Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Bondarev essays on the Web

Expand Messages
  • Robert Mason
    ... I m looking for are the statements in the book which the Vorstand considered anti-Semitic, and therefore damaging to the Anthroposophical Society - signed
    Message 1 of 22 , May 12 11:45 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      To Francisco, who wrote:

      >>I remember the discussion vaguely, Roberto, and what
      I'm looking for are the statements in the book which
      the Vorstand considered anti-Semitic, and therefore
      damaging to the Anthroposophical Society - signed by
      Dr. Georg Unger, whom I knew personally and whose
      judgment I trust. If I already saw them in 2002,
      sorry, I don't remember. In any case, it would be
      interesting for the whole list.<<

      Robert writes:

      It seems that you are asking me to get inside
      the minds of the (1998) Vorstanders (Vorsitzers?)
      and to know what they really "considered". I
      can't do that. I will post two old, long
      messages I sent to you in 2002. They contain a
      lot of quotes from Bondy; I may have already
      posted themsometime on this list -- I seem to
      remember that I did post them on Yahoo
      "Anthroposophy". It will likely be very hard
      for the listees here to tell which of us was
      saying what; so I went through quickly and
      marked wich *R:* the places where I am speaking
      or quoting Bondy.

      I just changed my "Christian Ethics" page to
      Graham Rickett's translation, which may be
      easier reading. I just the other day got that
      version from Willy Lochmann. He may be sending
      me more soon, maybe even the chapter from
      which the passages were deleted in the German
      edition. If so, I will surely try to get it
      up on the Web.

      Frank wrote:

      >>What do you thnk the real reason was then?
      [for Bondarev's expulsion]<<

      Robert writes:

      Again, I would have to guess. Maybe it really
      did have some connection with the politics of
      the Russian Society. Tension between a Bondarev
      faction and a Prokofieff faction? Maybe some of
      those CheKa-connected pseudo-Templars were
      involved? Somehow the desire in Dornach to
      raise Proky to the heights led to a drive to
      stomp Bondy into the dirt?

      Bondy seems to have a way of rubbing a lot of
      people the wrong way, and not only Society
      apparatchniki. But it's not out of the question
      that those apparatchniki had some hard feelings
      about Bondy's criticisms of the way the Society
      was being run and by his suggestion that "the
      Society has become a means of concealing something
      unknown". Perhaps he was right with this
      suggestion, and that sinister "something unknown"
      used the supposed "anti-Semitism" as a pretext to
      get him out of the Society?

      Maybe some of all of the above?

      Robert M







      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
      http://mail.yahoo.com
    • dottie zold
      Robert I find you doing a Steve Hale, Joel Wendt kinda thing with this far reaching. And I have to wonder why when it seems to be on record that this man
      Message 2 of 22 , May 12 3:47 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Robert I find you doing a Steve Hale, Joel Wendt kinda thing with
        this far reaching. And I have to wonder why when it seems to be on
        record that this man denied the Holocaust. Expulsion is in order
        plain and simple if he dared to use Anthroposophy as his cover for
        his twisted machinations. And to think you will logically try to find
        a way to make this true is just too much for normal thinking people
        when in all points one can not have an inthecloset antisemite
        speaking for the Society. But then again maybe you are not a member,
        are you?

        One need not even go any further than to look at antisemetic remarks
        period. One need not bring is the ignorance from the church goers
        that Prokofieff was to be put up and so Bondarev had to brought down.
        Ignorance plain and simple. If the man indeed did say or intimate
        that the holocaust did not happen then that is the end of the story.
        The Vorstand need nothing other than that. So the stupidity of
        bringing Prokofieff in on this is really beginning to show me a
        pattern of deceit amongst those that I am now really beginning to
        serious wonder about.

        And it seems to me that you are not real clear if the Holocaust
        happened in the way that historical records show. Maybe I am wrong
        about that and I misread you on the critics list. Are you one who
        holds that the Holocaust did not happen as well?

        Are you a member of the Society Robert?

