From
http://counterknowledge.com/2009/03/michael-santomauro-there-was-no-holocaust-just-a-massive-massacre/
Perhaps the most interesting aspects of this debate are the number of sources
quoted by John Thames and the enthusiasm of the liars opposing him.
Professor/Doctor/Mr Thames gives sources which are largely checkable and written
by Jews. A few do not show up because they are too obscure for Amazon.
You simply have to read the description of Debating the Holocaust: A New Look At Both Sides by Thomas Dalton, PhD.
Here is the first paragraph of the introduction, taken from the book’s website:
This is a book about the Holocaust, and about two competing views of that event. On the one hand we have the traditional, orthodox view: the six million Jewish casualties, the gas chambers, the cremation ovens and mass graves. Traditional historians have thousands of surviving witnesses and the weight of history on their side. On the other hand there is a small, renegade band of writers and researchers who refuse to accept large parts of this story. These revisionists, as they call themselves, present counter-evidence and ask tough questions. They are beginning to outline a new and different narrative.
Now I’m certainly not one to judge a book by its cover, but if the description is anything to go by… well, ladies and gentlemen, were History and Postmodernism to engage in an illicit night of passion then this book surely has to be their bastard offspring. Here’s that marvellous third sentence in all its glory again:
Traditional historians have thousands of surviving witnesses and the weight of history on their side.
Weight of history: three words which apparently escaped the author of this description, unless the intention really was a sublime parody of denial.
The ‘About the Author’ section on the book’s Amazon entry states that Thomas Dalton PhD’s academic background is substantial, having “taught humanities at a prominent American university for several years now.” With this in mind, I e-mailed both Mr. Dalton and Mr. Michael Santomauro, the editorial director of Theses & Dissertations Press, asking if they could elaborate. It struck me as extremely odd that a supposed university teacher’s e-mail address is merely a free Yahoo one, and not that of an educational instution ending in .edu. Holocaust denier and Associate Professor of Electric Engineering Arthur Butz uses his Northwestern University e-mail address, for example.
Of course, Thomas Dalton may be a pen name. And given that Theses & Dissertations Press is a division of Castle Hill Publishers which in turn was founded by German Holocaust denier Germar Rudolf (to whom one third of the book’s profits go), who - in the name of truth apparently - commands a list, indeed, a veritable legion of ficticious characters longer than your arm (no, really), I’m not exactly surprised that I haven’t received any elucidative responses.
Regarding the Williamson affair, Holocaust denier Michele Renouf has stated that it is a “disgrace” that the Holocaust is not open to “reasoned debate”, and in doing so, she neatly underlines the position this book and deniers crave for: that the Holocaust is a debate, and ‘Revisionists’ are not charlatans of history but merely the other side of an argument.
Yad Vashem has so far collected the names of over half of the 6 million or so reasons why there is no other side, but this hasn’t stopped Mr. Santomauro from trying to uphold this ridiculous dichotomy 22 minutes into a radio interview:
I don’t deny that there was a massive massacre, there’s no question about it, there was a massive massacre towards Jews and non Jews alike, and no revisionist has denied that, no serious Holocaust revisionist denies that there was a massive massacre.
We can only assume that the editorial board of Voice of Reason [sic] radio was out having lunch when this was broadcast. Here’s part of the introduction again [emphasis added]:
Traditional historians have thousands of surviving witnesses and the weight of history on their side. On the other hand there is a small, renegade band of writers and researchers who refuse to accept large parts of this story.
Bingo, Michael. That’s why it’s called denial.
1897 responses
on 19 March 2009
Perhaps in the same way “Did Queen Victoria really exist?” is a “tough question”.
on 19 March 2009
As a product of four Jews who were severely affected by what’s known as the Holocaust (paternal grandmother on the run, paternal grandfather arrested by the Russians and exiled to Siberia while his family was murdered by the Germans, maternal grandfather in the various camps while the Germans killed his wife and two kids and maternal grandmother in Auschwitz with the attendant facts as you would guess them) this whole Holocaust business annoys the hell out of me. The professional deniers are clearly Jew-haters of the worst order who are responding to various demons within their own psyche but the fact that people such as Richardson are asked to “recant” makes it seem as though “holocaust Belief” is a religion of some kind. People like Richardson should be laughed at, kicked in the arse and have feces thrown at them. Reacting to them with indignation however and demanding that they “conform” to “right views” only makes it seem to legions of honest people that they may be the noble embodiment of embattled truth. Thus their numbers are increased and independent-minded honest folk “reserve judgment” on the thing - discussion of which in and of itself is a further annoyance: My psyche needs no approbation from the wider world to the facts of the horrors that my grandparents (and by unfortunate extension my parents and my siblings) endured. I demand no fealty or recognition from strangers as to some sort of “uniqueness” of my family’s sorrow. If someone wants to praise Hitler in my presence or do so in a backhanded manner such as by denying that my grandparents were victims at all then I’ll obviously respond as is most prudent at the time, but to demand that the world bow before some great statute of Holocaust Horror? What the fuck do I - or anyone else - get out of that?
on 19 March 2009
mnuez, what you’re describing there is the so-called Holocaust “industry”, which is a separate issue. Sure that’s up for critique, but what’s being disputed here is history. Decrying dishonest, corrupt, ideologically motivated, revisionist “scholarship” is quite different from demanding the world “bow down before some great statute [statue?] of Holocaust Horror”.
on 19 March 2009
mnuez, thanks for sharing that.
I appreciate your concerns about how demanding a recantion can appear ungainly, but putting that aside, merely exposing these people simply has to be done.
As the saying goes, all it ultimately takes for these idiots to triumph is for good people to do nothing.
on 20 March 2009
Don’t these these deniers and their supporters (some of whom do not go so far as denial but insist that any discussion of the Holocaust is inspired by profit motive) form something of a “Holocaust Industry”?
They produce products like pamphlets, books, and videos, run conferences and book tours, charge membership fees, ask for donations, and sell products without making any contribution to historical knowledge.
on 20 March 2009
The “holocaust” has become over the last 60 years the main religion of the multicultural western world and the firm bed rock for a racist colonial state in the middle east. A state that occupies and oppresses the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine. Surely such a powerful belief system should be open to question?
The fact that those who question it are considered heretics and liable to loose their jobs and homes and even go to jail in eleven western countries shows you the power of those who object to any investigation of these events.
on 20 March 2009
Jew Hater…Anti-Semite…it’s like debating a retarded Max headroom, who just recites the same crap over and over.
When will the German government grow a pair and remove all of these laws that are contrary to human development?
“If you deny something that has been disproven, we will throw you in jail!”
Hey…I saw a Bigfoot!
What?!? There’s no such thing!
Well, I saw one…I don’t care what you say.
Okay, stupid…enjoy your delusion.
THAT is how one should respond when someone doesn’t believe in the Six Million Myth; but instead…YOU WILL BE PERSECUTED AND THEN PROSECUTED.
Remember how the Earth was FLAT?
Now…it’s just the heads of those who insist that you MUST believe.
I still can’t believe that James Randi has any association with you tools.
on 20 March 2009
Here’s some fun:
From http://www1.yadvashem.org/Odot/prog/index_before_change_table.asp?gate=5-26
How did the Nazis try to hide their atrocities?
The first method in camouflaging the murder of the Jews was the use of regulated euphemisms in many of their documents, such as special treatment for murder and evacuation for deportations. Even the term Final Solution is a code word for the extermination policy. Participants in the murder operation were sworn to secrecy. Jews were told various lies when ordered to prepare for deportation. Generally, they were told they were going to a “better place” where they would have to work but would be able to live. In June 1942 onward, a special operation, Aktion 1005, was begun to destroy the physical evidence of the murder. Under SS Standartenfuehrer Paul Blobel, a special unit called Sonderkommando 1005 supervised the burning of the victims’ bodies in the extermination camps. These operations assumed more importance with the growing consciousness among Nazi leaders that the war might be lost. From June 1943 onward, Sonderkommando 1005 returned to murder sites in the occupied areas of the Soviet Union dating from as early as June 1941, and tried to erase the traces of mass graves by burning the remains in huge pyres. Sometimes Jewish slaved labor performed this gruesome task. Although the Nazis did not succeed in wiping out all traces of the murder, their attempt to do so has made it much harder to determine the exact details and statistical magnitude of the crimes committed.
Okay…I take it that there is EVIDENCE of the ground being tested for human remains? You can’t honestly believe that bodies buried in the haphazard fashion described and then exhumed left NO TRACES WHATSOEVER? Is that what amounts to this “unshakeable truth”?
You just placed a Cleveland Steamer in a plate in front of me, and you’re insisting that it’s a ribeye.
I’ve been to two seders. I don’t hate people for what they ARE…I hate people for what they DO.
So…go ahead with your puerile comments; just be sure that YOU are the ones engaging in hateful behaviour.
on 20 March 2009
Of course there is evidence.
Ash and human remains are strewn across Treblinka. At Belzec, there are 33 mass graves containing ash and partially burnt human remains with a surface area of some thirteen square miles.
I’m surprised you missed that Hanover, given how deeply you like to bury your head in the sand.
on 21 March 2009
The so called “deniers” industry of a few pamphlets and internet sites is miniscule in comparison to the holocaust industry. That industry generates billions weekly .A Hollywood movie monthly (Striped pyjamas, The Reader, Deliverance etc) for entertainment , it produces books, demands millions from european tax payers in pensions for “survivors “in their Florida condos and Tel Aviv retirement villages. The high cathedrals of the religion eg the HMM in Washington garner millions in tax payer subsidies. Then there is the huge subsidy given by the US taxpayer to an illegal racist middle eastern state which uses as its shield the events of 70 years ago and the mythical gas chambers.
on 21 March 2009
My goodness William Henderson has obviously got some wacky ideas! ‘Ash and human remains are strewn accross treblinka’!! perhaps you could link me to an internet picture of these ashes and human remains or even better post one for yourself. What evidence have you got for that statement ? and I dont accept Soviet reports from the same people who lied about Katyn.
on 21 March 2009
It’s funny how of all the things that get posted on this blog, the two topics that always, ALWAYS get the lunatics to show up and pound away incoherent nonsense on their keyboards is holocaust denial and 9/11 “truth”. I’m not really surprised, since they attract the same kinds of paranoid anti-semites of the far-left and far-right.
I guess the faith healers and new-age gurus who get lambasted here just don’t spend every waking hour googling themselves.
on 21 March 2009
New Yorker do you feel you have contributed in an intellectual way to the debate? If you are unable to debate and resort solely to insults and ad-hominem attacks then you planely are the lunatic here.
on 22 March 2009
hANOVER and Peter your comments frighten me.
Do you honestly believe that the opinions of the few ‘denier experts’ with their highly-dubious credentials are more credible and factual that the thousands of witnesses who were actually there and whose stories and comments have been tirelessly researched and investigated by hundreds of qualified historians.
