"Adwil cannot find even one blogger,"

I don't use 'bloggers' or propagandists or polemicists or rumourmongers. Find me primary evidence or find me secondary documentary evidence if you really want to discuss an issue.

"Kurt Becher is universally condemned as a war-criminal "

I'm not interested in rumour mongering. If he was 'universally condemned,' why wasn't he put on trial at Nuremberg or one of the other trials of Nazi war criminals after the war? Why did the two attempts to prosecute him and his companions in the cavalry unit fall through lack of evidence? 

"Israel's Attorney General said that if he were to set foot in Israel he would be arrested." 

On what basis? The only evidence available at that time was from a Zionist extremist American polemicist film writer, Ben Hecht, who, according to Deborah Lipstadt, was unreliable because he invented his 'facts'.

 "It's not historical ... The problem is lots of the information in it is, is wrong!"

"BBC documentary Setting the Past Free, May 9, 2016. The segment on Perfidy starts at 17 minutes, 47 seconds in."

If the Israeli Government had the evidence to charge Becher, they could have applied to the German Gov for his extradition. They didn't.

adwil said:

The Weiss-Manfred affair didn't benefit Becher.

You're a full bore Nazi-excuser and apologist.

Your excuses for Jew-robbing and killing just get more and more silly.

adwil said:

On what basis? The only evidence available at that time was from a Zionist extremist American polemicist film writer, Ben Hecht, who, according to Deborah Lipstadt, was unreliable because he invented his 'facts'.

You lie. 

And you know enough of this case for it to be a malicious falsehood.

BerrySteph said:

"You lie.  And you know enough of this case for it to be a malicious falsehood."

<<according to Deborah Lipstadt, .......he invented his 'facts'.>>

You have the link to the BBC program. Click on it and you can listen to Lipstadt  saying exactly what I've quoted.

BerrySteph said:

You're a full bore Nazi-excuser and apologist. Your excuses for Jew-robbing and killing just get more and more silly.

Ah the logic of a Berry. No facts, no references, just insults.  

adwil said:

You have the link to the BBC program. Click on it and you can listen to Lipstadt  saying exactly what I've quoted.

I'm more interested to know why she lies about the number of victims of the Holocaust.

I'm not interested to know why she lies about the transcript of a hugely important case in the Jerusalem District Court.

Since I know why she lies about the latter - what happened in 1954/1955 convinced very large numbers of Israelis that their own leadership were behind the Holocaust.

In fact, Eichmann had to be kidnapped from Argentina to prove that, far from Rudolf Kastner and his like having brought about the Holocaust, it was the Palestinians who were to blame!

adwil said:

Ah the logic of a Berry. No facts, no references, just insults.  

Your excuses for Jew-robbing and killing just get more and more silly.

Cornered as usual not a fact to his name 

BM

BerrySteph said:

Your excuses for Jew-robbing and killing just get more and more silly.

You have no answer to the points I've made. Nothing changes, does it?

"I'm more interested to know why she lies about the number of victims of the Holocaust."

Lipstadt doesn't. It's a rough estimate. We still have no real idea of the exact number of people murdered during the Holocaust. 

"Eichmann had to be kidnapped from Argentina to prove that, far from Rudolf Kastner and his like having brought about the Holocaust, it was the Palestinians who were to blame!"

No comment. Your desperate accusation speaks for itself and makes me question your mental equilibrium.  

I haven't any more time until around midnight, so I'll leave Becher and get back to your assertions that Zionists were responsible for the first example of most forms of terrorism, in the morning.  

bml00 said:

"Cornered as usual not a fact to his name "

Hardly a surprise. He hasn't changed over the years. He's like a communist friend I used to argue with in the 50s. I'd argue him in ever decreasing circles but once he'd been demolished, he just went back to the assertions that he started with. He's still a good friend, by the way, still thinks of himself as a communist whose party has deserted him, but his views are now far closer to Johnson and Farage than Karl Marx.