peated point of contention here ...

[lorentzen-nicklaus]

Dave Monroe schrieb:

> > BUT THAT WAS NOT THE ISSUE.)

> Okay, but you seem to keep insisting on a distinction
> qhich, questionable at best before the intriduction of
> Jewsih prisoners at Dora, pretty much breaks down
> thereafter.  But my contention is that we need not
> even get so far in our hairsplitting here ... 


  yes yes, that's how it always goes ... the moment we get a little deeper into 
  the issue, some people immediately scream "hairsplitting!" ... raul hilberg, 
  perhaps the guy who knows most about the holocaust, he does  n o t  mention 
  dora mittelbau or peenemünde in his book "perpetrators, victims, bystanders. 
  the jewish catastrophy 1933-1945", nyc 1992: harpercollins (the german edition 
  was published the same year at the s. fischer verlag in ffm). dora was a labor 
  camp, not - like auschwitz or treblinka - a death camp. to say so does not at 
  all imply any kind of holocaust denial. & extinction through work is, in human 
  history, the rule, not the exception. these days, just read about it in the 
  paper yesterday, there are about 40 000 000 slaves in the world. 
  sweatshop-slaves, sex-slaves, household-slaves ... your argument that the 
  mentioning of jewish dora prisoners makes the distinction between labor camps 
  and death camps irrelavant, i do not understand at all. 

  if the holocaust is  s o  central to gr, why isn't there, say, an auschwitz   
  scene with, say, weissmann fucking a jewish boy into his ass? 


kfl