        Wondering about the great downward spiral of logic,
        Dottie
      • Tarjei Straume
        ... It seems to me that if this fella had an important task with putting things right in the Vorstand, he behaved like a plain idiot by publishing an
        Message 3 of 22 , May 13 2:41 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          Robert Mason wrote:

          >Bondy seems to have a way of rubbing a lot of people the wrong way,
          >and not only Society apparatchniki. But it's not out of the
          >question that those apparatchniki had some hard feelings about
          >Bondy's criticisms of the way the Society was being run and by his
          >suggestion that "the Society has become a means of concealing
          >something unknown". Perhaps he was right with this suggestion, and
          >that sinister "something unknown" used the supposed "anti-Semitism"
          >as a pretext to get him out of the Society?

          It seems to me that if this fella had an important task with putting
          things right in the Vorstand, he behaved like a plain idiot by
          publishing an embarrassing defence of holocaust denial, wouldn't you think?

          Apart from that, I'm left with the impression that your motive is not
          to defend holocaust denial, but to prove something with regard to
          some sort of vendetta you have going with the Vorstand. That's
          difficult for most of us here to comment on, I would imagine, because
          we're considered the Wild West of Anthroposophy, and most AS members
          shy away from our company.

          For this reason, I myself won't comment on your suggestions about the
          Vorstand. I'll only mention that any defence of holocaust denial,
          even indirectly, is plain sick. So the only alternative to dismissing
          the guy from the AS would have been to send him into
          anthro-psychotherapy to have his repressed childhood experiences and
          former incarnations scrutinized and then put the poor fellow on the
          proper medication.

          Tarjei
        • Robert Mason
          ... had an important task with putting things right in the Vorstand, he behaved like a plain idiot by publishing an embarrassing defence of holocaust denial,
          Message 4 of 22 , May 16 1:28 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            To Tarjei, who wrote:

            >>It seems to me that if this fella [Bondarev]
            had an important task with putting things right
            in the Vorstand, he behaved like a plain idiot
            by publishing an embarrassing defence of
            holocaust denial, wouldn't you think? . . . .

            >>I'll only mention that any defence of
            holocaust denial, even indirectly, is plain
            sick.<<

            Robert writes:

            I suppose that what you mean by *embarrassing
            defence* are those passages that were deleted
            from the German edition of *Kreuzung*? -- Those
            passages amounted to only a few pages of a big
            book, which is only one of his many big books.
            This book is the only one of his that I have
            read (other than a few translated pages about
            Tolkien and Castañeda); the rest are only in
            German and/or Russian. (I've tried to struggle
            through a few of his German essays that have
            appeared on the Web.) His object in *Kreuzung*
            is not primarily to "put things right in the
            Vorstand". He does mention here and there
            shortcomings in the Society, but not in much
            detail; there are some hints about infiltration
            of the "lodges" into the Society. I don't know
            *exactly* what is his criticism of the Vorstand;
            if you read German you could soon know more
            about that than I do. (See Lochmann's Bondarew
            page.) I think that his brochure *Stimme aus
            dem Osten* (1992?) dealt mainly with that
            matter, but of course a lot has happened since
            1992.

            He wasn't such an "idiot" that he didn't
            anticipate that he would encounter opposition
            because of *Kreuzung*, or that he might be
            called all sorts of things. -- And I don't think
            that *defense of holocaust denial* is an
            accurate description of his position, unless you
            mean a defense of the rights to freedom of
            speech and of the press -- and a recognition of
            the need for free and open research into this
            matter. These he does defend, as would I.

            Tarjei wrote:

            >>So the only alternative to dismissing the guy
            from the AS would have been to send him into
            anthro-psychotherapy to have his repressed
            childhood experiences and former incarnations
            scrutinized and then put the poor fellow on the
            proper medication.<<

            Robert writes:

            As I said before, there was the "alternative" of
            simply stating that Bondarev's opinions are his
            and not necessarily those of the Society. And
            of course there was the alternative of treating
            Bondarev's book as the Society officially treats
            most of the "secondary literature": with
            silence.

            Tarjei wrote:

            >>I don't understand why you call the 6 million
            Jews murdered in Nazi death camps a "magic
            number"; nor do I understand your motive for
            wanting to make an issue out of this. It looks
            as if you're arguing for historical revisionism.
            If so, the Holocaust is a highly disreputable
            place to start, for obvious reasons.<<

            Robert writes:

            I was being a little sarcastic with *magic
            number*, but I think that in the context I wrote
            that phrase, its meaning is clear enough. If
            one can lose one's career or be put into prison
            for denying, or even doubting, that number . . .
            that's a kind of "magic", isn't it?

