REVISITING THE SIX MILLION DEATHS FIGURE - 34 years ago

 

 

From: Ichee@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, 2 November 2005 2:42 PM
Subject: ICHEE BULLETIN 1st Nov-05 extreme ethnocentrism/loss of liberty 34 years ago

 



ICHEE BULLETIN 1st Nov-05 extreme ethnocentrism/loss of liberty
 


34 years ago a man wrote to the New York Times Book Review and asked a question. It was never answered. Now, $200 billion for survivors and relatives later, it is illegal to ask the question in many countries. People are in prison or fined for asking the question. How is it in the country that you are in? Here is the letter. It is followed by News

New York Times Book Review September 19, 1971.
The Six Million
To the Editor:


Commenting on ‘Richard Grunberger’s book “The 12-Year Reich” Terence Prittie fails to mention some interesting statistics offered by the author. According to Grunberger, the Jewish population of Germany was just under 1 per cent of the total—which would have made it somewhat in excess of a half million.

He adds that between 1933 arid the outbreak of war in 1939 roughly half of this minority emigrated to the United States, Great Britain u-and Palestine. . . .. and that. of the remainder, only a few thousand survived the Nazi persecution.

The question to be answered—it would seem is me—is how could those done to death in the concentration camps have totaled Six million?

That figure is cited, invariably, without authority. I have yet to see it documented.

Even with the Jews then in Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland and subject countries added (a fantastic supposition), one scarcely arrives at so staggering a total.

Who first authored this incredible demographic fact or fiction—and how did he compute?

Whether the number of lives extinguished at Belsen, Dachau, Auschwitz and other horror sites was six million or 100,000 the episode remains a massive blot on history - . .

Now, a quarter-century later, it seems high time for a responsible historian to address himself to the matter . . .- - to make it no longer necessary to quote some anonymous guesser—who may have pulled his Six Million statistic out of thin air.

FRED DEARMOND
Springfield. M0


YET -
 

 

UN eyes annual day to mark Holocaust Remembrance would honor victims
By Evelyn Leopold, Reuters | November 1, 2005

UNITED NATIONS -- Israel introduced a watershed resolution in the UN General Assembly yesterday that designates Jan. 27 as an annual commemoration day for the 6 million Jews and other victims murdered in the Nazi Holocaust during World War II.

The measure, expected to be approved today by consensus, rejects any denial that the Holocaust took place. It also urges members to ''inculcate" future generations with the lessons on the genocide so it would not be repeated.

''I feel moved and privileged to present this historic resolution today, as an Israeli, a Jew, a human being and the child of Holocaust victims," Israel's UN ambassador, Dan Gillerman, told the 191-member General Assembly.

 

=============================== related matter =======================

 

 

Mike Macaulay
AUSTRALIAN PRIME MINISTER REFUSES TO ANSWER 20 QUESTIONS !!!
Tue Nov 1, 2005 10:06
202.72.148.102



In May 2005 I wrote to Prime Minister John Howard of Australia, Attorney General Philip Rudduck and Minister for Foreign Affairs Alexander Downer.


The letter contained 20 questions relating to Australia's illegal participation in the unprovoked attacks on the Sovereign Nations of IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN, and matters relating to Australian's held illegally at Guantanamo.

ALL THREE HAVE REFUSED TO ANSWER MY QUESTIONS !

In view of their refusal to answer I will now forward all the information to the UNITED NATIONS WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL in The Hague with the intent that they be indicted for War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity.

These 3 Politicians and others are traitors to Australia and to the ideals and standards that our great country used to abide by on the International stage. They are also now in the process of trying to pass draconian un-constitutional laws to detain people like myself who speak out against them - sound familiar ??

They also stand accused of deliberately failing to stand up for or provide assistance to two Australian citizens, namely David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib who were illegally detained, rendered, tortured and imprisoned at Guantanamo by the United States of America, without charge or due process of law. Davis Hicks has been there for 4 years. Habib was released without charge after 3 years.

The Prime Minister, Attorney General and Foreign Minister have been derelict in their duty and have continuously supported the detention of these two Australian's even when they knew that they would not receive a fair trial !!

If anybody should be facing charges it should be these 3 dishonourable men.

Here are the 20 questions they refuse to Answer:-

5th May 2005.
Hon. John Howard MP
Prime Minister
56/70 Phillip Street
SYDNEY NSW 2000



Dear Sir,
I write to you seeking clarification in respect to matters concerning Australia’s involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Would you be so kind as to answer the following questions.

1.) Did Australia declare War on Afghanistan and Iraq before it participated in a US led invasion and occupation of those countries, under the banner the ‘Coalition of the Willing’?

2.) If Australia did not declare War on Afghanistan or Iraq, on whose authority and on what legal basis, and under what Australian laws did the Australian Liberal Cabinet approve the Australian Defence Forces to participate in unprovoked attacks on these sovereign nations, without the sanction of the United Nations?

3.) Can you explain why the ANZUS treaty was invoked by you on September 14th 2001 in respect to the 911 attack on New York/Washington by ‘terrorists’ still unknown to this day, and on whose authority Australia breached Article 1, IV and V1 of the treaty by bypassing the authority of the United Nations?

4.) Can you explain what relevance to the Pacific area either Afghanistan or Iraq have in context with the terms of the ANZUS Treaty, and with the 911 attacks?

5.) Was the then Governor General of Australia Dr Peter Hollinsworth consulted as Command in Chief of the Australian Naval and Military Forces under Section 68 of the Australian Constitution, as the final Civil authority in Australia, and did he give his sanction in writing to the Australian Government on advice from either yourself or any other Minister of the Crown in respect to the commitment of Australia’s Defence Forces to unprovoked war against the Sovereign Nations of Afghanistan and Iraq?

NOTE: If you seek to suggest to me in your reply (as has been tried in the past as a diversionary ploy) that the role of the Governor General is purely ‘ceremonial’, then please table for me under what statutes his power under the Constitution is usurped, in favour of the Government in respect to his duties under Section 68 of the Constitution.

6.) Australia is a contracting party to the Geneva Convention. As such, please explain on whose authority Australia is responsible for multiple breaches of the Geneva Convention during and after the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq?

7.) Please explain on what legal basis the Australian Government claims it is not an ‘Occupying Force’ in Iraq under the Geneva Convention, having participated in an unprovoked attack on that sovereign nation, and has continued to maintain forces in that country ever since?

8.) Australia is bound by the United Nations Charter. Therefore, in view of the fact that Australia in conjunction with Britain and the United States carried out these attacks without the sanction of the United Nations, please explain under what other International law such un-authorized attacks can be deemed legal?

9.) Are you and the Australian Government aware that the Nuremberg Convention states that unprovoked attacks on sovereign nations are deemed to be the most heinous of war crimes?

10.) Following the release of the 911 Report that accentuates the contrary, does the Australian Government still maintain that there was any connection between either Afghanistan or Iraq, and the 911 attacks on the World Trade Centre?

11.) Prime Minister what was the ‘compelling evidence’ that President George Bush showed you or verbally advised you about, following 911, that you claimed convinced you that Australia should be party to an illegal attack on Afghanistan? I recall that you were not prepared to share that ‘compelling evidence’ with the Australian people, at that time, for reasons unknown. Will you now reveal what that information was in order to justify your actions and to prove that such evidence was factual, and not contrived by the US Administration to deceive you, in order to secure Australia’s support?

12.) In view of the fact that it has now finally been confirmed by the US authorities that there are NO Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, nor were there at the time of the attack on Iraq by Australia, can you explain how, on no more than a presumption, you and other Ministers repeatedly told the Australian Parliament and the people that your reason for participating in the attack on Iraq was because Iraq possessed WMD’s?

13.) Prime Minister are you aware of the recently leaked secret document which tables a meeting held on July 23rd 2002 between the then head of MI6 Richard Dearlove, Prime Minister Tony Blair, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and Britains top National Security advisors, following Mr. Dearloves return from consultations in Washington, that reveals that President Bush had decided that the War on Iraq is to be “Justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD’s,” and that “The intelligence and facts are being fixed around the policy.” This and other parts of the briefing clearly indicate that the political leaders of ‘the coalition of the willing’ were basically instructed to ensure that their respective Intelligence Services “fix facts” in order to “justify” an unprovoked war on Iraq, as has been suspected in many quarters since before the war, and is now blatantly obvious to the world. What is your explanation to justify your position and your actions following these damaging revelations?

14.) Can you explain to me the logic behind the premise that even if Iraq did have WMD’s prior to the ‘war’, how those weapons would have been a threat to Australia, in view of the fact that they had no delivery systems? Can you further explain the logic of the attack on Iraq for unproven possession of WMD’s when it is a known fact that Israel is the only country in the middle-east so armed, with in excess of 200 nuclear weapons, and is a country that has constantly ignored all UN Resolutions, or had them vetoed by the USA on 73 occasions. Why does Australia support the double standard, which results in no action being taken against Israel?

15.) If the ‘coalition of the willing’ including Australia did not declare War on either Afghanistan or Iraq, can you explain how ex-patriate persons captured in those countries or even other countries such as Pakistan, can be described as ‘enemy combatants’? And in view of that, can you further explain how those two Australian citizens who were not soldiers or involved in combat, and who have been held by the US Government at Guantanamo can be classified as ‘enemy combatants’?

16.) If Australia supports the Geneva Convention why has the Australian Government failed over 3 years to take proper legal action against the United States Government in respect to the US’s illegal detention of the two Australian’s namely Hicks and Habib at Guantanamo, contrary to the Geneva Convention? (Obviously I am aware that Habib has subsequently been released – without charges laid by either the US or Australian Governments)

17.) Does the Australian Government support the United Nations War Crimes Tribunal? If so, Will the Australian Government support the arrest and trial by the United Nations War Crimes Tribunal of any Australian’s who have committed War Crimes against or within either Afghanistan or Iraq, be they either soldiers in combat, military leaders or the politicians who ordered such attacks?

18.) Does the Australian Government believe that as an ‘attacker’ and ‘occupier’ of Iraq, it is a culpable party to the large civilian death toll, and if not, what is the legal justification for such a claim to the contrary? Further what representation or action, if any, did Australia make or take against the USA as a member of the ‘coalition of the willing,’ in respect to the use by the United States Military of cluster bombs and chemical weapons against civilian targets?

19.) Is the Prime Minister aware of the publication of proof of the deliberate deceit of the Parliament and the people of the United Kingdom by Prime Minister Tony Blair in respect to the legal advice tendered to him by British Attorney General Lord Goldsmith, which was used to justify the war against Iraq, and the recent suggestion by the former British Chief of the Defence Forces Admiral Sir Michael Boyce that both he and ‘others’, clearly meaning politicians, who engineered the illegal attack on Iraq by deliberately failing to reveal the true extent of the caveats on that legal advice, may be liable to be tried by the ICC for war crimes? On whose legal advice did you, the Australian Attorney General and the Australian Government believe it was legal to attack Iraq and Afghanistan?

20.) Finally, Prime Minister will you personally take responsibility for the deaths of any of the further 450 Australian Defence Force personnel that you have unnecessarily sent to Iraq for no apparent legitimate or logistical reason, but for political reasons, when most other sensible countries are in the process of removing their forces, now that the truth about the illegality of the war and the blatant lies told about Iraq are surfacing for all the world to see?

Yours faithfully,
Michael Macaulay
Australian Citizen.

c.c. Attorney General Hon. Philip Rudduck.
Minister for Foreign Affairs Hon. Alexander Downer.


FOOTNOTE FROM AUTHOR:
One has to assume that their failure to reply to my questions clearly indicates that replying would incriminate them. The reality is that failure to reply also clearly indicates their guilt.

It is also evident that similar moves are afoot in the USA and Britain to indict President Bush and his associates and Prime Minister Blair and his associates for War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity.

 

http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=149495;article=95095;show_parent=1

 

Top of Page | Home Page

©-free 2005 Adelaide Institute