Do you honestly believe the thousands of eye-witness accounts, taken not only from the survivors, but also from perpetrators, have all been elaborately contrived; that the Jewish community has been able to convince and co-ordinate these thousands of people (including their enemies) to engage in a massive, highly-detailed lie?
Do you honestly believe that the Jewish community has faked all the photos, footage and detailed NAZI reports of the atrocities?
And for what…so they can sell a few holocaust films?
hANOVER and Peter if this is what you believe then I truly worry. I thought the only good thing to have come out of the deplorable acts of genocide committed in WW2 was that civilised humanity would at least learn the harsh facts on what happens when good people sit back and do nothing; and how much damage emotive, uneducated rhetoric and propaganda can actually do. Reading your comments I see there are still people who have failed to learn anything and will continue to trot out the tired, old conspiracy theories and fanatical quasi-factual counter knowledge. If you think your comments are “just adding to the debate” and are part of a legitimate discussion they are not.
They are dangerous.
on 22 March 2009
“they attract the same kinds of paranoid anti-semites of the far-left and far-right.”
New Yorker, I’m going to suggest that maybe antisemitism is largely independent of political affliation– even apolitical– but a bigotry that adapts itself to the political (or theological) ideology of the anti-Semite, so that the Neo-Nazi has one version of Holocaust denial, while the Arab nationalist has another, the religious fundamentalist has their own version, and the Marxist has yet another– and they borrow from one another whenever they can.
on 22 March 2009
Um, you’ve got it exactly backwards, petey my boy. Those with extraordinary claims must prove those claims. It’s not the responsibility of skeptics to disprove those claims.
For example, I could claim that Barry Manilow is the secret ruler of the universe and controls us all with cosmic rays being beamed into our brains from a transmitter located at the summit of K2. Now, such a claim requires proof on my part, not demands on my part that those who scoff at such claims to disprove it.
And since your claims about Treblinka are less grounded in reality than my claims about Barry Manilow, it is also up to you to prove them.
So do you have proof of your claims about the holocaust, petey?
on 22 March 2009
So Edgar my comments are frightening and dangerous; to you maybe but I assure you the majority of people in the western world do not find free speech and debate frightening. However a small minority have cajoled eleven western countries to proclaim laws which incarcerate those who question the holocaust for anywhere between five and twenty years. Do you not find that odd??? German Rudolf languishes in a German prison becuase the results of his forensic study contradicted the official line on Auschwitz.
There are plenty of confessions including Rudolf Hoess’s which was beaten out of him after three days and written in English a language he could neither read nor understand. With confessions I am always reminded of the Lindbergh baby kidnapping where the police received 200 people confessing to the crime. What we need is forensic evidence and as a former CIA director said there isnt any. Thus we have the laws all over the western world. Until those laws are repealed I know where the power lays and it isnt with those who seek the truth.
on 23 March 2009
peter,
Care to present your evidence that the holocaust is a hoax? Any response to the well known fact that Barry Manilow is the ruler of the universe?
By the way, I agree with you that the laws against holocaust denial are unjust and I’m glad my country, the US, doesn’t have any on the books.
on 23 March 2009
No, Peter, European countries have long been nervous about letting the likes of Germar Rudolf harness the power of stupid people in large numbers (people like yourself.) These laws are ill-advised, and would never pass muster in the United States, but they are par for the course in Europe.
Now, for forensic evidence, go to Google Scholar, and type “belzec excavaction”, and be enlightened.
on 23 March 2009
Photos of remains of Treblinka: http://www.deathcamps.org/treblinka/lasttracks.html
http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/gcpoltreb1.htm
German Crimes in Poland. Volume I. Published by the Central Commission for Investigation of German Crimes in Poland. Warsaw, 1946
“For example, in the north-eastern part, over a surface covering about 2 ha. (5 acres), there are large quantities of ashes mixed with sand, among which are numerous human bones, often with the remains of decomposing tissues.
As a result of an examination made by an expert it was found that ashes were the remains of burnt human bones. The examination of numerous human skulls found in the camp has shown that they bear no traces of external injuries. Within a radius of several hundred yards from the camp site an unpleasant smell of burnt ash and decay is noticeable, growing stronger as one approaches.”
Peter, we all know that “I don’t accept X” equates to “I don’t accept anything that might contradict my predetermined opinion”.
Of course if I’m wrong then, please, feel free to contact Yad Vashem. I’m sure they will delighted to hear how you’ve managed to make the roughly 713,555 people sent to Treblinka reappear out of thin air:
http://www1.yadvashem.org/about_yad/contact_us/contact_us.html
on 23 March 2009
Actually peter I think New Yorker’s comparison between 911 truthers and holocaust deniers is on point.
Conspiracy theorists have different issues that get them unglued, there is a similarity in their arguments.
Your argument about missing human ash and remains for instance, was comically stupid. It’s as if you don’t want to look at evidence at all, and prefer to rely on half-baked theories by psuedo-experts with hidden agendas.
I guess, from your attack on laws which prohibit holocaust denial, that your defense of freedom of speech immunizes you from your own holocaust denial. It doesn’t. You’re obviously directing arguments away from your lack of evidence and silly conclusions.
In case you hadn’t noticed, no one here has yet defended the speech restrictions, but limited themselves to the content (or lack thereof) of your own arguments.
on 23 March 2009
Well Peter? William Henderson called you out, provided evidence and documented proof. What say you? Nothing? Sweet, just like all you f*cking idiots that dent 9-11 and the holocaust happened. When presented with undeniable evidence you idiots crawl back into your hole for a few days to try and rethink your arguement and ignore what has been presented. So many people got it wrong and you are the enlightened one correct? And hiding behind free speech and 1st amendment rights is classic.
on 23 March 2009
Peter and hANOVER,
Just look in the mirror and repeat these words- it is because of people lie me that Israel has developed a nuclear capability.
I thought of a long fact and reason based response but why bother. You are why I own a gun.
I am sorry you labor under a disease of the mind. I am sorry it is unfixable. There is no cure for it except imprisonment or, Stalin’s excellent method of shooting Nazis on the spot.
on 23 March 2009
Some of the most prominent Holocaust Revisionists are Jewish or from interfaith backgrounds where one side is Jewish.
on 23 March 2009
Hey Peter, I have a theory too. Black Slavery never happened the way the “Black Slavery Industry” says. It was greatly eggagerated by interested parties looking to rationalize their failed culture and hoping to cash in one day vis a vis reparations. What say you
on 23 March 2009
Got anything relevant to say, Santomauro?
on 23 March 2009
Michael,
What does a person’s religion (or their spouse’s) have to do with whether or not they are a conspiracy theorist?
Watching the comments here I’ve seen holocaust deniers like you clutch the straws of: (1) free speech, (2) Israel is bad, (3) follow the money and now (3) some holocaust deniers are Jewish - or my new personal favorite: married a Jew.
Has it ever occurred to you that you aren’t dealing with the historical record, and are just hiding from uncomfortable historical facts that don’t fit into your badly framed world view?
FYI, Prominent Holocaust Revisionsts. n. 1. A person who misstates, misquotes, falsifies statistics, falsely attributes conclusions to reliable sources, relies on books and sources that directly contradict his arguments, quotes in a manner that completely distorts the author’s objectives, manipulates documents to serve his own purposes, skews documents and misrepresents data in order to reach historically untenable conclusions, bends historical evidence until it conforms to his ideological leanings and political agenda, takes accurate information and shapes it to confirm his conclusion and constantly suppresses or deliberately overlooks sources. 2. Not a person you want to rely on for much of anything.
on 23 March 2009
While we’re on the subject of backgrounds, Michael…
on 24 March 2009
‘Actually peter I think New Yorker’s comparison between 911 truthers and holocaust deniers is on point’.
And from previous ‘exchanges of opinion’ I can say that hANOVER fIST is both of the above.
on 27 March 2009
How can Michael, Peter and Hanover “deny” something that didn’t happen? 9/11 did happen, but you dummies think 19 ragheads made it happen.
on 27 March 2009
How appropriate it is that we have a truther/Holocaust denier who’s named himself after a fictional psychopath.
It’s also interesting to note the reference to Arabs as ‘ragheads’. Clearly on Planet Bates not only did the Nazis not exterminate 6 million Jews, but Arabs are such savages that they are incapable of either developing algebra, or of orchestrating the simultaneous hijacking of four passenger jets. Maybe ‘Skyjack Sunday’ was an inside job as well.
on 28 March 2009
I love how since the pictures he asked for are now put up, Peter has vanished.
Which if the standard SOP for these people.
Hide and run from facts
on 28 March 2009
Joseph Welch,
I’ve often noticed the casual racism of the “truth” movement and how it’s always “19 Arabs in caves couldn’t have done this!” because, well, they’re Arabs and that makes them slightly more evolved than colobus monkeys. At least Norman Bates has the guts to come out and proudly express his racism.
on 28 March 2009
Indeed. It also reflects sheer ignorance on their part about the evolution of al-Qaeda, and its position in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan as a ’state within a state’. ‘19 men in a cave’ does not describe the scale of the jihadi training camps in Afghanistan during the late 1990s (turning out volunteers for Chechnya, Kashmir etc) as well as a brigade of trained men who were the Taliban’s best fighters in the war against the Northern Alliance. Nor does it describe bin Laden’s influence over Mullah Omar and his peers.
I would list some sources for Mr Bates to read to educate himself, but I fear that would be a waste of time. Truthers tend to prefer to remain ignorant.
on 29 March 2009
a little info about Hydrogen Cyanide (Zyklon B)
A hydrogen cyanide concentration of 300 mg/m3 in air will kill a human within about 10 minutes. It is estimated that hydrogen cyanide at a concentration of 3500 ppm (about 3200 mg/m3) will kill a human in about 1 minute.
hyfroden cyanide also soaks through the skin
we are told in ‘eye witness accounts’ that German soldiers removed bodies from the gas chambers, bare handed and laughing. they are also said to have eaten sandwiches surrounded by the bodies which they’d just been handling.
hang on, 300 parts per million will kill a man but soldiers who were laughing (and therefore obviously taking big gulps of air) while handling bodies covered in its residue didnt die.
nor did they die from it soaking through their skin or from the trace amounts which would have been transferred from their hands to their food
impossible.
people dont need to listen to the revisionists.
they just need to check a basic chemistry website to see that the way we’re told the Germans routinely handled the bodies would have killed them too.
Incidentally, until 1991 it was reported that 4.4 million died at Auschwitz. In 1991 this figured was revised down to 1.1 million but the 6 million figure never changed because suddenly, previously unknown records were found detailing extra deaths at other camps.
on 29 March 2009
Where did you get this bullshit from, Dali? It is every bit as surreal and non-sensical as your namesake’s output?
Hydrogen cyanide is a blood agent, not a nerve agent. It kills upon ingestion by a human being. It is not a substance like (say) VX which is persistent and which kills by contact with the skin.
In any case, attempts to refute claims of gas chambers by Leuchter and other charlatans have been decisively refuted. See here, for example:
http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/iffr/report.shtml
Reputable scholars on the Holocaust have never pretended that the total of 6 million Jews exterminated by the Nazis included all deaths (from starvation/disease in the Ghettos, Einsatzgruppen killings, and then the death tolls from all camps - Treblinka, Majdanek, Auschwitz-Birkenaue etc), not just Auschwitz itself:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/techniques-of-denial/four-million-02.html
Your efforts to play games with the historical record makes you a very sick man indeed.
on 30 March 2009
Dali,
You make a slipshod argument. You confuse the cavalier handling of bodies at Auschwitz with the handling of lethal, zyklon b. The germans had decades of experience with using zyklon b as a disinfectant, and knew pefectly well how to handle it without killing themselves.
The 4.4 mortality figure of Auschwitz appears to be the discredited Soviet estimate used for anti-fascist propoganda purposes and was not recognized outside the iron curtain.
In the west, historians have relied on the 1 million death toll as the more reliable figure since the 1960s. With the collapse of Polish communism, the Polish government quickly discarded the now discredited Soviet figure.
on 1 April 2009
When I looked into holocaust / holocaust “denial,” it occurred to me that truth never needs force of law. Well, it also occurred to me that “holocaust denial” as a term is loaded with an opinion that accepts this event a priori, but I’ll keep it simple for now:
If an historian announced that he was Napoleon incarnate, we would collectively bite our lips and say under our breaths, “Poor guy, suffering from some form of mental illness.”
There would be no hate-speech trial.
There would be no jail time.
There would be no group of thugs to burn him out of his house.
There would be no arbitrary application and subsequent unprecedented punishment for a small breech of immigration laws in countries with free speech so that said speaker may be deported to stand trial in countries that do not have freedom of speech.
None of this, yet these things have all happened to men who had come to different conclusions about events surrounding WWII. If someone is to be called insane for questioning the “accepted truth” of an historical event, why are certain peoples and influenced governments so very interested in what a few “crazy people” have to say, and why are 35 million illegals less dangerous than an educated man who works hard and has a non-hollywood opinion about WWII?
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.
on 1 April 2009
Dietrich,
I have the same concern about speech resitrictions that you do, and think that holocaust denial - which is perfectly legal in the U.S. and should be - is more readily exposed as the sham it is and holocaust deniers as the sloppy amatuers and racist clowns they are, when there are no speech restrictions.
However, could you clue us in as to what you’re talking about when you mention 35 million illegals?
And what countries are using rendition for “small” immigration law violations to transfer people to countries without freedom of speech because of what they said?
Hmmm Napoleon incarnate?
on 1 April 2009
When I looked into the Holocaust and Holocaust denial, it occurred to me also that truth never needs a force of law.
This is because huge swathes of an ethnic group do not disappear without leaving any record of why they did.
Thus the laws of Holocaust denial are not intrinsic to the verifiability of fact. They are to prevent the resurgence and whitewashing of National Socialism in places affected by it.
It follows that these laws defend against free speech’s biggest enemy: Nazism.
on 1 April 2009
“However, could you clue us in as to what you’re talking about when you mention 35 million illegals?”
You’re not minimizing the issue of illegal immigration in this country, are you?
“And what countries are using rendition for “small” immigration law violations to transfer people to countries without freedom of speech because of what they said?”
Earnst Zundel:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Z%C3%BCndel#Detention_and_deportation
William wrote:
“This is because huge swathes of an ethnic group do not disappear without leaving any record of why they did.”
. . . in response to me writing:
“When I looked into the Holocaust and Holocaust denial, it occurred to me also that truth never needs a force of law.”
. . . which doesn’t make sense unless he is saying that people who do not believe in ’self-evident truths’ *should* be jailed.
You holocaust religionists have no leg to stand on as long as they throw historians and anyone else in jail who comes to a different conclusion on this non-event. This is faith-based historicity and it will only last as long as the Church can make scientists recant the hypothesis that the Earth orbits the Sun, or whatever the religious dogma of the day happens to be.
on 1 April 2009
“Thus the laws of Holocaust denial are not intrinsic to the verifiability of fact.”
According to broadly accepted tenants of historiography, and well, western civilization, they are. People should be able to study these matters and write their own critiques without fear of government enforcing one view of history or another. It’s nothing personal, but for us westerners, people who said “trust me” have been shown to have agendas wrapped up in the issue at hand.
In other words, they put historians in jail for telling the truth about the “holocaust” because they have to.
on 1 April 2009
Dietrich,
I read with interest the wiki article you linked to. I don’t think your comparison to the danger of 35 million illegals with one educated man who works hard (Ernst Zündel) works because Ernst himself was deported as an illegal immigrant. Interestingly, he wasn’t deported as a security threat, Zündel simply overstayed his visa like thousands of deportees.
I also think it’s odd you linked to the wiki article in the first place. According to the article you cite, Zündel was an open neo nazi, racist, and anti-semite.
Far from being a proponent of free speech, Zündel himself tried to ban other people’s speech, such as the movie Schindler’s List. It’s takes chutzpah to wrap yourself up in the 1st Amendment given that Nazis in general and Zündel in particular want just the opposite.
And the quality of Zündel’s literary work: Atlanteans, UFOs and Nazis? He sounds alot like someone who thinks that he’s Napoleon incarnate.
I think you, Dietrich, said it best:
“Poor guy, suffering from some form of mental illness.”
on 1 April 2009
Dietrich, you have misread my comment
I wrote that:
This is because, as I repeat, huge swathes of an ethnic group do not disappear without leaving any record of why they did. For example, the 33 mass graves at Belzec and the disappearance of all but 2 of the people sent there is a fact which does not need the law to verify….it is verifiable because, well, there are 33 mass graves where the camp used to be, and all but 2 of the people sent there disappeared.
The laws against Holocaust denial criminalize denial so that the crimes of National Socialism cannot be whitewashed. To maintain that they are needed in order to verify those crimes is of course, a huge non sequitur fallacy.
on 1 April 2009
I’m having trouble recalling an example of government enforcing a system of belief, when that belief wasn’t eventually found to be wrong or at least profoundly lacking.
William, your premise seems to be that the deaths brought on by NS were so profound that laws are merited, lest its crimes be whitewashed. Two things jump out at me which serve to at the very least depants your argument:
Are you aware that far more have been killed in the name of communism? Certainly, apologetics have been written in the name of communism, and even Stalinism. Can’t find any in jail for that, however.
Also, I find it odd that there seems to be this tacit agreement by holocaust allegers that historical revision and indeed NS are so robust and resilient that societies which otherwise cherish free speech, freedom of conscious, and open scholarship and debate must go so far out on a limb to suppress research, writings, and speech.
Indeed, I was ashamed as a westerner at not only the chastising by Iran’s Ahmadi-nejad on the Jewish stranglehold on the terms and legality of this debate, but at the fact that he was right. So much these days are about “opening up” societies that treat women differently than we do in the west (dress them as sluts and push abortion–you know, freedom?), like the months-long hubbub in the academic community which bubbled up through the neocon press about Saudi women not being able to drive. As it turns out, we seem to have our own hangups (teh holocost), just as they do, it’s just that nobody likes hearing about it.
Unchanged after all changes–we still burn witches and astronomers, we just call them racists and deniers.
on 1 April 2009
Is your first name Sepp? That comment about ‘Holocaust allegers’ is cheap, even by the standards of a Nazi (which is what you most obviously are).
Your assertions about the robustness of Holocaust Denial are laughable, given that even Mark Weber admits that he and his fellow ghouls have got nowhere in the thirty years since the Faurrison affair:
http://counterknowledge.com/2009/01/holocaust-denier-mark-weber-admits-weve-failed/
Maybe the problem for Holocaust Deniers is not that the poor lambs are being ‘persecuted’. Maybe it’s because their piss-weak attempts at pseudo-scholarship just do not stand up against the weight of historical evidence. Maybe it’s because when normal, honest people of average and above intelligence (i.e. not members of the far right) compare the likes of David Irving with Deborah Lipstadt, they can spot the difference between the geniune academic and the two-faced liar in an instant.
I also find your reference to Iran puzzling. Maybe in your world a country which executes a 16 year old victim of serial child abuse should be lauded for having an alternative view of women’s role in society. Maybe I’m just a decadent liberal, but I happen to think that a country which allows women to wear skimpy tops is a better place to be than one which sentences a teenager to a slow death being hanged from a crane for ‘crimes against chastity’:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5217424.stm
But given your politics, you’re only question would be why the authorities didn’t use piano-wire and a meat-hook.
on 1 April 2009
Dietrich,
Governments enforce belief systems all the time. Here in the US our criminal laws are based on a belief system stemming from the bible: thou shalt not steal, or commit murder for instance. Those haven’t been found to be “wrong or profoundly lacking.”
I don’t know why you would find it “odd” that national socialism is robust and resilient given that racist ideologies and racial hatred have existed and will exist forever. You, in fact, are living proof.
The countries that have holocaust denial laws tend to be European, were perpetrators of the holocaust, have broad hate speech laws in general ,and well grounded fears of a return of racist ideologies (unlike the US, and other common law countries which generally don’t have such speech restrictions - which is also why these nut jobs publish here) Israel, which has a population of victims of nazism, has a different reason for its holocaust denial laws.
Comparing how different free, western countries - who’ve had very different histories with totalitarionism and different legal systems - handle the threat of incitement and racism with the systematic denial of rights to women (and I should mention other ethnic and racial groups) in Saudi Arabia is a non-starter.
It’s too bad some countries have anti-incitement laws because it gives you your one and only argument, and it has nothing to do with the merits (or lack thereof) of your argument.
on 2 April 2009
After reading the various comments on this post, it is clear to me that what is required is a clear exposition of the revisionist position. That might clear up the confusion relected in so many of the posts.
There is not a single German document that speaks of a program to exterminate the Jews. All the German documents speak of expulsion and deportation as a solution to the “Jewish problem”. Before the war the Germans considered deporting the Jews to places such as the island of Madagascar. This particularly became a possibility after the fall of France in 1940. Once the war in the east began, the Germans began deporting Jews to the occupied territories in Russia. The original claims about “gas chambers” in the German and Austrian camps have long since been dropped by the Holocaust Hoaxsters. Now the exterminations are supposed to have taken place in the Polish camps, principally Auschwitz, although also at Treblinka and Sobibor.
The Auschwitz camp was located in southwest Poland at the junction of three rivers, principally the Vistula and Sola rivers. It was a very swampy, marshy area where typhus and other diseases carried by lice were a major problem. Auschwitz consisted of three main camps, including Birkenau and Momowitz where the I.G. Farben plant was located. In addition, the camp complex included 38 other satellite camps. Auschwitz was a major industrial production center for the German war effort. It produced synthetic rubber and gasoline from refined coal, among other products. The prisoners employed at the camp were a valuable labor resource for the labor strapped German war economy. The Germans had no reason to exterminate their labor.
