Time: Sat Aug 09 18:32:25 1997
by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA05588;
Sat, 9 Aug 1997 18:33:02 -0700 (MST)
by usr09.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA01533;
Sat, 9 Aug 1997 18:30:52 -0700 (MST)
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 18:29:47 -0700
To: bobdj@djurdjevic.com
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: "The Arizona Republic" [sic]
You are confusing "Arizona Republic"
with "The Arizona Republic".
They are not one and the same.
The latter is a registered trademark;
the former is not.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://www.supremelaw.com
At 06:05 PM 8/9/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Thought you'd be interested in my correspondence with James Hill, editor
>of the OpEd pages (including the Sunday Perspectives section) of the
>ARIZONA REPUBLIC.
>
>Should any of you wish to write to the AZR yourselves, let me explain
>who the people on Hill's CC. list are:
>
> John Oppedahl is Publisher;
> Pam Johnston is VP and Executive Editor;
> Paul Schatt is Editor of Editorial Pages.
>
>One other data point - FYI:
>
>I know personally all these people (except for Pam J.). After our
>(Truth in Media-organized) demonstrations (against the Bosnian war lies
>and distortion) in front the ARIZONA REPUBLIC building in January 1993,
>all editors have been quite reasonable and open-minded on most issues.
>Except, it seems, when it comes to the question of the Holocaust not
>being only a Jewish event.
>
>Best,
>
>Bob Dj.
>Message-ID: <33ED0E03.3191@djurdjevic.com>
>Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 17:40:35 -0700
>From: bobdj@djurdjevic.com
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: James.Hill@pni.com
>CC: John_Oppedahl@pni.com, Pam_Johnson@pni.com, Paul_Schatt@pni.com
>Subject: Reply to your letter of Aug. 8
>References: <072564ED.0075108C.00@PNI-NEWGATE.PNI.COM>
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>James.Hill@pni.com wrote:
>>
>> Dear Bob:
>>
>> I will be to the point.
>>
>> About your letter to the editor, submitted to Paul Schatt on Aug. 4:
>>
>> One, there was absolutely no plagiarism, as you allege. The artist, working
>> with me and the page designer, came up with the idea independently after I
>> suggested the opening the vault theme. That Mike Keefe had a similar idea
>> is not surprising; it is why Time and Newsweek often have similar covers.
>> But Keefe's cartoons are not purchased by The Republic, and the Denver Post
>> is not circulated within the newsroom, so it is only coincidental that Mr.
>> Lopez and Mr. Keefe had like-drawings. (Another distinction: Mr. Lopez is a
>> graphic artist assigned to The Republic's newsroom art department; Mr.
>> Keefe is an editorial cartoonist. To compare an illustration with an
>> editorial cartoon is to compare apples and oranges.
>>
>> You also allege Messrs. Weiss and Gati attempted to make a new case out of
>> "an old extortion scheme called the Holocaust." That is inflammatory, as is
>> your charge that Weiss repeated "an old chant that 'the Nazis murdered 6
>> million Jews.'" I am aware that the Holocaust numbers have changed
>> (upward) considerably since the end of World War II (William Shirer put the
>> figure, I believe, at from 4.5 million to 5 million in "The Rise and Fall
>> of the Third Reich.") The 6 million figure is now considered authoritative
>> and cited by such reference works as the Cambridge Encyclopedia.
>>
>> As to the rest of your letter, I think you know my work well enough to
>> acknowledge that a constant theme of my writing -- and of many of the
>> articles of which I have run, including yours -- has been to look at the
>> horror of World War II in its entirety, lest we make the same mistakes
>> again. I am personally offended by your comments that the Weiss and Gati
>> pieces deliberately overlooked this: They did not; they looked at the issue
>> of the Swiss acknowledgment that, after 50 years of denying the existence
>> of the accounts, they indeed had money on deposit that belonged to Jewish
>> Holocaust victims and their heirs. It is a simple case of focusing on the
>> issue at hand -- one I believe you once begged of The Republic on the
>> question of the Serbs during the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
>>
>> As to the Vatican issue, The Republic reported the story (based on one
>> declassified document) and the Vatican issued a denial. This is not a
>> deliberate media silence as you allege, but a case of too little
>> information to do little with the story lacking other facts. (I might add
>> that I am in the process of trying to get more facts on the issue, as I
>> told one of your associates when he called me shortly after the story
>> broke.)
>>
>> And finally, Paul decided he did not want to publish the letter based on
>> the objections that I have cited above. There is no conspiracy to silence
>> you; there is a requirement that editors use judgment, and in our judgment,
>> the letter was not fit for publication. Hope this clears up the questions
>> of your last correspondence.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> James
>----------------------------------------------
>
>August 9, 1997
>
>TO: James Hill, ARIZONA REPUBLIC
>
>Subject: Your e-mail letter dated Aug. 8
>------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Dear James,
>
>First, an overall comment: Your letter WAS a disappointment! (for the
>first time since I've known you, which has been a goodly number of
>years).
>
>All I tried to do in my Aug. 4-letter was tell the whole truth; show the
>other side of the coin; inform the Arizonans and other Americans who
>read your paper that, contrary to the establishment media propaganda,
>the Jews weren't the only victims of WW II!
>
>And that the Jewish WW II survivers were the only ones who had profited
>financially from the suffering of their brethren - by literally
>extorting the money from the democratic post-war German governments
>which had nothing whatsoever to do with the Nazis.
