Anne Frank's Diary. Providential proofs of authenticity.

[Hannover]

However does it really matter if the little girl wrote the book all by herself or had help.

It matters plenty.

It exemplifies the forged/fraudulent nature of the 'holocau$t' story in general. If the tales were true, we certainly would not be seeing the lies, forgeries, scientific impossibilities, and easily debunked nonsense.

And oh yes; if the stories as alleged were true, we would not see prison sentences for those who question them.

Revisionists are just the messengers, the absurd stories are the message.

- Hannover

[Reviso]

It seems the ghost writer was Myer Levine: google for more details.

I thought the Myer Levine theory was abandoned by unbelievers.
Faurisson first accepted this theory but changed his mind.
Myer Levine claimed copyright for a theatrical adaptation of the Diary, but not for the Diary itself.

Has anybody seriously defended the thesis that Myer Levine was also the author of the diary itself ?

As I said it in my first post, I find it susprising that Anne sent (in her "adult" handwriting) exercises of Dutch-German translation to her grandmother who didn't read Dutch.
I would rather think it was an exercise for Anne, written by an adult.

But it would need to be studied...

Reviso.

[Carto's Cutlass Supreme]

Hey Reviso,

Maybe you have noticed some important things. I reread your first post but still have a hard time grasping it. Maybe something like the following would make it clearer:


SITUATION: Handwriting sample of Anne writing to her grandmother in Dutch
PROBLEM: that grandmother spoke German, it's likely that Anne would have wrote to her in German.

SITUATION: Anne's handwriting sample on a letter
PROBLEM: The address is written twice. Why would the address be written twice on a letter? That's odd.

SITUATION: A card to family friends as handwriting sample
PROBLEM: Anne is the only signer, why wouldn't other members of the family have signed the card.

The oddities point to the idea that these handwriting proofs are contrived, forged etc.

Is this right Reviso?

[Reviso]

Is this right Reviso?

Perfectly right, Carto. It's exactly my mind.

(Precision : it's the address of sender that is written twice, once on the recto and once on the verso.)

Reviso.

[Turpitz]

However does it really matter if the little girl wrote the book all by herself or had help. Do we really care that Uncle Tom's cabins wasn't written by Tom himself or that Huck Finn didn't write his book either. Who Cares? They are great books. Besides I liked her book. I liked her message. I wonder what she would think of the world she left behind?

Stop trying to compare the innocence of Tom Sawyer to the mind bending fraudulence of the Anne Frank travelling road show. To my knowledge children of this most impressionable and vulnerable age are not compelled to read Tom Sawyer. You suggest it is a ‘great book’ It is not a ‘great book’ it is a piece of odious crap, used to implant deceitful and idealised views in the minds of innocent children about a gang of crooks and mass murders, that have done nothing but bring utter misery and death to innocent children, day and night for the last fifty-five years in Palestine. It seems rather a shame that members of this fraud cartel, do not seem to live by the message they so deviously transferred to paper through their poisonous nibs.







‘Dear Phienny, Daddy has asked Mr. Kleiman for a diary and Bep for a potty. Eh, I completely forgot, that I used to write in print all the time, I was so deep in thought.’ 26 October 1942, version a, omitted from the Diary

[Reviso]

Good seen, Turpitz.

This excerpt of the manuscript gives the impression that the adult writer prepares the mind of the reader of the manuscript for a definitive change of handwriting (from childish to adult).

Reviso.

[Carto's Cutlass Supreme]

What is the story with that document above? Yes, it looks like the cursive is from an adult and the printed letters are from a kid. Was the cursive added later?

[Reviso]

What is the story with that document above? Yes, it looks like the cursive is from an adult and the printed letters are from a kid. Was the cursive added later?

It's difficult to guess what precisely happened.

Perhaps : Anne Frank (or someone else) had begun a diary with the childish handwriting. Later, some adult person (perhaps another or perhaps the same who had begun, if this isn't Anne Frank) wanted to continue, but with his or her natural, adult, handwriting. This person thinks the sudden change of handwriting could make a bad impression and this person uses again (or imitates) temporarily the childish handwriting to attribute to Anne Frank the (unnatural, I think) remark : " He, I forgot that I always write in print letters here ! "

So the reader has an "explanation" of the change (change that will soon become definitive, I presume).

Naturally, believers can believe that this page is authentic.

Reviso.

[widukind]

The swedish revisionist Ditlieb Felderer brings several samples of handwriting attributed to Anne Frank in his book "Anne Frank's Diary, a Hoax". He uncovers instances where the text may have been tampered with.

The book was put online a few days ago :

http://www.radioislam.org/annefrank/index.htm

The handwriting samples can be found here :

http://www.radioislam.org/annefrank/figures.htm

Robert Faurisson brings 2 samples in the book "Vérité historique ou vérité politique?" These samples are particularly embarassing for they are dated and reveal that the mature cursive writing precedes the childish one...

The 2 samples can be contemplated here on page 297:

http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres/vhvp_annexes.pdf

widukind

[Goethe]

More interesting information on this fraud is at this site.
http://www.heretical.com/sheppard/frank.html