In the summer of 1942 a major typhus epidemic struck the camps, causing the camp to be shut down for six months. The Germans built crematory ovens in the spring of 1943 to sanitarily dispose of the diseased bodies by burning. The famous Zyklon B hydrogen cyanide gas used at the camps was used as a delousing agent to kill insects and vermin in the barracks and to delouse clothing. An extensive German war time technical literature exists instructing German personnel in the proper use of the highly dangerous gas. German camp records were carted off by the Soviet Union after the war and suppressed from the Nuremberg kangaroo court. Those records show that approximately 140,000 camp inmates perished during the war. Overwhelmingly, the principal cause of death was typhus or heart attacks and seizures induced by typhus. Of those deaths, roughly half were Jews.
The German secret police chief, Heinrich Himmler issued a documented order that the “death rate in the camps must be reduced at all costs”. This was consistent with German policy to preserve needed wartime labor. The Swedish revisionist, Dittlieb Felderer [ Wrote About the Anne Frank Diary ], himself of Jewish extraction, conducted an on-site inspection of the Auschwitz camp buildings back in the 1980’s. He documented with thousands of photograps the following buildings which are now padlocked and off limits to tourists today. Those buildings include a theatre, a camp library, a brothel, a swimming pool , a camp hospital where hundreds of healthy Jewish babies were born (confirmed by the camp records) and a hospital to nurse ill inmates back to health. All these amenities were provided, gratis, to the same Jews the Germans were allegedly “gassing”. All this evidence was brought out at the first trial of Canadian dissident Ernst Zundel in 1985 for publishing “false news”. It is a matter of public record and has been deliberately ignored by orthodox historians ever since.
Internal evidence of the Auschwitz camp does not support the Holocaust claims. The camps contained numerous underground intelligence groups which regularly reported to their governments-in-exile about the workings of the camps. These groups employed both carrier pigeons and radio transmitters. Not once did any of these groups mention rxterminations or “gassings”. In addition, the Germans regularly employed free Polish labor in the camps. They, too, failed to report any “gassings”. Auschwitz was not a secret camp. Aerial photographs taken by the U.S. Air Force during the war of the camp reveal that it was built in the middle of several adjoining Polish villages and that Polish farm land stretched right up to the wire fence around the camp. There was clear visibility inside. The aerial reconnaissance photos show no evidence of long lines of Jews waiting to be “gassed”. This, in spite of the fact that the aerial photos were taken on at least fifteen seperate days.
It is true that the Germans were using Zyklon B at the camps to delouse and “gas” clothing. Anyone who has seen the Jeff Goldblum/Geena Davis film “The Fly” [ Jeff Goldblum and Geena Davis in The Fly (1986) ] will immediately see what these delousing “gas chambers” looked like. These chambers, still extant, contain massive “Prussian Blue” hydrogen cyanide stains. As engineer Fritz Berg [ in YouTube - CO 2 and Zyklon-B - part 1 of 6 ] has shown, these delousing chambers could very easily have been converted to homicidal purposes, had that been actual German intent. In 1985 an American “gas chamber” engineer, Fred A. Leuchter, performed the first forensic examinations of the so-called “gas chamber” buildings. These buildings were, in reality, nothing more than underground morgues with upstair crematory ovens for burning diseased bodies. Leuchter concluded that the buildings exhibited none of the characteristics of real “gas chambers”. They were far too small to have housed the claimed number of victims who would have died of simple suffocation. They had no proper means of heating the Zyklon B to the temperature required for dispersion, no ventilation system, no chimneys for dispersing the gas upward, etc. In short, they had none of the design characteristics of real “gas chambers” but were simply what the German construction documents showed them to be-morgues with accompanying crematory ovens. In particular, Leuchter noted that there was no trace of the “Prussian Blue” stain which was everywhere present in the delousing chambers. Leuchter took brick and mortat samples from the chambers and submitted them to a Jewish chemist back in the United States for analysis (without, of course, telling him where he got the samples). The results came back almost completey negative for hydrogen cyanide residue. (The Jewish chemist, Roth, later came up with some innovative but completely unconvincing “explanations”, to cover for the holy lie of his unholy people.) Fred Leuchter had his carrer destroyed for his honesty. However, both his test results and his bottom line conclusions have been confirmed by several subsequent investigations, including those by the Viennese engineer Walter Lüftl, the chemist Germar Rudolf and the investigations of the former Polish communist authorities themselves. The crematory ovens at the camp had a disposal rate entirely consistent with the actual death rates from disease and typhus. The investigations of the Italian revisionist researcher, Carlo Mattogno, are particularly good on this point. Mattogno regularly makes mincemeat of his “dillettante” adversary, Professor John Zimmerman of the University of Las Vegas Nevada. Anyone interested can look up and read the debates online.
Since the claims of “gassings” in the German camps and Auschwitz have been decisively refuted the Holocaust Hoaxsters attempt to move the extermination story ever eastward. Thus, the claims now are that the Germans were exterminating Jews at Belzec, Sobibot and Treblinka. In addition, they were supposedly killing every Jew in Russia. The first point to realize here is that the claims about these camps are no more believable than the claims about the other camps. “False in one thing; false in all things” as the lawyers say. Mr. William Henderson, who imagines that he knows something about “The Holocaust”, quotes a War Crimes Investigation of these camps and their supposed findings. What he does not mention is that the Commission from which he quotes was a Polish Communist Commission of Stalinist truthfulness. The gullibility of the pathetic Mr. Henderson is laughable. In reality, these camps were merely transit camps for transporting the Jews further east. Aerial reconnaissance photos taken by revisionist researchers have shown none of the mass graves and mountains of ashes claimed by the Polish communists. Interested readers may consult the excellent article by Andrew Allen and Mark Weber in the Journal of Historical Review. Or, they may read Carlo Mattogno’s heavily researched and purely factual book on “Concentration CampTreblinka”.
Now for the claims of mass executions on the Eastern Front. This claim is partially true, although the numbers are vastly inflated. The first point to be noted is the one made by Arthur Butz, in his classic “The Hoax Of The Twentieth Century: The Case Against The Presumed Extermination Of Eastern European Jewry”. Had the exterminations of Jews in Russia been as great as claimed, The Jews would have had legitimate evidence for extermination and would not have needed the “gas chamber” hoax. Now the context of the exterminations that did occur. Communism in Russia, and everywhere else in the pre-WW2 era, was a Jewish movement. The Russian Jews en masse, had formed the backbone of the Communist state. They were overwhelmingly the gulag commissars and secret police chiefs. The names of Henrik Yagoda, Lev Mehklis, Lavrenti Beria, Simon Firin, Mattvei and Boris Berman, Simon Firin, Moishe Trilliser, Gregory Zhuk, Lev Inzhir, Isaac Rottenberg, Elizabeth Zerbin, Moishe Uritzky, Kamenev, Zinoviev and many, many others come to my mind. The partisan warfare against the German tropps was largely in German hands. Thus, the Germans had good reasons for many of their liquidations of Jews.
However, the numbers are clearly exaggerated for a great many reasons. First, one-half to two-thirds of the Russian Jews had already been evacuated ahead of the German advance by the heavily Jewish communist Soviet regime. They had been taken east of the Ural Mountains to work as highly skilled technical workers in the Soviet arms factories. (Consult Walter N. Sanning, “The Dissolution Of Eastern European Jewry”.) These Jews could not have been exterminated by the Germans because they were never under German control. The Einzatsgruppen reports require careful analysis. First, it must be realized that there were two Einzarsgruppen reports: the reports from the troops in the field to their commanders and the reports of the commanders back to their superiors in Berlin. All the kill totals are based on the reports back to Berlin; the field reports have conveniently disappeared. Since the Berlin reports were in the exclusive control of the conquerors after the war, it was entirely possible for them to insert exaggerated kill totals in the reports or even to forge them entirely. Beyond this obvious consideration, troops in the field regularly exaggerate their kill totals to make themselves look good. The Americans did it in Vietnam; there is no reason to suppose that Germans in Russia would do any differently. Besides, the Einzatsgruppen were a very small force of only 3000 men, some of whom were admimistrative. When one considers the vastness of the Russian terrain, the miserable travel conditions in winter and the forests and other places for Jews to hide, there is no way such a limited force could possibly have killed the numbers claimed. As to allegatiions that the Germans dug up the grave and burned the bodies, that flies in the face of common sense. In a war with millions of casualties and bodies everywhere, who could possibly distinguish bodies of dead Jews from other bodies? Besides, burning bodies would not destroy the bones and thus would have been futile. The Germans were suffering major lack of petrol for their tanks and could hardly have afforded to waste gasoline for such irrelevancies.
And here we come to a simple point everyone seems to forget. The Germans were fighting a war against a Soviet enemy enjoying overwhelming numerical and material superiority. The Germans needed every available soldier to win the war; executing Jews was a sideline. This is not to deny that a lot of Jews were killed in Russia but the real numbers were probably in the 100,000-1,000,00 range, not the numbers claimed. There is another very important consideration bearing on this issue. The diaries of the German secret police chief, Heinrich Himmler, disappeared after the war and eventually wound up in Israeli hands. They have not been seen by the rest of the world since. Clearly, if the Germans had been conducting mass exterminations of Jews in the east, the Israelis would have disclosed the diaries in support of their case long ago. If they have not, someting in the diaries must be inconsistent with their claims. No other reasoned conclusion is possible. Historian David Irving has found a document in which German Ministry of the Interior official, Hans Lammerer, records notes of a telephone conversation where he is told that “the Fuehrer wants the Jewish problem shelved until the end of the war”. This phone conversation, of undoubted authenticity, is simply ignored by the Holocaust Hoaxers.
There are additional problems with the Holocaust Hoax. The Germands did not even get around to deporting the Jews of France and Hungary until 1944 after the allied landings at Normandy. That is an amazing oversight in a regime that was supposedly exterminating every Jew it could get its hands on. The communist governments in Eastern Europe after the war were top heavy with regimes 75%-80% Jewish. These Jews had obviously not been exterminated. Jews who logically should not exist continue to collect ever escalating reparations seventy years after their supposed extermination. Something obviously does not add up, as even Jewish communist Professor Norman Finkelstein notes in his book “The Holocaust Industry: The Exploitation Of Jewish Suffering”.
But what about the Nuremberg Trial and all the “survivor” testimonies”? Doesn’t that prove “The Holocaust”? In a word, no. The Nuremberg Trial was a kangaroo court organized and run by Jews. Without the Nuremberg Trial, there is no evidence at all for a Jewish extermination. Who sold the allies on the idea of a war crimes trial? Why, it was the Robinson brothers of the Institute of Jewish Affairs of the World Jewish Congress. It was the New York Zionist Jew, David “Mickey Marcus”, who picked all the personnel for the trials. According to Hungarian author Louis Marschalko in his book, “The World Conquerors”, out of 3000 total personnel at the trils, 2400 were Jews. The late Senator Thomas Dodd of Connecticut wrote letters to his relatives complaining that the Jewish disproportion at the trials was leading many of the time to conclude that the trial was really just a Jewish “revenge fest”. Judge Wennersturm of America wrote that “90% of the personnel at the trial in American uniforms were really “racial aliens” (meaning Jews). Judges Gordon Simpson and Edward Van Roden documented that at one of the subsidiary NMT (National Military Tribunal) trials, thirty nine German defendants had their testicles smashed beyond repair. Among the Jews present at the trials were Sidney Alderman, an assisstant prosecutor, Benjamin Ferencz, a Hungarian Jew who spends a lot of time on C-Span bragging about his trial experiences, the American actor Tony Randall (Rosenberg) who was there as a member of the Army Signal Corps, Robert Kemper, a Prussian Jew and many, many others. The defendants were hung in October 1946, the middle of the Jewish high holidays, between the Day Of Atonement and the Day of Final Judgement. The sentences were read out by Wolf Frank, a German Jew in American uniform and the hang man was John Woods Short, another American Jew. These facts leave little doubt of the ethnic power controlling the Nuremberg farce.
The testimonies presented at the trial suffer from three defects.
(1) They are internally inconsistent;
(2) They are inconsistent with each other;
(3) They are inconsistent with the physical facts.
Without the Nurember Trial “evidence”, which excluded the German camp records and other evidence we have reviewed in detail, there would be no evidence at all for a Jewish extermination program.
There is no secret at all where the Jews really went. The vast majority of them were hiding out east of the Ural Mountains in the Soviet Union during the war. After the war, they terrorized the populations of Eastern Europe as the chief commissars. The balance proceeded onto Palestine to drive the Arabs off their land. Still others went to North and South America canoflauged as Hungarioans, Poles, etc. The United States Immingration and Naturalization Service in November 1943 conveniently dropped the classification “Jew”, thereby aiding the process of camoflauge. The true number of Jews killed in World War 2 is between one to two million. That is a lot but it is no worse than the two to three million Germans who were murdered in the expulsions from the east or the one million plus German and Japanese civilians firebombed to death by American and British bombers. The Jews, in short, have taken brutal wartime experiences experienced by all and made themselves into martyrs by perpetrating the most brazen hoax of all time. That is criminal and civil fraud on a colossal scale-and it should be punished-by penalties appropriate to the crime.
on 2 April 2009
Until I read the comment above, I didn’t realise that sewers were connected to the internet.
on 2 April 2009
john thames
In the future, when you want to copy other people’s writing, just link to the artcle rather than cutting and pasting the whole thing.
on 2 April 2009
john thames,
Come to think of it, the fact that you plagarized another crank’s writing, and passed it off as your own, speaks volumes about credibility.
Thanks for clearing that up!
on 2 April 2009
Gentlemen:
It is my original creation.
Try reading it.
P.S.
“Counterknowledge” needs a name change. “Idiotinc.” would do nicely.
on 2 April 2009
‘It is my original creation.’
I guessed as such. It bore all the hallmarks of a goose-stepping cretin who is more comfortable burning books than reading them.
‘Try reading it.’
I did. Half the time I was amazed at the idiocy of your conclusions (i.e. the notion that 6 million dead could just be magicked away), and other half of the time I felt a sense of nausea, similar to that I get when I walk pass a pile of dogshit on the pavement during a summer’s day.
I just thought I’d let you know that you’re as outclassed in the academic battle as your counterparts were in the real war six years ago. There’s a reason why you are pariahs in normal society, and it extends to the fact that your pseudo-scholarship is very similar to your ideology - it stinks.
on 2 April 2009
The parts I read were filled with factual errors, a blatantly racist overtone and a reliance on psuedo-experts who have been legally found to lack credibility.
Truly a dismal piece of work
on 2 April 2009
Dear Dumb Asses:
You have not rebutted a single point. You cannot.
As to your kangaroo courts with Jew bought and paid for judges, like Judge Gray, they prove nothing. Take away your legal hocus- pocus and you have not a leg to stand on. It is rather like your famous Balfour Declaration, granting a non-existent Jewish “right” to Arab Palestine.
And, oh yes, dumb ass Mr. Welch. I explained exactly where the Jews hid out and where they went, you lying piece of shit. Do you really imagie that your readers cannot see the words in front of their eyes?
It is idle to debate with professional liars, which is what you are. A website that seriously pretends that 09/11 was not an “inside job” cannot be taken seriously on any subject. Since profanity and insults are your only arguments, why don’t you try eating kosher shit?
on 2 April 2009
Religion has nothing to do with any of this. ‘Jewish’ is not a religion no more than ‘Italian’ or ‘German’ is.
on 2 April 2009
Heh heh rather than having to torture yourself with john thames’ copy ‘n paste post, he’s kindly summed up holocaust denial:
“kangaroo courts with Jew bought and paid for judges”
“legal hocus- pocus”
“liars”
“eat kosher shit”
At least your shorter post was more honest.
on 2 April 2009
John, how many of the roughly 2.5 million people (mainly Jews) that disappeared following their deportation to Auschwitz, Treblinka, Belzec, Majdanek, Sobibor and Chelmno have come forward to support your position that the aforementioned camps were, in fact, not their final resting place?
on 2 April 2009
Mr Thames, you have proved nothing, except for where you lie (pun intended) on the political spectrum.
Based on the shoddy scholarship of Leuchter and other assorted charlatans (including David Irving, the man who tried to sue Deborah Lipstadt for calling him a Holocaust denier - and then blew his case by proving he was one), you have concocted a cosmic conspiracy based on nothing more than your petty-minded hatred and gross violence to the historical record.
If I am to understand you correctly, you are claiming that the Nazi regime which did so much to demonise ‘world Jewry’ pre-1939, was suddenly so solicitous about the welfare of European Jews under their occupation that they didn’t kill a single one of them - aside from the odd fatality from anti-Partisan operations.
You are also asking us to believe that all the millions we supposed were slaughtered in the death camps, by the Einsatzgruppen etc were all alive and well until 1944, and then they all decided to emigrate behind the Urals where no one could find them.
You are also asking us to believe that all the evidence presented at Nuremberg and successive war crimes trials was all concocted by the ‘Jooos’. For reasons which you fail to specify.
And finally, you claim that the Communist regimes of the USSR and Eastern Europe were under Jewish control, despite the Doctors’ Plot of 1953, the anti-Semitic tone of the purges in East European countries in the early 1950s (such as the Slansky trial), the alignment of the USSR and its Warsaw Pact allies with Israel’s Arab enemies throughout the Cold War era (who armed Iraq, Syria and the PLO, you complete moron?), and despite the refusal of the Soviet regime to allow Soviet Jews to emigrate to Israel in the 1970s and early 1980s (why didn’t the Jewish-dominated regime let all those millions of Jews behind the Urals go to the Middle East and tip the demographic balance further in Israel’s favour).
The only thing you have proved is that Herman Goering is not the only Nazi to be stoned on drugs.
on 2 April 2009
Mr. Welch:
Before you parade your abysmal ignorance before the entire world, do try to learn a few basic facts of history. There is no doubt whatever that up until the year 1950, communism everywhere in Eastern Europe was a Jewish movement. Do not take my word for it; consult a few reference works instead. Let me give you the relevant volumes so that you can begin to learn a few basic facts. Begin with “The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State” by Professor Benjamin Ginsberg. It contains many candid admissions of the Jewish preponderance in the pre-WW2 Soviet state. Then get “The Jewish Century” by Yuri Slezkine, published by Princeton University Press. Thiis is the latest, most up-to-date research volume on the subject. It has been praised by innumerable Jewish reviewers as definitive. Slezkine (himself half-Jewish and born in Russia) is unequivocal. Communism in its murderous 1950’s heyday was a Jewish movement. Then get Zvi Gitelman’s 1970’s study “Soviet Nationality and Jewish Politics: The Jewish Sections of the CPSU, 1917-1930″. It will only set you back one thousand dollars on the used book market. I assume that a failure in life like you can afford it. It, too, documents the Jewish success story in early Soviet Russia. If that is not enough to convince you, read “The Jewish Threat: Anti-Semitic Politics of the US Army” by professor Joseph Bendersky. There you can read all the State Department and Military Intelligence reports of the US government taken directly out of the National Archives from the early 1920’s. Presumably all the on site diplomatic observors of the period simply made it up.
Now here is another little aspect of the story you do not know, dick head. The Soviet Union, although Jewish controlled in these years was anti-Zionst. Here’s why. In the revolutionary struggles of the years 1880-1917, the split in the Jewish ranks was whether communism was to be established in Russia or in Palestine. Thus, the Soviet Union enjoined the Russian Jews to loyalty to the Soviet state, not loyalty to the Zionist state in-the-making in British Mandate Palestine. Nevertheless, a great many Russian Jews were both Marxists and Zionists. Have you heard of Dov Borochov, Nachman Syrkin, Chaim Zhitlovsky, etc. No? Then read “A Fire In Their Hearts: Yiddish Socialists In New York” by Professor Tony Michels, “Prophecy and Politics: Nationalism and Socialism” by Jonathan Frankel and “While Messiah Tarried: Jewish Socialist Movements In Russia, 1870-1917″ by Norah Levin. Pay particular attention to the chapter headed: “The Struggle With Lenin” where the conflict between orthodox Marxism and Zionist-Marxist synthesizing is described in detail. If that is too much trouble, take a course from Elliott Ratzman at Harvard University entitled “The Jewish Romance With Communism, Zionism and Liberalism”. You can find the required reading materials on line. Then you can scream at Ratzmann for giving away your secrets rather than screaming at me.
And now to Soviet relations with Israel, you pathetic, dumbed down little dick head. Get professor Arnold Krammer’s book, “The Forgotten Friendship” on the orginal Soviet romance with Zionism, 1945-1950. Professor Krammer will tell you the same things I am telling you about communism and zionism growing up side-by-side in the ghettos of Czarist Russia. He will also tell you about the ideological affinities as well as differences between the two. Then you can read how Stalin allowed many thousands of Jewish communists to pour out of Russia to plant communism in Palestine. So did Jacob Berman in Poland and Ana Pauker in Rumania. Read how it was communist arms from Czechoslovakia which were transfered to the Zionists with Stalin’s permission to make Zionist victory possible. It is all documented fact, dick head.
What happened to change Stalin’s policy? That is well-known. Soviet Jews began to switch their loyalties to Zionism. Many of these Jews had relatives in America which was starting to replace the British mandate as the guarantor of Zionism. David Ben-Gurion, himslf a Marxist, aligned Israel with the US to gain access to the wealth of Diaspora Jewry. In short, Stalin’s policy was boomeranging. Stalin reversed course and started purging the very Jews who had served him so loyally for sol long. The Jewish preponderance in the USSR started to fade, although Russian Jews continued to dominate in the professions, the arts and the media.
Today, all this has been forgotten, particularly by stupid shits like Mr. Welch who never learned the facts in the first place. As to the Einzatsgruppen, I never denied that a lot of Jews were shot. I said the kill total was somewhere between 100,00-1,000,000. I also gave my reasons for thinking the kill totals were exaggerated.
This entire blog illustrates the deficiencies of the internet. Here we have a bunch of adolescent jerk offs prattling endlessly on subjects they have never studied. These punks (that’s you , gentlemen) blab and blab but have not the slightest knowledge of the facts nor the intelligence to properly evaluate them. Instead of refuting so-called myths, you merely add more nonsense to an already ignorant and dumbed down world. Do everyone a favor and fellate your own pricks-while leaving the commentary to a man who possesses the vast historical acumen you suck offs so obviously lack.
Schmuck Heil!
on 2 April 2009
John Thames…excellent work.
I’ll just add, once again…EVERY HOLOCAU$T TALE HAS BEEN REVEALED AS A HOAX.
on 3 April 2009
john thames don’t change the subject.
Your benign view of nazi treatment of eurpoean jews, which are based on made up facts from well known cranks, suddenly becomes an argument about many jews in eastern europe and the former ussr were communists (ignoring all the pogroms that preceded it).
Then you wrap yourself up in the robes of conspiracy by suggesting that: “all this has been forgotten.” Throughout all this, you weave in personal attacks and praise yourself as a man of “vast historical acumen.”
Weak.
Just stick to your basic argument of “it wuz da joos dat dun it.” That has the benefit of answering all the mysteries in your little world!
P.S. I liked your stormfront posts - Free Zundel!
on 3 April 2009
Notice John and Hanover falling over themselves to answer my previous message…
on 3 April 2009
911 truthers, holocaust deniers etc have a tendency to change subjects, engage in personal attacks, appeal to false authorities and argue half truths etc.
Perhaps I can answer for both of them: the roughly 2.5 million death camp survivors were too busy looking for their suntan lotion for the Auschwitz pool to notice the argument.
on 3 April 2009
Ron:
The ad hominem arguments were initiated by your side kicks, not by me. Go back and read the posts. I have no Storm Front posts.
The issue of Jewish control of the USSR was brought up by your fellow dumb ass, Mr. Welch. I never argued that Nazi treatment of Jews was benign; I only argued that they didn’t gas six million of them. As to pogroms, those too were greatly exaggerated by Jewish press propaganda. According to the well known report by the British consul, Wagenstorff (although not known to a dumb ass like you, obviously), the cause of the pogroms was Jewish financial exploitation of the peasantry and Jewish sex slave trading. (Consult Edward Bristow’s “Prostitution and Prejudice” for information on the latter.)
Jews never cause their own problems. Everybody knows that-especially a knowledgeable punk like you.
on 3 April 2009
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/tmotsm/A5.html
on 3 April 2009
john thames
I don’t wish to offend you too much - with your self-described “historical acumen” and prodigious output, I assume your wound pretty tight - but I simply enjoy watching 911 truthers, UFO experts, holocaust deniers, creationists, astrologers, herbalists, cultists and other assorted wackos come unglued.
It’s been strangely entertaining reading your very long posts - thousands and thousands of words - they’re like little insights into the demented mind. Maybe that’s why I read this site so much.
I particularly enjoyed watching you unravel. You started with a nice presentation: “what is required is a clear exposition of the revisionist position.” Hmm, I thought.
Hehe Sure enough you delivered:
“Dear Dumb Asses”
“Counterknowledge” needs a name change. “Idiotinc”
“A website that seriously pretends that 09/11 was not an “inside job”
“why don’t you try eating kosher shit”
leave “the commentary to a man who possesses the vast historical acumen you suck offs so obviously lack.”
“Schmuck Heil!”
Good times, good times.
on 3 April 2009
I am new here and a seeker of truth and enjoyed reading this thread. Keep it going. I should say at the outset that I have nothing to gain by recognizing or denying the Holocaust.
John Thames, I think you all should have to admit, calls attention to some good points. It is amazing the amount of flaming he is taking for posting reasoned and carefully expressed facts that are sourced and that anyone can read for themselves. I am in a way surprised at this treatment by those supposedly seeking truth, and it was indeed not JT that started the name calling. Especially disconcerting is that other than these types of ad hominems, like also accusations of plagiarism, not one single referenced point by JT (or for that matter Carlo Mattogno) has been addressed.
Myself, I don’t know the truth, but I’d like to find it out, yet will not say i have it until I am sure. All I know is what I have read in books or other places, or heard from other people. As somewhat of a historian, my main concern here is the troubling fact that we can’t seem to get the friggin’ facts straight about something that happened less than a hundred years ago, which is what happens when groups or individuals with axes to grind get a hold of history. This holds profound implications for someone interested in ancient history, as I am.
It is also suspicious to me, however, that those of you who argue with JT accuse him of borrowing information, when the source of your own parrotings are never revealed. Most of us stop our learning at a certain level of authority and believe by virtue of accepting that authority or those authorities. Who invented the motor? Do some research, you will see it is not who you think. It is the same for oh just about everything you “know”. In the end, who invented the motor—or writing, or agriculture, or cyanide “gas”, etc.—depends on what sources you believe. With wisdom comes the realization that sometimes you have to see for yourself to grasp that objective reason (if) you truly seek. We all get our info from somewhere, it is unlikely any of us got our information from a truth-revealing vision—if that would be considered insight at all.
Maybe some indication as to what proves the Holocaust, or what refutes JT, would further the discussion. At least JT has done some research, and isn’t just spewing his hatred, prominent here most likely because of the Jew presence on this thread. Romans hate talk against the decrees of Rome, and it is precisely this sort of identification that distorts history.
I think it is a fact that the supposed “Holocaust” and the reparations involved has elevated the Jew to prominence throughout the word, not only on merit, and whether the Holocaust is as I was taught in elementary school, and then repeatedly throughout my education. What about all the other massacres of bygone days? In America, one could say, today, for all practical purposes run banking, Hollywood, the stock exchange, much big business, and have caused much trouble in the world by occupying land (thanks Churchill) that belong to other people. You don’t just slice off a chunk of another country and give it to other people, and not expect subsequent, perhaps eternal trouble. Worst of all, today’s Jews think they are the only original Semites, when they are but one tribe from the same general stock, as am I and many of us European-descended people. Jews, we could add, furthermore in the business world hire their own first, an example of racism in action. Monopoly has been proposed.
But of course this last paragraph is an example of speaking in generalities. Without doubt any time a race as a whole is considered evil there is a problem with the argument. For me, every war is an atrocity, us idiots do the bidding for higher powers, deaths occur, tortures, and unspeakable crimes. All these things, I think, did take place against the Jews…as they did against the Japanese, the Poles, the Slavs, the Moslems, the Palestinians, etc., just not on the scale, or in the ways we have been taught. Anytime we declare war on a religion—oh as during the Crusades, or as is happening right now again against the “other” Semites—we speak to our continued laughable ignorance.
But as for the exaggerations about what happened, the recompense which continues…to be honest, I am sick of hearing about the Jewish plight during WWII. We have paid and paid dearly, and if Canaan is any indication, we continue to pay for the mistake we made in our rush to relocate the Jews after the war. As with slavery, at some point, one should ask—do we really gain by repeatedly telling our kids that we were once slaves?
So all I’m saying for all this is attack JT fairly, I would like to see this debate continued. It is wrong to say because he or anyone else challenges the numbers and methods, that he is therefore anti-Jew (anti-Semitic is a bad term). Otherwise, as of right now, in that JT recognizes the atrocities to the Jews, only not to the extent the Jews would have us believe, he has relayed what seems to me a reasoned, and possibly correct point of view, based on verifiable facts.
on 3 April 2009
‘John Thames’ has become increasingly unhinged as this thread has progressed. Notice for example his failure to answer why there is no theoretical evidence to support (for example) his claim that several million European Jews just decided to emigrate behind the Urals, and it is this - rather than the Nazi effort at systematic extermination - that explains the demographic dive in Europe’s Jewish population in 1939-1945.
Notice also the fact that he keeps talking about ‘6 million Jews being gassed’. No reputable historian of the Holocaust has ever made this claim - the total figure of dead incorporates all those either deliberately exterminated (massacred by Einsatzgruppen and also local Nazi-raised militias - e.g. Arajs Kommando in Latvia, Ustase in Croatia etc), or who died as a consequence of disease and starvation in ghettos from Warsaw to Terezin.
‘Mr Thames’, being monumentally dense even by neo-Nazi standards, also claims that the Nazis rounded up Jews just as labour, and that they had no incentive to slaughter them. If he is honestly expecting us to believe that all these people - including the elderly, young children, and those unfit for hard labour either through illness or the fact that they were white-collar types - were systematically deported to occupied Poland just so that they could work for I.G.Farben, I can only say that it is no wonder that the far right has become a refuge for the semi-educated and the terminally stupid.
Let us also turn to his claims about ‘Jewish control’ of the USSR. A close examination of the composition of the Bolshevik movement - and indeed the CPSU as it subsequently became - shows yet again that it was a disproportionately Slavic group; mainly ethnic Russians and Ukrainians. There were obviously other ethnic categories. You have in the OGPU/NKVD ethnic Poles (like Genrikh Yagoda - falsely described by Mr Thames as Jewish) and - once Lavrenti Beria (Mingrelian/Georgian, not Jewish) became head of the NKVD a cluster of fellow Georgians. And let us not also forget where Josef Stalin himself hailed from.
The purges of the 1930s (unlikely to be covered in a source such as “Soviet Nationality and Jewish Politics: The Jewish Sections of the CPSU, 1917-1930?) claimed prominent Jewish CPSU members such as Lev Kamenev and Grigori Zinoviev. Let us not also forget that the most prominent Jew amongst the Old Bolsheviks - namely Leon Trotsky - was forced into exile in 1928 and subsequently murdered - on Stalin’s orders - in 1940.
As for the composition of the East European Communist parties installed by the Soviets in the 1940s, Mr Thames’ claims of Jewish domination are a falsehood. A handful of prominent Jews (Jakub Berman, Matyas Rakosi) does not a trend make, and it is also evident that the Stalinist show trials of the late 1940s-early 1950s has an anti-Semitic tinge. Look at the fate of Ana Pauker in Romania, or of Rudolf Slansky in Czechoslovakia. I have also pointed out the entrenched anti-Semitism that existed within the Soviet bloc from the post-Stalin period onwards. Mr Thames doesn’t seem to want to recognise this.
Let us also deal with another issue here, which is Mr Thames’ wilful conflation of Communism with Socialism. I know that this is a general problem with Nazis, that they can’t distinguish between the two. The sources cited (”A Fire In Their Hearts: Yiddish Socialists In New York” by Professor Tony Michels, “Prophecy and Politics: Nationalism and Socialism” by Jonathan Frankel; “While Messiah Tarried: Jewish Socialist Movements In Russia, 1870-1917?) clearly emphasise this point. A Jewish Socialist was more likely to be a Bundist in inter-war Poland, or a member of the Social Revolutionary Party or the Mensheviks in Russia. He or she could even be a member of the Labour Party in Britain. But in his efforts at pseudo-scholarship Mr Thames misses this point. I rather suspect that like most neo-Nazi types nowadays he is content to surf the various hate sites on the web, and pretend that he knows something about the sources they refer to. Unless he has a sizeable Amazon account - or access to a University library - I somehow doubt that he has taken the time and trouble to read them himself.
Finally, we come back to pogroms being ‘exaggerated’, and their being due to ‘Jewish financial exploitation of the peasantry and Jewish sex slave trading’. Again, if Mr Thames honestly believes that the most socially and economically disadvantaged ethnic group in Tsarist Russia was actually capable of such ‘exploitation’, I can only say that a lengthy stay in a padded cell is in order.
It’s a funny thing about people like Mr Thames. They’re at great pains to rant hysterically about a global and satanic Jewish conspiracy, but they’re very coy about admitting the fact that sixty years ago their ideological ancestors sought to destroy this ‘conspiracy’ for good - by exterminating all of Europe’s Jews. It’s an odd message from a Nazi - ‘These people are really evil, and a threat to civilisation, but we never tried to kill them’.
on 3 April 2009
Dear John: You are not for 100 % right but for 200 %! Communism was indeed a Jewish Movement from the beginning. The proofs are there. These are not “conspiracy-theories” but conspiracy-facts!
YES INDEED, THE CORPORATED MEDIA LIES TO US … BUT NOT ALWAYS!
Recently, on Saturday 14 March, I went as usual to my post box to get the papers. One of them is the “Dutch Daily.” The other “The Telegraph.” It is in the first one where I read this on page 1, nl. that on 14 March 1909 in the building of a Jewish trade union on the Nieuwe Achtergracht in the city of Amsterdam, the first Communistic party of The Netherlands and of all Europe was set up. The hundreds of people who where present called themselves “the true followers of Karl Marx, the founder of Communism. Their leader, the bearded son of a Rabbi named David Wijnkoop, opened on 30 minutes past eleven AM the doors of the gathering of a new pure Marxist party, the Social Democratic Party in the Netherlands.”
“No cult are we, but a fighting party” was their slogan. Remember, this was the first Communistic party ever in all of West-Europe!
on 3 April 2009
First…to William:
You posted:
“John, how many of the roughly 2.5 million people (mainly Jews) that disappeared following their deportation to Auschwitz, Treblinka, Belzec, Majdanek, Sobibor and Chelmno have come forward to support your position that the aforementioned camps were, in fact, not their final resting place?”
You didn’t initially request that I respond to this…I’m not entirely sure what this is supposed to be, honestly. The whole premise of this argument is that THESE PEOPLE WERE NOT MURDERED; THAT THEY INSTEAD EXITED THE REGION…so what benefit would THEY gain by revealing this to be absolutely true?!?
You are a dullard.
Ron:
You were upset that John responded to your and others’ retarded ad-hominem attacks with more of the same?
“Dear Dumb Asses” - considering my experiences here, I think he showed a great deal of restraint.
“Counterknowledge” needs a name change. “Idiotinc”1 - I agree.
“A website that seriously pretends that 09/11 was not an “inside job” - EXACTLY.
“why don’t you try eating kosher shit” - it was blessed by a rabbi, wasn’t it?
leave “the commentary to a man who possesses the vast historical acumen you suck offs so obviously lack.” - self-explanatory
“Schmuck Heil!” - you guys really can’t take a bloody joke, can you…considering the joke has been on the world for over SIXTY YEARS, possibly.
But, like John stated…YOU HAVEN’T REBUTTED ONE BLOODY POINT.
William goes on about mass graves, even though ground penetrating radar shows NO SUCH THING; William - how about some forensic testing on the “ash and DNA” all over Treblinka?
on 3 April 2009
Hanover, bearing in mind that there are 33 mass graves with a total surface area of some 13 square miles where Belzec used to stand, exactly how did the 434,500 people sent there “exit the region”?
ground penetrating radar shows… Yawn. You are regurgitating the nonsense of Richard Krege, who supposedly conducted ground penetrating radar research (the results of which he has chosen not to release) at the site of Treblinka. Krege maintained that there were no mass graves on the basis that he found no evidence of any ground disturbance.
Treblinka was completely destroyed after Operation Reinhard was completed, and the ground was ploughed up for farmland.
As I have said before, by maintaining that the soil hasn’t been disturbed, Krege thus implies that the camp itself never existed either, which is an incredibly stupid conclusion.
on 3 April 2009
Although I enjoy seeing attempts to legitimize holocaust denial exposed as the frauds they are, and enjoy reading Joseph Welch and William Henderson’s calm and coherent responses to the liars, I think this thread ultimately proves the wisdom of Prof. Lipstadt’s policy of not debating deniers. You will never convince them of the error of their ways, and arguing with them only fuels their view that they are participating in a legitimate dispute over history, and gives them a soapbox to repeat their lies from. Expose them and ignore them seems the wiser course.
The issue of laws banning holocaust denial is a much more interesting one, but the deniers take over these threads so quickly that it is hard to have much of a discussion about it. For what it is worth, though, to Dietrich who was relying in part on the treatment of Zundel in Canada, it is worth remembering that Zundel was ultimately successful in his criminal cases, and the the laws he was charged under were determined to be unconstitutional. So it is rather unreasonable to use Zundel as an example of free speech thwarted by the judicial system.
on 3 April 2009
Angelo,
I find it odd that you think it’s wrong to say JT is anti-Jew in light of his repeated anti-jewish insults.
The reason why people I’m underwhelmed with JT’s “carefully expressed facts that are sourced” is because the sources he cuts and pastes from have been exposed as written by frauds and constitutes fraudulent historiography. In fact, his sources have been exposed to the harsh light of the adversary system and have been found wanting.
And yet, these same sources are routinely dragged out of the garbage bin, dusted off, and presented as startling new unimpeachable evidence on racist websites.
“At least JT has done some research, and isn’t just spewing his hatred.” I hope that this is one of those “truth revealing visions” you warned of.
on 3 April 2009
“As I have said before, by maintaining that the soil hasn’t been disturbed, Krege thus implies that the camp itself never existed either, which is an incredibly stupid conclusion.”
Okay…conjure up Robert DeNiro in Cape Fear, doing the laugh…”Ah. hahahahahahahaha…ahhhhhhahahahahahaha!”
Here is your clumsy attempt to OBFUSCATE the truth…Krege may at some time have stated thus, but I DIDN’T.
I maintain that if the ground has NOT been disturbed, there are NO MASS GRAVES. Period.
Nothing was said about the existence of the camp.
Tool.
on 3 April 2009
http://www.polonica.net/mordercy_Polakow.htm
My thanks to Hanover for his support. As he correctly notes, the other side started the insults. I merely responded in kind. Please note the above highly informative link. It is a compilation by a Polish researcher of Polish communist Jews and their job functions. The photographs alone should be sufficient to demolish Mr. Welch’s pretenses about just “a few” Jewish communists. “A picture is worth a thousand words”, as the expression goes.
Now, I possess, on my library shelves, all of the research volumes hitherto referred to. If Mr. Welch imagines that he can best me by alleging that I “misrepresent” the contents of these volumes, I shall now quote chapter and verse so that interested readers may judge for themselves. (Mr. Welch shall rue the day he ever opened this subject.) Let us begin with “The Fatal Embrace” by Professor Ginsberg.On pages 30-33 Ginsberg writes as follows: “Three of the six members of Lenin’s first Politburo-Trotsky, Kamemev, and Zinoviev-were of Jewish origin. Trotsky, in addition, was commissar of defense and organized and commanded the Red Army during the civil war that followed the October Revolution. Kamenev and Zinoviev became members of the triumvirate (along with Stalin) that ruled the Soviet Union immediately after Lenin’s death in 1924. Other prominent Jews in in the early Soviet government included Yankel Sverdlov, president of the Communist party central committee, Maxim Litvinov, commissar for foreign affairs, and Karl Radek, who served as press commissar. In subsequent years, Jews continued to play major roles throughout the Soviet state. Lazar Kaganovich, for example, was one of Stalin’s chief aides, commissar of heavy industry during the Second World War, and a member of the Politburo.
…the special contribution of the Jews to the Bolshevik state involved the organization of coercion. From the beginning, the Soviet state relied heavily upon military, police, and security services to sustain itself, and Jews were active in these agencies…
During the 1920’s and 1930’s, Jews were a major element in the secret police and other Soviet security forces. Genrikh Yagoda, for instance, served as chief of the secret police during the 1930’s. Yaghoda had been a pharmicist before the Revolution and specialized in preparing poisons for his agents to use in liquidating Stalin’s opponents. Other high ranking Jewish secret policemen included Mattvei Berman and Naftaly Frenkel who helped to expand and institutionalize the slave labor system. Slave laborers working under Frenkel’s supervision built the White-Sea Baltic Canal in 1932. As many as 200,000 workers perished while completing this project. Another Jewish security officer, K,V. Pauker, served as chief of operations ofthe secret police in the 1930’s. Lev Inzhir was the chief accountant for the Gulag. M.T. Gay headed the special secret service police department that conducted the purges of the 1930’s. In what came to be regarded as the “great Terror”, he supervised the mass arrests, trials, and executions of Stalin’s opponents. Two other Jewish secret policemen, A.A. Slutsky and Boris Berman, were in charge of Sviet terror and espionage abroad during the 1930’s. Jews were also prominent in the Red Army. In addition to Trotsky, prominent Jewish generals included Yona Yakir, who was a member of the Communist party central committee; Dmitri Schmidt, a civil war hero and commander of the Kiev area; and Yakob Kreiser, a hero of the defense of Moscow during the Second World War.
Another domain in which Jews were particularly visible was the Soviet cultural and political apparatus. Semyon Lozovsky was the deputy chief of the Soviet government’s information bureau and chief Soviet press spokesman during World War Two. Jews dominated the Soviet film industry, which Stalin viewed as an especially important propaganda instrument. Prominent Jews in the film industry included directors Sergei Eisenstein, Mikhail Romm, Mark Donsky, Leonid Lukov, and Yuli Reisman.
One important Soviet propaganda agency operated entirely by Jews, albeit under Stalin’s overall direction, was the Jewish AntiFascist Committee (JAC), established during the Second World War to propagandize on behalf of Soviet causes. Leading members of the JAC included the famous actor-director Solomon Mikhoels, writer Ilya Ehrenberg, violinist David Oistrakh, and film director Eisenstein. The JAC helped to mold a positive image of the Soviet Union among American and Western European intellectuals.
A third area i which Jews played a particularly noteworthy role was the governance of the Soviet Union’s Eastern European satellites after World War Two. Communists provided the Soviets with a useful leadership cadre in Czechoslovakia, Poland, East Germany, and Hungary. Many of these individulals had received training in Russia, survived the war years in the Soviet Union or with Soviet-sponsored partisan forces and, as a result, had strong ties to the USSR. A typical case was Hirsch Smolar, an important postwar Communist party leader. Smolar had been born in Poland, was trained in Moscow as a Communist party agitator, and sent to Poland in 1936 to organize underground party cells. ..
Czecoslovakia provides a notable example of the prominence of Jews in Eastern European regimes after World War Two. Fewer than twenty thousand Czech Jews, out of a prewar community of several hundred thousand, had survived the Nazi extermination camps. Despite these small numbers, however, Jews were a major force in the Czech Communist party. Within the government, Jews effectively ran the ministries in charge of foreign affairs, foreign trade, planning, and propaganda.