            About my "motives": I don't want to keep
            writing the same things over and over. Have you
            read my recent thread on WC? I think that might
            help your "understanding".

            Tarjei wrote:

            >>And when you say "someone is hiding
            something", it's not easy to distiguish [sic]
            whether you mean Israel and the Jewish lobby, or
            the Goethanum Vorstand. Are you suggesting
            there's a Jewish conspiracy behind the
            Vorstand?<

            Robert writes:

            The context from which you snipped *magic
            number* etc. was something I wrote about four
            years ago, and I wasn't discussing the Vorstand
            at all. Again, I think that my WC thread might
            clarify my meaning for you. If not, try me
            again with more specific questions.

            Robert M


            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            http://mail.yahoo.com
          • Steve Hale
            Robert, I appreciate the material you have brought here concerning Gennadji Bondarew s work. I consider him, and yourself, to be true workers for the fifth
            Message 5 of 22 , May 16 7:42 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              Robert,

              I appreciate the material you have brought here concerning Gennadji
              Bondarew's work. I consider him, and yourself, to be true workers
              for the fifth cultural epoch, with eyes wide open. And, as you can
              see, the slings and arrows fly around here.

              Steve

              --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Robert Mason
              <robertsmason_99@...> wrote:
              >
              > To Tarjei, who wrote:
              >
              > >>It seems to me that if this fella [Bondarev]
              > had an important task with putting things right
              > in the Vorstand, he behaved like a plain idiot
              > by publishing an embarrassing defence of
              > holocaust denial, wouldn't you think? . . . .
              >
              > >>I'll only mention that any defence of
              > holocaust denial, even indirectly, is plain
              > sick.<<
              >
              > Robert writes:
              >
              > I suppose that what you mean by *embarrassing
              > defence* are those passages that were deleted
              > from the German edition of *Kreuzung*? -- Those
              > passages amounted to only a few pages of a big
              > book, which is only one of his many big books.
              > This book is the only one of his that I have
              > read (other than a few translated pages about
              > Tolkien and Castañeda); the rest are only in
              > German and/or Russian. (I've tried to struggle
              > through a few of his German essays that have
              > appeared on the Web.) His object in *Kreuzung*
              > is not primarily to "put things right in the
              > Vorstand". He does mention here and there
              > shortcomings in the Society, but not in much
              > detail; there are some hints about infiltration
              > of the "lodges" into the Society. I don't know
              > *exactly* what is his criticism of the Vorstand;
              > if you read German you could soon know more
              > about that than I do. (See Lochmann's Bondarew
              > page.) I think that his brochure *Stimme aus
              > dem Osten* (1992?) dealt mainly with that
              > matter, but of course a lot has happened since
              > 1992.
              <snip>
            • Frank Smith
              ... Robert, these are the few pages I m interested in. Do you have them - in any language? Frank Frank Thomas Smith http://SouthernCrossReview.org
              Message 6 of 22 , May 17 6:01 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                > >
                > > Robert writes to Tarjei:
                > >
                > > I suppose that what you mean by *embarrassing
                > > defence* are those passages that were deleted
                > > from the German edition of *Kreuzung*? -- Those
                > > passages amounted to only a few pages of a big
                > > book, which is only one of his many big books.


                Robert, these are the few pages I'm interested in. Do
                you have them - in any language?
                Frank




                Frank Thomas Smith
                http://SouthernCrossReview.org

                __________________________________________________
                Do You Yahoo!?
                Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                http://mail.yahoo.com
              • Robert Mason
                To Frank Smith: ... Do you have them - in any language? revised
                Message 7 of 22 , May 21 11:54 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  To Frank Smith:

                  [Robert had written:

                  > > I suppose that what you mean by *embarrassing
                  > > defence* are those passages that were deleted
                  > > from the German edition of *Kreuzung*? -- Those
                  > > passages amounted to only a few pages of a big
                  > > book, which is only one of his many big books.]