>
>[The total number of Jewish claimants was 4,344,378, according to the
>German Information Center in NY. About 40% were in Israel, 20% in
>Germany, and remaining 40% elsewhere in the world. As of 1981, some
>99.8% of the claims had been settled, implying that some 87,000 Jews
>were still receiving checks at that time.]
>
>And you call that "inflammatory?" You think that the families of
>Americans who fought and died in WW II so as to save the Jews, among
>others, don't deserve to know who profited from their sacrifices? And
>that only the poor Jews who had no means of getting out were slaughtered
>by Hitler?
>
>Meanwhile, you and the same "high-minded" AZR editors who want to
>protect the fellow-Americans from such "inflammatory" truths, had no
>problems aiding and abetting the New York bankers' latest extortion -
>that of the Swiss banks - with whom the New Yorkers are in competition
>in Europe. Didn't you know that three of the four top investment
>bankers in Europe were the New York based merger and acquisition
>dealers? And that the Swiss banks are their direct competitors (see
>"Big Wall Street Banks Gallop In, Guns Ablaze," the NEW YORK TIMES,
>7/13/97).
>
>Meanwhile, the same "high-minded" AZR editors who want to protect
>Americans from the allegedly "inflammatory" truths, had no problems
>printing the highly inflammatory (and often FACTUALLY WRONG!)
>establishment media "news" and editorials which habitually DEMONIZED the
>Serbs as a nation for the last 6-7 years. As I am sure you are aware,
>the Serbian-Americans even had to stage a street protest in front of the
>AZR building (in January 1993) before some form of balance was achieved
>on the AZR editorial pages.
>
>And then there is that "minor" point of my letter - the disputed
>Holocaust numbers. You say that you were "aware that the Holocaust
>numbers have changed (upward) considerably since the end of World War
>II." James, that makes your publishing the "PC" 6 million-figure an
>even worse offence! You knew the figure was suspect, yet you still let
>it be used without qualification or equivocation.
>
>Why? Because, "the 6 million figure is now considered authoritative and
>cited by such reference works as the Cambridge Encyclopedia," you
>explain.
>"Considered authoritative" is equivalent of "politically correct."
>Cambridge Encyclopedia is just one reference point. Neither Webster's
>nor Oxford dictionaries (wisely) offer any numbers. Oxford doesn't even
>mention "holocaust" in the context of WW II.
>Now check out only some of the other reference points you or your
>authors could have used, but chose not to:
>---------
>Since 1945 there have been many conflicting claims concerning the
>numbers of Jewish people (and others) who died at Auschwitz-Birkenau
>(Oswiecim) concentration camp. However, it is only recent research and
>access to hitherto unavailable documents, that these numbers have
>drastically lowered, possibly indicating that more of our people
>survived. Perhaps the 6 million often publicized (though our best figure
>is 4.5 million) may also need to be revised lower, we hope.
> Source: Dr. Nathan Nussbaum, Honorary Director, Center for
>Jewish
> Holocaust Studies.
>
> According to official documents in the French Republic (Institute for
> the Examination of War-criminals) the number that died in Auschwitz
> was: 8,000,000
>
> According to the French daily newspaper 'Le Monde' (April 20, 1978):
> 5,000,000
>
> According to the memorial plaque on the gas-chamber monument at
> Auschwitz-Birkenau (later removed in 1990 by the Polish Government):
> 4,000,000
>
> According to the 'confession' of Rudolf Hoess, the last commandant of
> Auschwitz, q.v. interrogation record and written statement before
> his 'suicide': 3,000,000
>
> According to a statement by Yeduha Bauer, Director of the Institute for
> Contemporary Jewry at the Hebrew University, Jerusalem: 1,600,000
>
> According to 'Le Monde' (September 1, 1989): 1,433,000
>
> According to Prof. Raul Hilberg (Professor for Holocaust Research, and
> author of the book, 'The Annihilation or European Jewry', 2nd. ed.,
>1968:
> 1,250,000
>
> According to Polish historians, q.v. DPA - Report of July 1990 and
> corresponding public announcements: 1.000,000
>
> According to Gerald Reitlinger, author of 'Die Endlosung': 850,000
>
> Published by the Board of Jewish Holocaust Studies,
> P.O.B. 40, Summer Hill, NSW, 2130. AUSTRALIA.
>------
>
>What can else can one say after all this, James, but - "et tu, Brute?"
>I would have never expected you and Paul Schatt to censor "un-PC" facts
>or opinions as you did in this case.
>
>Bob Dj.
>
>--
>Bob Djurdjevic
>TRUTH IN MEDIA
>Phoenix, Arizona
>e-mail: bobdj@djurdjevic.com
>
>LINKS: http://www.beograd.com/truth/
> (Truth in Media home page)
>
> http://www.forbes.com/tool/html/97/aug/returns0805/
> (Djurdjevic's August 1997 FORBES column, "The Japanese are
> coming (maybe)"
>
> http://www.forbes.com/tool/html/97/july/returns0708/einstein.htm
> (Djurdjevic's July 1997 FORBES column, "Move Over Einstein,
> Signor Da Vinci Is Back")
>
> http://www.djurdjevic.com
> (Annex Research home page)
>
========================================================================
Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine
tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best
Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone
Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this
As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
========================================================================
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail