THE TREND OF BICKERING
One of the themes, in our so-called process of public education, is that it is not important to know much of anything, but just where to find it. We might not know anything about the amoeba, but the important thing in this matter is to know where the library is. So, I suppose, if something comes up, you'll have to run to some source in order to solve whatever it is. When danger threatens, I prefer to have a head full of knowledge relative to the problem rather than log onto the Internet and click on some search engine. When the electricity shuts of, or the library burns down, where will you then find your answers?
Concurrent with this approach, is the idea that it is more important to know the technique of teaching than it is to know the subject material. As one "expert" (a Ph.D. gas head) put it, "If you have the proper background in teaching technique, you can teach any subject. All you'll need in that case is a good textbook." Thus you will find that schools are filled with nincompoops who have little grasp of the topic at hand, but are collecting a salary for being a teacher (actually a "presenter" for teaching requires students and our schools are filled with non-students). At one school, where I was employed, I was frequently approached by the head of the math department with questions regarding the solution of certain vector problems. In another school, chemistry teachers were constantly bombarding me with questions concerning laboratory procedures simply because, like baking, the possession of a book doesn't not make you proficient in the subject. Americans pay infinitely more attention to labels than they do content. They always judge a book by its cover. Thus, a person sporting a $3000 camera instantly becomes an expert photographer, and so on and so forth. A person with a college degree is thus licensed to think – as in the Wizard of Oz.
It has been said that in America one has to attend college in order to secure a high school education. That's true and it is easily demonstrated relative to the books, exams, etc. which were used in the 1930's. Eric Thomson claims that this downward trend in education parallels the down breeding of the American public and there is much truth in that. If present trends continue, you'll have to attend college in order to receive a 1930's grammar school education.
The salary scale for teachers is not discriminatory. A guidance counselor (a director of bull sessions), a gym instructor (a kid who never grew up) and a mathematics teacher are all paid the same. There's something oddly strange in all of this for the mental discipline and acuity for being proficient in the hard sciences certainly exceeds that required for those in the gabbing business. And that brings me to the topic of revisionists – those pesky gabbers who bother other pesky gabbers.
Revising things is a perpetual process. Some might even call it evolution. Snow White, for example, has been undergoing racial changes as well as all the other time-honored Disney characters. The skin color of previously obvious White characters has been getting more "tanned" by the decade. Blue eyes are being replaced by brown eyes. Golden hair – a unique Aryan color – has been steadily becoming more dirty in appearance.
Amerasians (incorrectly called "Indians") are no longer the bloody savages which there really were, but kindly, wise and "in tune" with the big Nature god. Insignificant Negroes have miraculously evolved into great heroes, scientists and what all. People with contagious diseases – public health menaces – become honored citizens and have a "Constitutional right" to spread their afflictions to the healthy. "Genius" is defined by that hideous, and foul creature known as Einstein. It goes on and on.
Once in a while, some American manages to lift his head from the slop trough and look beyond his stomach. His nose detects foul odors and his eyes see chaos. Most simply stuff their faces back into the swill but some think and begin to dream of a better way. Often, a few of them begin to look toward the past for a model of order and harmony.
The Third Reich was well known for its efficiency and order. As Eric Thomson once asked the race-mixing anarchist Bradley Smith, "If you take out the Holocaust©, what's wrong with National Socialism?" Time is taking out the Holocaust© and as the veil of Survivor® tears dries up, National Socialism is becoming an object of questioning from a people who are growing tired of crime, corruption and filthy squatters. It's time for a revision.
Progressively watch the shifting image of Nazi Germany as it is shown on your jew tube. (So-called "public television" is also jew-controlled.) Programs are now showing that Hitler's Germany wasn't that ordered at all. It was actually very chaotic! Hitler was an indecisive party-boy who often slept through important meetings. It was degenerate – even more so than ours. Top officials had orgies where women's breasts were the focus of ogling, feeling and what all – where introductions resulted from pressing a "door bell" button.
The greatest shift, at this point in time, is the hint that most of the top Nazis were really jews after all! Hitler was "part jew" and the relabeling continues over most of his staff from Goebbels to Bormann. It shall "evolve" and thus furnish more wheat for the revisionist mill. Is the Holocaust© to be remembered as an event where one batch of jews gassed another?
Revisionists – actually historians – are not scientists. They poke, peer and fondle bits of information and get into debates over trivials and their circuses remind me of baboons picking lice from each other's bodies. Listen to them argue: "No, Hitler used his index finger to scratch his nose." "You are incorrect for in the Deutchespuken archives it doesn't mention nose scratching at all." "Yes, but we all know those papers were forgeries." "I have it on good authority that my degree is more prestigious than your degree. Where did you say you earned it?" Unlike a scientist, a revisionist is not interested in underlying principles. He looks for a fly in the ointment.
A fellow claims that the vehicle before us is a working piece of transportation. Suppose, as a person schooled in the hard sciences, I discover that one of the constant velocity joints is seized. I therefore conclude that the vehicle is definitely not a working piece of transportation. A revisionist doesn't stop there. He has an inner compulsion to examine the whole vehicle for additional faults from ashtray to spark plug. If he discovers a crunched bearing, he immediately writes a book about it. Someone else might claim that the alternator works just fine while another argues that it doesn't. On and on it goes where the crucial factor is of no importance at all. It's only the game which counts! (Dr. Robert Faurisson once told me that revisionism is just nitpicking.) They even get into debates over the type of oil which may, or may not, have been used. That damned car simply cannot be used as claimed! The Holocaust© yarn simply won't fly.
I give up! The Holocaust© is 100 percent true. Hitler's real name was Lenny Bogstein. The Hitler Youth was a car-jacking ring. The entire Reich was forced to eat bagels, salute and shout "Seig Heil. Enjoy!" Their trains never ran on time and all churches were compelled to engage in animal sacrifice. People never slept. They went on all-night torch-lighted parades. Hitler's birthday was a national day of nudity were towns competed to see which could produce the greater number of impregnated 12 year olds. Hitler started WW II because he was unhappy with his latest batch of pastries and was tired of practicing mass hypnosis. I'm an American. I'll believe anything providing it pays well. How much did you say my "conversion" was worth?
Keep in mind that WW II revisionism is only a historical exercise. It is a noise generating contest where one set of flapping lips opposes another. History is concerned with the past. We should focus on the present, for if we don't, we will have no future as a race. If you think that revisionism is "doing something" simply because it irritates the jews, then consider kicking in the door of a synagogue, some Saturday morning, and then urinate on the carpet. I am sure you will have angered all the jews you could handle but it will not change one thing other than make you wish you never had.
If Ernst Zündel, or any other revisionist, were really affecting jewish power, he'd have had a convenient "accident" years ago. The present Toronto courtroom circus is just that – an entertaining sideshow which keeps the masses of asses from noticing what is really going on. You are losing your country Whitey.
by Robert Frenz
13 August 1998