                  Frank wrote:

                  >>Robert, these are the few pages I'm interested in.
                  Do you have them - in any language?<<

                  Robert writes now:

                  Frank, I already told you four years ago, and again
                  just a few days ago:

                  >>The edition I have > is translated from the second
                  German edition, > revised in 1998. It has two loose
                  pages with 11 > supplemental passages, which the
                  publisher partially > deleted from the German edition.<<

                  That edition, which I got from Nelson Willby, is
                  the Rickett translation, except for the long
                  chapter on "Good and Evil". The two loose pages of
                  the 11 supplemental passages are differently worded
                  from the Rickett wording, but the translator of
                  those supplements is unnamed.

                  I have already quoted some from those loose pages,
                  along with the other extensive quotes I have typed
                  out. In themselves those deleted passages are, to
                  me, among the least remarkable of Bondarev's
                  remarks in the whole book, with a couple of
                  exceptions. For the most part, he is not drawing
                  in those passages any "spiritual scientific"
                  conclusions; he is merely applying some healthy
                  common sense in that he questions the "official"
                  story of the "Holocaust". He doesn't go into any
                  great detail, not nearly as much as have plenty of
                  other "revisionist" commentators. In a less
                  Anthroposophical context his few remarks would be
                  almost ordinary, were it not for the *Verbot*
                  surrounding the subject.

                  And for the most part, what makes this application
                  of common sense especially "interesting" is the
                  opposition to such an exercise. There is the legal
                  opposition, which (I would assume) led to the
                  deletions in the German editions. And there is
                  also the psychological opposition, which is of a
                  kind that Bondarev explains by reference to a
                  black-magickal process by which an untruth becomes
                  so established within the human organism that an
                  encounter with the corresponding truth provokes a
                  violent reaction within the organism. Bondarev
                  writes:

                  "We already spoke of disturbances and arrhythmia in
                  the nervous system and blood circulation suffered by
                  a Western intellectual if he inadvertently
                  stumbles upon the truth. This phenomenon appears
                  particularly repellent in people who claim to be
                  socially awake, or who have even freely taken upon
                  themselves the obligation to stand consciously in
                  their time."

                  He then goes into a brief discussion which touches
                  upon the "Holocaust", and from there the passages
                  were deleted. And again, to me most of the deleted
                  material involves simply the application of
                  ordinary common sense. There are a couple of
                  exceptions, one being the remarks about the
                  supposed ecological disaster which would have
                  resulted from mass cyanide gassing, the other being
                  this:

                  "As an Anthroposophist I am obliged to think that
                  the 45-yeear-long concentration of all humanity on
                  the idea that with the help of cyanide, 6 million
                  human beings were eliminated, as gigantic spiritual
                  counter-image has been created. If it corresponds
                  to reality it is one thing, but if not it is an
                  astral monster of lies, thirsting to realize itself
                  in truth. If the Holocaust really happened, then
                  denying it deprives its human victims of meaning.
                  If it didn't happen, then, given existing
                  circumstances it certainly will. This is why it is
                  necessary to summon up courage and, after
                  thoroughly checking and analyzing everything for
                  and against, arrive at full clarity on this
                  question. Until then only one thing is clear:
                  that the ban on studying it serves only to
                  strengthen doubts as to the official version."

                  (Those two conclusions about what would happen or
                  would have happened seem dubious to me; Bondarev
                  doesn't lay out in detail the (presumed) spiritual-
                  scientific consideration which led to them. In
                  general, over the course of the whole book Bondarev
                  is, to me, much more convincing when he talks about
                  what did happen and is happening.)

                  It has been about five years since we started to
                  discuss Bondarev in S98. And I have to ask myself
                  why, after all this time, you seem still to be
                  interested only in those few, hardly original
                  remarks which were deleted. But not so interested
                  that you have tried to get them and read them. --
                  In all that time have you not gotten hold of the
                  whole book and read it for yourself. And you need
                  not have limited yourself to that one book of his;
                  you read German well enough that you could read his
                  other books that are published in German. (And
                  maybe not only the German; you do know some Russian
                  too, don't you?)

                  I do wonder why after five years you seen to have
                  little or no interest in that which is really
                  interesting about Bondarev -- and why even the
                  little interest you do have is in that which is not
                  really so unusual about him.

                  I suppose that I could, with time, put my crooked
                  little fingers to the keyboard and type out in full
                  the whole of those fine-typed two loose pages, but
                  I don't see any real purpose in such an exercise
                  now. If all the material from Bondarev that I have
                  already made available does not arouse enough
                  interest in you so that you wish to make a deeper
                  study, I really doubt that those few,
                  not-very-special comments about "Holocaust
                  revisionism", taken out of context, would engage
                  any deeper interest in you. The context itself,
                  the whole book, is the really important thing, it
                  seems to me.

                  If Lochmann sends me any more digitized text from
                  the book, I'll try to get that up on the WWW. If
                  that's not enough for you, then I guess you'll
                  have to read the book for yourself, or else starve
                  that little interest you have in those few words
                  that were deleted, I would assume, in deference to
                  the draconian censorship laws in much of Europe.
                  (And they are a relatively few words: in some cases
                  the deleted words are only fragments of a sentence.)

                  Robert M


                  __________________________________________________
                  Do You Yahoo!?
                  Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                  http://mail.yahoo.com
                • Tarjei Straume
                  ... Honestly, I don t see any healthy common sense in questioning a proven, documented horror chapter in European history aqugmente3d by the testimonies of
                  Message 8 of 22 , May 22 6:33 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Robert Mason wrote to Frank Smith:

                    >For the most part, he is not drawing in those passages any
                    >"spiritual scientific" conclusions; he is merely applying some
                    >healthy common sense in that he questions the "official" story of
                    >the "Holocaust".

                    Honestly, I don't see any "healthy common sense" in questioning a
                    proven, documented horror chapter in European history aqugmente3d by
                    the testimonies of survivors and other eye witnesses. Quite the contrary.

                    >He doesn't go into any great detail, not nearly as much as have
                    >plenty of other "revisionist" commentators. In a less
                    >Anthroposophica context his few remarks would be almost ordinary,
                    >were it not for the *Verbot* surrounding the subject.

                    Do you consider yourself an anthroposophist? Do you *also* consider
                    yourself a historical revisionist with regard to the Holocaust?

                    >And for the most part, what makes this application of common sense
                    >especially "interesting" is the opposition to such an
                    >exercise. There is the legal opposition, which (I would assume) led
                    >to the deletions in the German editions. And there is also the
                    >psychological opposition, which is of a kind that Bondarev explains
                    >by reference to a black-magickal process by which an untruth becomes
                    >so established within the human organism that an encounter with the
                    >corresponding truth provokes a violent reaction within the organism.

                    In this case the "untruth" is that six million Jews were murdered in
                    death camps by Nazis during the second world war? Do you have any
                    sources for this type of "enlightetnment" that are not associated
                    with neo-Nazi organizations, or similar organizations that seek to
                    place Adolf Hitler in a more favorable historical perspective and
                    imply that the Jewish Holocaust survivors have been lying?

                    Tarjei
                  • eltrigal78
                    ... Frank: If you already quoted from those pages, I apologize - for the 2 days ago, not the 4 years. ... Frank: There s a legal Verbot (prohibition) in
                    Message 9 of 22 , May 23 9:29 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Robert Mason
                      <robertsmason_99@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Frank wrote:
                      >
                      > >>Robert, these are the few pages I'm interested in.
                      > Do you have them - in any language?<<
                      >
                      > Robert writes now:
                      >
                      > Frank, I already told you four years ago, and again
                      > just a few days ago:
                      >
                      > >>The edition I have > is translated from the second
                      > German edition, > revised in 1998. It has two loose
                      > pages with 11 > supplemental passages, which the
                      > publisher partially > deleted from the German edition.<<
                      >
                      > That edition, which I got from Nelson Willby, is
                      > the Rickett translation, except for the long
                      > chapter on "Good and Evil". The two loose pages of
                      > the 11 supplemental passages are differently worded
                      > from the Rickett wording, but the translator of
                      > those supplements is unnamed.

                      Frank: If you already quoted from those pages, I apologize - for the 2
                      days ago, not the 4 years.

                      >
                      > I have already quoted some from those loose pages,
                      > along with the other extensive quotes I have typed
                      > out. In themselves those deleted passages are, to
                      > me, among the least remarkable of Bondarev's
                      > remarks in the whole book, with a couple of
                      > exceptions. For the most part, he is not drawing
                      > in those passages any "spiritual scientific"
                      > conclusions; he is merely applying some healthy
                      > common sense in that he questions the "official"
                      > story of the "Holocaust". He doesn't go into any
                      > great detail, not nearly as much as have plenty of
                      > other "revisionist" commentators. In a less
                      > Anthroposophical context his few remarks would be
                      > almost ordinary, were it not for the *Verbot*
                      > surrounding the subject.

                      Frank: There's a legal Verbot (prohibition) in Germany for holocaust
                      denial, true. Ths is because of the latent danger of neo-naziism in
                      that country. Given that the holocaust is a known, proven, undeniable
                      fact, anyone who denies it must have a different agenda - such as
                      roiling up the ignorant anti-Semitic nationalist masses for political
                      advantage. That's the thinking anyway.

                      (snip)

                      (quoting Banderev):
                      > "As an Anthroposophist I am obliged to think that
                      > the 45-yeear-long concentration of all humanity on
                      > the idea that with the help of cyanide, 6 million
                      > human beings were eliminated, as gigantic spiritual
                      > counter-image has been created. If it corresponds
                      > to reality it is one thing, but if not it is an
                      > astral monster of lies, thirsting to realize itself
                      > in truth. If the Holocaust really happened, then
                      > denying it deprives its human victims of meaning.
                      > If it didn't happen, then, given existing
                      > circumstances it certainly will. This is why it is
                      > necessary to summon up courage and, after
                      > thoroughly checking and analyzing everything for
                      > and against, arrive at full clarity on this
                      > question. Until then only one thing is clear:
                      > that the ban on studying it serves only to
                      > strengthen doubts as to the official version."

                      Frank: This slippery wording, apparently objective, in reality puts
                      what he calls the "offical version", i.e, that the holocaust actually
                      happened, in doubt.

                      (snip)

                      Robert: It has been about five years since we started to
                      > discuss Bondarev in S98. And I have to ask myself
                      > why, after all this time, you seem still to be
                      > interested only in those few, hardly original
                      > remarks which were deleted. But not so interested
                      > that you have tried to get them and read them. --

                      Frank: But I have tried - through you.

                      Robert: In all that time have you not gotten hold of the
                      > whole book and read it for yourself. And you need
                      > not have limited yourself to that one book of his;
                      > you read German well enough that you could read his
                      > other books that are published in German. (And
                      > maybe not only the German; you do know some Russian
                      > too, don't you?)
                      >
                      > I do wonder why after five years you seen to have
                      > little or no interest in that which is really
                      > interesting about Bondarev -- and why even the
                      > little interest you do have is in that which is not
                      > really so unusual about him.

                      Frank: You're right, Robert. I am not interested in Bondarev, except
                      when you bring him up on this list calling him an anthroposophist and
                      lamenting his expulsion from the Anthroposophical Society because he
                      was identified as a holocuast denier. From what you quoted above (I'm
                      still not clear as to whether that was all he said on the subject), I
                      can safely say that he is a holocaust "doubter" - which is one baby
                      step away from denial - or even synomimous. And this indicates to me
                      -even without having read the rest - that the Vorstand was correct in
                      expelling him. I would have done the same, especially considering that
                      the great majority of members are Germans, Austrians and ethnic-German
                      Swiss. Holocaust revisionism (a great lie) is something which should
                      not be allowed to be in any way indentified with anthroposophy. But it
                      is, by people like Bondarev. So the least the organization which
                      pretends to represent anthroposophy can do is not allow it within its
                      own sphere of responsibility.

                      > I suppose that I could, with time, put my crooked
                      > little fingers to the keyboard and type out in full
                      > the whole of those fine-typed two loose pages, but
                      > I don't see any real purpose in such an exercise
                      > now. If all the material from Bondarev that I have
                      > already made available does not arouse enough
                      > interest in you so that you wish to make a deeper
                      > study, I really doubt that those few,
                      > not-very-special comments about "Holocaust
                      > revisionism", taken out of context, would engage
                      > any deeper interest in you. The context itself,
                      > the whole book, is the really important thing, it
                      > seems to me.

                      If you have the pages, it's much easier to scan them than to type
                      them. I'm not asking you do that, just pointing it out.

                      > If Lochmann sends me any more digitized text from
                      > the book, I'll try to get that up on the WWW. If
                      > that's not enough for you, then I guess you'll
                      > have to read the book for yourself, or else starve
                      > that little interest you have in those few words
                      > that were deleted, I would assume, in deference to
                      > the draconian censorship laws in much of Europe.
                      > (And they are a relatively few words: in some cases
                      > the deleted words are only fragments of a sentence.)

                      Perhaps you could be kind enough to give me Lochmann's site address,
                      in cases the mysterious pages are there.

                      Frank
                    • Tarjei Straume
                      ... The agenda of holocaust denyers and doubters bears a close kinship to that of Peter Staudenmaier, a historical revisionist with a slightly different twist,
                      Message 10 of 22 , May 23 11:19 PM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Frank wrote to Robert:

                        >Given that the holocaust is a known, proven, undeniable fact, anyone
                        >who denies it must have a different agenda - such as roiling up the
                        >ignorant anti-Semitic nationalist masses for political advantage.
                        >That's the thinking anyway.

                        The agenda of holocaust denyers and doubters bears a close kinship to
                        that of Peter Staudenmaier, a historical revisionist with a slightly
                        different twist, with very similar tricks up his sleeve.

                        Tarjei
                      • Robert Mason
                        ... in reality puts what he [Bondarev] calls the offical [sic] version , i.e, that the holocaust actually happened, in doubt.
                        Message 11 of 22 , May 25 12:28 PM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          To Frank Smith, who wrote:

                          >>This slippery wording, apparently objective,
                          in reality puts what he [Bondarev] calls the
                          "offical [sic] version", i.e, that the
                          holocaust actually happened, in doubt.<<

                          Robert writes:

                          I have already quoted, more than once, some
                          fairly firm wording that he does regard the
                          official version with doubt:
                          "> [supp. #8:] "I am not expressing a final
                          judgement > on whether the holocaust happened
                          or not. I simply > don't have such a
                          judgement."

                          [Robert had written:

                          [It has been about five years since we started
                          to > discuss Bondarev in S98. And I have to
                          ask myself > why, after all this time, you seem
                          still to be > interested only in those few,
                          hardly original > remarks which were deleted.
                          But not so interested > that you have tried to
                          get them and read them.]

                          Frank wrote:

                          >>But I have tried - through you.<<

                          Robert writes:

                          I meant that you had not tried in the last four
                          years to get them the same way I got them:
                          from Nelson Willby -- four years would have
                          been enough time, even in Argentina.

                          Frank wrote:

                          >>You're right, Robert. I am not interested in
                          Bondarev, except when you bring him up on this
                          list calling him an anthroposophist and
                          lamenting his expulsion from the
                          Anthroposophical Society because he was
                          identified as a holocuast [sic] denier.<<

                          Robert writes:

                          Yet again: If you take a look at the official
                          expulsion statement, you will see that it
                          doesn't say a word about "holocaust denial"; it
                          only speaks vaguely of "antisemitischen
                          Tendenzen" and unspecified "antisemitischen
                          Äußerungen".

                          Frank wrote:

                          >>From what you quoted above (I'm still not
                          clear as to whether that was all he said on the
                          subject) . . . .<<

                          Robert writes:

                          No, I haven't directly quoted everything he
                          said on the subject.

                          Frank wrote:

                          >>. . . . I can safely say that he is a
                          holocaust "doubter" - which is one baby
                          step away from denial - or even synomimous
                          [sic].<<

                          Robert writes:

                          You might have a soul-mate over in WC, someone
                          with the initials *PS*. He seems to be unable
                          or unwilling to make that distinction.

                          Frank wrote:

                          >>And this indicates to me -even without having
                          read the rest - that the Vorstand was correct
                          in expelling him. I would have done the same,
                          especially considering that the great majority
                          of members are Germans, Austrians and ethnic-
                          German Swiss. Holocaust revisionism (a great
                          lie) is something which should not be allowed
                          to be in any way indentified [sic] with
                          anthroposophy. But it is, by people like
                          Bondarev. So the least the organization which
                          pretends to represent anthroposophy can do is
                          not allow it within its own sphere of
                          responsibility.<<

                          Robert writes:

                          Sigh. What more could I say about this that I
                          haven't already said? -- I guess you don't want
                          freedom within this organization which one (at
                          least this "one") might hope would be the
                          paradigmatic expression of the "free spiritual-
                          cultural sphere". Sigh.

                          Frank wrote:

                          >>If you have the pages, it's much easier to
                          scan them than to type them. I'm not asking you
                          do that, just pointing it out.<<

                          Robert writes:

                          I have neither the hardware nor the software to
                          do that.

                          Frank wrote:

                          >>Perhaps you could be kind enough to give me
                          Lochmann's site address, in cases [sic] the
                          mysterious pages are there.<<

                          Robert writes:

                          And yet again: To me it seems really a pity
                          and a waste that you (and others, it seems) are
                          interested only in this little commotion, which
                          has become such a diversion away from what is
                          really important and interesting about
                          Bondarev. To focus *only* on this diversion is
                          to deny yourself so much that might be
                          beneficial. -- But, if you are determined to
                          cheat yourself:

                          <http://www.lochmann-verlag.com>
                          Email: <info@...>

                          Lochmann-Verlag
                          Anschrift/Kontakt:
                          Lochmann-Verlag
                          Moskau-Basel-Verlag
                          Postfach
                          CH-4009 Basel 9

                          Tel. 0041 (0) 61 3015418
                          Fax 0041 (0) 61 3013477

                          I haven't seen the deleted passages on the
                          website, and it seems pretty unlikely that they
                          would be there, since Lochmann would almost
                          certainly be making himself vulnerable to
                          prosecution if he put them on his site. He
                          might even be in danger if he were to email
                          them.

                          There is some other material about Bondy
                          scattered over the site. Probably this 1998
                          interview would be the most relevant for you:
                          <http://lochmann-verlag.com/Bondarew%20im%20Gespraech.pdf>

                          You might be more likely to get those two
                          translated pages from Willby in London:
                          <wellspringbooks@...>
                          <http://www3.mistral.co.uk/wellspringbooks>

                          . . . unless he refuses to send those pages
                          without the whole book. Then, I guess you
                          would have to give him a good reason why he
                          should provide only those fragments ripped from
                          their context -- if you can.

                          Robert M



                          __________________________________________________
                          Do You Yahoo!?
                          Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                          http://mail.yahoo.com
                        • Tarjei Straume
                          ... What he means by that, Frank, is And your mama too! And I once heard an old wise man say, What goes around comes around, motherfucker. I guess he was
                          Message 12 of 22 , May 25 9:39 PM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Robert Mason wrote to Frank Smith:

                            >You might have a soul-mate over in WC, someone with the initials
                            >*PS*. He seems to be unable or unwilling to make that distinction.

                            What he means by that, Frank, is "And your mama too!" And I once
                            heard an old wise man say, "What goes around comes around,
                            motherfucker." I guess he was talking karma.

                            On the other hand, if there's a soul mate of PS around here, it would
                            have to be Robert Mason. The two of them should discuss the virtues
                            of historical revisionism. Maybe they're already done that in the
                            Unthinkable Facility, where Mr. Mason has also been trying to peddle
                            his kooky unpalatable notions I understand.

                            Tarjei
                          • Steve Hale
                            ... distinction. ... would ... virtues ... peddle ... Hey Taz, I saw a PBS special recently on Emma Goldman, and I thought of you. But I had to say, nah, that
                            Message 13 of 22 , May 26 8:28 PM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, Tarjei Straume
                              <reefer@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Robert Mason wrote to Frank Smith:
                              >
                              > >You might have a soul-mate over in WC, someone with the initials
                              > >*PS*. He seems to be unable or unwilling to make that
                              distinction.
                              >
                              > What he means by that, Frank, is "And your mama too!" And I once
                              > heard an old wise man say, "What goes around comes around,
                              > motherfucker." I guess he was talking karma.
                              >
                              > On the other hand, if there's a soul mate of PS around here, it
                              would
                              > have to be Robert Mason. The two of them should discuss the
                              virtues
                              > of historical revisionism. Maybe they're already done that in the
                              > Unthinkable Facility, where Mr. Mason has also been trying to
                              peddle
                              > his kooky unpalatable notions I understand.
                              >
                              > Tarjei

                              Hey Taz, I saw a PBS special recently on Emma Goldman, and I thought
                              of you. But I had to say, "nah, that was then and this is now". And
                              you are definitely now.

                              Steve
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.