Elle Weisels book Night does not mention the gas chambers saying that Jews were killed by being thrown into burning ditches.

The thing I object to is its use as a political tool the best case in point is the Balkans wars during the 90's.
Simon Wiesenthal and others lobbied Clinton as well as a mass media campaign for the US to intervene on behalf of Muslims.

The narrative was Milosevic was the new Hitler and the Serbs were the new Nazis killing innocent Muslims because the Serbs were evil racists.

Bosnians were portrayed as being in the same position as Jews were during WW2 and if we didn’t intervene Bosnians would be genocided by our inaction.
Of course they never mentioned the Bosnian regime was running international training camps and raiding Serb villages and slaughtering Serb civilians.

I remember when I was younger in Glasgow with my parents there was a stand with people handing out flyers with a boy about the age of 5 in front of a bombed out building in a street ( I’ll assume it wasn’t doctored ) and the image was in black and brownish colour.
This connotation was definitely there to give it a grainy WW2 style appearance playing into the whole history repeating again if we don’t respond myth.

On the holocaust issue I have satisfied myself that the numbers don't add up. Documentary and modern scientific evidence support this conclusion.

In another forum it was pointed out to me that Anne Frank and her family were originally from Frankfurt, Germany.

Contrary to popular opinion the Germans did not throw every Jew into a concentration camp; there were tens of thousands of Jewish soldiers and generals in the German armed forces.

On this basis I think that the Frank family was considered subversive to German interests and interned.

International Judaism had declared war on Germany in 1933 and the Germans were protecting their security by interning Jews with international Jewish interests.

The USA and Canada interned the Japanese for merely being Japanese.

H.F. Wolff

On the other hand, if the Diary of Anne Frank is a hoax, as many claim, then perhaps she never existed either. The paperback book as published by Pan claimed it was "found on a rubbish dump." However, some parts of it were not published, why not? I'm very skeptical of revisionist history concerning the so-called holocaust.

Nobody denies the camps existed or that Jews died.
What they do dispute is there purpose that the camps were used for slave labour and gas chambers were delousing chambers to kill lice to stop the spread of diseases in the camps like Typhus.
One of the most famous people killed at Auschwitz was Anne Frank who died of disease.

To continue...

"...the irrefutable evidence presented at Nuremberg...".

And the justices from the US Supreme Court that witnessed the proceedings at the "Trials at Nuernberg" described it as a Kangaroo court and victor's justice, anything but a legal trial in our accepted sense of the word.

And evidence produced by torture is unacceptable in civilized countries, in case you didn't know.

H.F. Wolff

Of course it can because you are counter asserting someone’s claim that something does exist that there is a financial, military, media, political and philosophical dimension to an organisation run by OBL.
There is no proof to this assertion hence it does not exist

“If it does not exist it is therefore by definition impossible to prove. You can’t prove that there is no pink elephant sitting behind you, in your room while you’re typing - can you?”

Yes you can because it has characteristic that define what it is wither it be quantified, counted, colored, tasted, touched, felt, smelled, drawn, etc.
By proving something does not exist you can disprove that it does exist, that it does not meet the requirement of characteristics that qualify it as existing.

Take your pink elephant for example for there to be a pink elephant it has to meet a certain criteria height, weight, physical characteristics and colour.

The governments claim that OBL runs an organisation called Al Queda which they characterise as this that OBL is its leader that he helped set up and run training camps in Afghanistan to fight western countries and interests around the world recruiting and training Islamic militants from around the world to set up Islamic regimes in predominant Muslim populated countries.

That’s what governments classify the Al Queda terrorist organisation as meeting this criteria. None of this is true and there is no evidence to back up this assertion hence an organisation called Al Queda does not exist.

“If Al-Quaida does not exist it’s by far the worst possible outcome since nobody can prove that it doesn’t exist - therefore it must exist. “

If it doesn’t meet the criteria/characteristics then it doesn’t exist.

Cows across the US have formed a resistance organisation Moo–Queda and preparing for guerrilla warfare.
Its leader Moosama Bin Lden has issued a Fatwa calling for attacks on the American populace for killing and eating cow meat in there restaurants and supermarkets.

You must believe such an organisation exists then as you can’t prove that it doesn’t.

Wow, what a tour de force! I am truly impressed by your comprehension of the English language, the ability to disseminate information, and to formulate an argument.

Brilliant, sir! Bravo! Well done and all that!

And the piece de resistance: "...a large detachment of Patton’s 7th Army that entered Auschwitz-Birkenau and witnessed the piles of dead bodies..."

You, sir, need to frequent with a better class of the population, one that, at least occasionally, knows when to tell the truth.

Just in case the sarcasm escapes you, the Russians recently celebrated their "liberation" of Auschwitz. The Americans didn't get within (rough guess) 300 miles of the place. And as our legal friends would have it "falsehood in one, falsehood in all...".

As I stated in my earlier post, eye witnesses (and fairy tale tellers) pale in comparison to forensic and scientific evidence.

Why don't you contact your compatriots at the Simon Wiesenthal centre in Los Angeles, and inquire what documentary and scientific evidence they have to substantiate their claims?

Why would anyone accept eye witness evidence of the"chosen ones" if this was not even acceptable to the Israeli Supreme Court?

H.F. Wolff

I have met hundreds of concentration camps survivers myslef and remain convinced that the camps did exist - keep your neo-Nazi views to yourself. Jasnovac in Serbia is one of those camps, aside from the irrefutable evidence presented at Nuremberg among other places. I love the Holocaust deniers, gay-bashers and all other forms of abuse of our liberties where such venomous thoughts could be freely advocated under the rights of the First Ammendment. Freedom of speech does should not encourage us to speak rubbish.... But, that's the price we pay for having all sorts of freedoms. Wasn't there a large detachment of Patton's 7th Army that entered Auschwitz-Birkenau and witnessed the piles of dead bodies - they all must have died in their sleep - you'd think.

Anything that is claimed to NOT exist can not be proven. I can't remember the last time I encountered such a dimwitted view on life. Very simply that which is non existant can not be quantified, counted, colored, tasted, touched, felt, smelled, drawn, etc. Therefore its existance can not be affirmed. Nobody, since times immemorial has ever fallen into this trap deeper than you did. If it does not exist it is therefore by definition impossible to prove. You can't prove that there is no pink elephant sitting behind you, in your room while you're typing - can you?

Did you ever even at an elementary level study any philosophy or any other science of critical thinking (logic, ethics, etc.)? I bet you never did.

If Al-Quaida does not exist it's by far the worst possible outcome since nobody can prove that it doesn't exist - therefore it must exist.