auschwitz State Museum, brazenly admits this. You should watch the whole video, which povides proof that the guides lie to visitors about the so-called "gas chamber" as a matter of course, but if you do not have time then the interview with Dr Piper starts at around the 23 minute mark. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr9t1eNfho8 You said: The question, with most respect Mike, is not the mechanics of "how or why did the victims die" as you proposed since that is to presuppose and prejudicially accept that those victims deaths were thus 'righteous' in some way...therein lies more Nazi, Stalinism horror, ultimately Sorry Fred but I have no idea what you mean by this statement. The question of how or why the Jews died is what the whole Holocaust is about for goodness sake, so if you do not think it is of the utmost importance then I am at a loss as to what to say. In fact it beggars belief. Mike. On 22/09/14 14:08, Rays1 wrote: Mike, I've declared what I believe already, and qualified that by inviting a professional appraisal, in private, of the "crematoria" you mentioned so as to research it seriously in engineering terms No response. Hence, what more can I say now? The more important point yet again being brushed aside, is the matter of abuse of state power to simply select masses or sections of populations at whim so as to unlawfully intern them (as is starting already in our land with secret courts in respect of child stealing etc) or to put markers on their clothing, or ban whomever they may deem "undesirable" - for whatever reason as may occur to them. Or to inflict ever more ridiculous taxes upon sections such as the now defunct "Window Tax"; the despised "bedTax" Ad-Infinitum. I have some comparatively wealthy relatives (unfortunately, little of it came my way!) and tried to explain to one that a primary purpose of the imposition of the 'Bedtax' was so as to set a taxation precedent that could be rolled out to anywhere and anything at their whim and to anybody as they chose. When thy sneakily achieve such precedent as to give themselves power to lordly decree where any and all disadvantaged or disabled people may, or may not even sleep, then a Rubicon of state control has been achieved. My relative dismissed this saying "This is my property" but, crossing such a Rubicon means they have now set that limitless taxation precedent and it CAN now be rolled out to anyone else they please. Got a separate dining room?...the precedent is set to now order a hike in your rate payments for an "under occupancy dining facility".. and the list is now endless. When they target the weak and poor, you can be sure that that is what they are considering for us all http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_... The question, with most respect Mike, is not the mechanics of "how or why did the victims die" as you proposed since that is to presuppose and prejudicially accept that those victims deaths were thus 'righteous' in some way...therein lies more Nazi, Stalinism horror, ultimately I actually took it upon myself to merely pose a question about the figures. Maybe I did step over some boundary of 'criticism'? but, all questions could be said to be critical....I once said to a guy "Good Morning?!" , and he turned to me and actually said, "whats it gotta do with you?" so all questions are critical if chosen to be such....I'm sorry if I did come across as critical but I've explained myself now and see no need to continue Ray From: patriots-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:patriots-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Green Sent: 22 September 2014 08:46 To: patriots@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [patriots] Re: Fwd: CD Ray, With respect, I think it only fair to the rest of us that you declare exactly what you do believe on this topic. You have been reluctant to spell out what you think happened because, as you said yourself, you were not there. You say your relatives witnessed horrific scenes at one or more concentration camps. None of us dispute that there were horrific scenes, i.e. many dead and dying, at some of the concentration camps when they were liberated. The question is, how or why did the victims die? Your family members saw dead and dying people. However, they did not witness what transpired before they entered the camps. That is what is in dispute here. You took it upon yourself to send an email which was critical of the beliefs of others, so surely it is only right that you tell us explicitly what is wrong with what we are saying. Regards, Mike. On 22/09/14 02:03, Rays1 wrote: Jack, I'm disappointed you stoop to the "Sly dig" "Cognitive Dissonance" applies equally, and perhaps more so, to those that hold so strongly to any one belief that they simply cannot be moved from it - despite and irrespective of evidence. Witnesses Word of mouth remains one of the most convincing of all, and I still choose to believe my relatives that the 'Holocaust' did occur - although I accept that the numbers are in dispute. That is not 'Cognitive Dissonance' by a long chalk Religious beliefs?. Well, thats maybe for the individual. I tend to think there must be 'something' although what that is remains beyond me - no matter how old I get! Ray From: patriots-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:patriots-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jack Lewis Sent: 22 September 2014 00:02 To: Patriots Subject: [patriots] Fwd: CD For your information. This could apply to many people who will not accept the evidence against the Holocaust. However I can safely say that it doesn't apply to religious beliefs because they cannot be proved or disproved. The Holocaust however can. Jack a -------- Original Message -------- Subject: CD Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 22:50:47 +0100 From: Jack Dixon <mailto:dm-king@xxxxxxxxxx> <dm-king@xxxxxxxxxx> To: Jack Lewis <mailto:ukpatriot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <ukpatriot@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> I was just watching the holohoax conversation you was having, it just came to mind! :-D