Similarly, in Hungary, Mathias Rakosi served as the head of the Communist party while General Peter Gabor commanded the secret police. In addition, Joseph Revai served as minister of culture and chief Communist party propagandist while other Jews headed the state planning office, the ministry controlling industry and commerce, and Radio Hungary. Similar situations prevailed in Romania, where from 1947 until 1952 Ana Pauker served as Communist party secretary and minister of foreign affairs, and in Poland and East Germany as well.
The role played by Jews in the governments of the Soviet satellites after World Watr Two is one reason that during the 1980’s and 1990’s, in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union, anti-Smitic sentiments were often voiced by nationalist forces in those countries…”
On the basis of the documented facts, then, Mr. Welch is brazenly prevaricating. There shall be many other remarkable quotationsas this discussion proceeds, with Mr. Welch ancd company frantically blowing smoke to cover up the truth. Hang on tight, you circumsized, lying SOB’s-I am going to take you apart.
…
on 3 April 2009
Travis, thank you for your comments. I have absolutely no illusions about my ability to reason with maniacs like hANOVER fIST (whose state of mind can best be gauged by consulting his website). And while I will not speak for others on the Counterknowledge site, my main aim is to ensure that visitors can see posts like mine, and read the crap produced by the deniers, and then conclude for themselves who is closer to the historical truth.
on 3 April 2009
I second Mr. Welch’s perspective.
Let the readers read the documented facts and then judge for themselves. The verdict is already a foregone conclusion.
on 3 April 2009
Regarding John’s “the other side started the insults” comment, I would like to disambiguate that I do not stand behind any ad hominem comments and have not made any - it is on that behalf that neither Mr. Welch nor anybody else speaks for me.
However I do endorse Mr. Welch’s above perspective. With a deficit of some 2.5 million people that disappeared following their deportation to supposedly benign places that Hanover and John still cannot verifiably explain, it is indeed abundantly clear to the reader.
on 3 April 2009
“I have absolutely no illusions about my ability to reason with maniacs like hANOVER fIST (whose state of mind can best be gauged by consulting his website)”
You couldn’t shine my shoes, you nitwit.
This is the least of my interests…but it doesn’t mean that I have to give it short shrift. I just love poking holes in your stupid theories.
on 3 April 2009
hanover and john thames
angelo has made a point you don’t hear much in mixed company, but I’d like to hear the reactions from other jew haters:
“I think it is a fact that the supposed “Holocaust” and the reparations involved has elevated the Jew to prominence throughout the word, not only on merit”
Do you think that’s right?
on 3 April 2009
Mr. Henderson is entitled to a response. Two and one-half million people did not simply “disappear”, as he wrongly supposes.
The supposedly exterminated Jews did not disappear. They retreated into the interior of the Soviet Union for reasons I have already explained. The Jews were the political elite of the Soviet union. They were also highly skilled technical workers badly needed in the arms factories east of the Ural Mountains. The Soviets had every reason to move them out of harm’s way before the Germans arrived. After the war, the Soviet Union deliberately undercounted the number of Jews in their domain by claiming two million when the real number was closer to four million. All this is admirably gone over in Walter Sanning’s book “The Dissolution Of Eastern European Jewry”. (I highly reccomend it.)
US Army reports of the time quoted in Professor Butz’s book speak of a veritable flood of Jews pouring through the Balkan countries after the war and from Poland into Germany, as many as three million. Without endorsing the precise numbers it is obvious that the post-war Jewish migration out of the USSR to other destinations, including Palestine, was much greater than orthodox historiography has let on. These Jews moved to many locations in North and South America camoflauged as other nationalities.
I trust this answers Mr. Henderson’s question.
on 3 April 2009
To answer Ron:
When I get a chance I will post my essay “The Moral Lie Behind The Historical Lie” which should answer the question.
However, for the nonce, the answer is yes. I believe it was Nahum Goldmann of the World Jewish Congress who stated that “since the Second World War Jews have been treated with kid gloves because of Auschwitz”. The state of Israel has certainly been able to cover up its barbarities against the Palestinians because of the Auschwitz myth. Indeed, although the Zionist movement to seize Palestine from the Arabs began in the 1880’s, it was the “gas chamber” lie which provided the camoflauge for the final takeover.
It is obvious that anyone who makes valid criticisms of Jewish behavior is immediately accused of planning another Holocaust. In the case of Israel and its indefensible behavior, the excuse is breaking down. But the argument is still in force when it comes to protecting other Jewish dirt. For instance, the ritual response “That’s what Adolf Hitler said!” whenever the subject of Jews and communism comes up is a standard dodge. As I have already demonstrated by quoting a reputable Jewish scholar, the charge was true. The fact that Hitler manipulated the charge for political purposes of his own does not get around the hard truth.
More later. Thanks for the question. It was a good one.
on 3 April 2009
Thanks Travis
I agree. You will never convince holocaust deniers that they are wrong and Deborah Lipstat’s comment that arguing with them only legitamises their view that they are engaging in a real dispute hits the nail squarely on the head.
So why is counterknowledge bothering, I wonder ?
on 3 April 2009
John thames
I have to confess, i do not really understand your argument. I quite like history and am reasonably well read, so perhaps you could educate me.
From what I know:
1. It is a historical fact that Hitler was a white supremacist and anti- semitic.
2. It is a historical fact that the Germans attempted the systematic genocide of the jews.
3. The Nazis themselves estimated that, by conservative estimate that they killed six million jews. Though Himmler belived that they killed much more.
I think that you are saying that the Nazis were deluded fools and liars. What is the basis for you contradicting the official Nazi view of how many jews were tortured, starved and killed?
Over to you. I look forward to your response.
on 3 April 2009
Ars - it’s sorta like watching a train wreck, you just can’t turn your head away.
john thames is a real life fan of hitler and the nazis. You know you shouldn’t watch, but you just can’t help staring at the dementia.
It’s fascinating. Take a peak at the youtube video of nassim haramein below. It’s fun - especially at work. Woldn’t it be great if nassim would post a comment?
on 3 April 2009
Lee:
Adolf Hitler was a white supremacist. Ron to the contrary, I am not an advocate of National Socialism. However, it is worth noting that Winston Churchill, in his pre-war days, made many compilmentary statements regarding Adolf Hitler. One , in particular, was that “one may dislike Herr Hitler’s system but still admire his patriotic achievment”.
As to the “documented fact” that the Nazis exterminated six million Jews, please go back and read my original post.
My thanks to Angelo for his comments. They are well taken. Contrary to what some of you think, I do not relexively put all Jews in the same category. I have documented the Jewish involvement in communism but Jews figured prominently in other movements as well . Most people today would not associate Jews with fascism. But, in actual fact, Italian Jews were major supporters of Benito Mussolini’s Italian fascist regime. Marshall Badoglio was of part Jewish extraction. The Jew, Olivetti, sat on the Italian Supreme Court. There were even Jews on the Fascist Grand Council. Mussolini only resorted to anti-semitism in 1938 on Hitler’s ill-advised urging. Everyone has heard of Gabriele D’annunzio, the poet and revolutionary and Giovanni Gentile as advisors to Mussolini. But how many know of Margharita Sarfiata, the Italian socialist Jewess who was one of Mussolini’s long time intellectual mentors? How many know that Adolf Hitler incorporated about 150,000 part-Jewish German soldiers into the Wehrmacht as “Honorary Aryans”? (Consult “Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers”, University of Kansas press, for confirmation.) Hitler himself made a number of exceptions for Jews he trusted and respected. Erhard Milch, the half-Jewish second-in-command to Herman Goering as head of the Lutwaffe was one such. Reinhard Heydrich, the head of rump Czechoslovakia, was allegedly the son of a Jewish actor. Herman Goering had a half-Jewish half-brother, Albert Goering, who was a vocal critic of the Nazi regime. In the arts, Hitler made some exceptions for Jews. One was for the soprano Margarete Slezak, daughter of the part-Jewish Austrian tenor, Leo Slezak, whose career Hitler personally sponsored at the Berlin State Opera. One of Hitler’s favorite later-life composers, Franz Lehar, was married to Lizzie Leon, the daughter of the Viennese Jewish librettist, Victor Leon. Hitler looked the other way. (Consult “Hitler and the Power of Aesthetics” by Frederic Spotts, for a truly remarkable analysis of Hitler’s little known artistic and architectural abilities. There are many photos and drawings of Hitler’s very gifted and, in many cases outstanding, designs.)
Today, everyone seems to think that Jews are universal supporters of the state of Israel. And yet, when the British Empire first issued its famous Balfour Declaration sponsoring a Jewish “national home” in Palestine, many wise English Jews objected to the declaration as tainting the Jews with “dual loyalty”. Among the names were Lucien Wolfe, Edwin Montagu, the governor of India and one of the most vehement opponents of the declaration, Moses Montefiore and many, many others.
As Angelo notes, I do know something of history. I realize the great evil that is being done by the Holocaust Hoax. I also realize the danger into which Jews are throwing themselves by continuing to support a crumbling legend. If Jews continue to support the legend, the anti-semitic demagogues shall have a field day when the truth finally comes out. The argument shall be brutal and straight forward. “The Jews have collaborasted with their parents in covering up the truth. They are accessories-after-the-fact. They have destroyed the careers of those who exposed the truth. They have criminalized the truth. They are all in it together. No distinctions can, or should, be made among them.”
It is an ugly argument but a valid one. The wiser course of action, by far, would be for the Jews to come clean. It would be messy because of the enormous resentments and swindles involved, but it would be doable. To continue the cover up, to continue down the path of folly, can only lead to a real extermination replacing the fake one.
on 3 April 2009
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Dodgson-Ukraine.html
Here is a very pointed essay on the hypocrisy of Jews who accuse others of mass murder while ignoring their own.
on 4 April 2009
John Thames
I have tried to read your post, but it seems nonsensical to me and I do not understand what you are trying to say. For example:
“There is not a single German document that speaks of a program to exterminate the Jews. All the German documents speak of expulsion and deportation as a solution to the “Jewish problem”.
Well maybe not a “document”, but here is a recording of Himmler refering to the :
“extermination of the Jewish people”
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/himmler-heinrich/posen/oct-04-43/
Plus I think you are getting confused. Are you saying that Hitler never wrote down his desire to exterminate the jews (lots of “Nazis” expressed their desire to kill the jews?)
Whether Hitler wrote down his intent is largely irrelevant. I’m sure you can see that, for example, murderers do not get convicted on writing down their intent to commit a crime, but rather evidence as to whether they comitted a crime. And it is a documented historical fact that the Nazis tried to exterminate the European jews, through stavation, shooting and gassing,
As Winston Churchill noted:
‘There is no doubt this is the most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world, and it has been done by scientific machinery by nominally civilised men in the name of a great State and one of the leading races of Europe. ”
It is not possible to know exactly how many jews were exterminated by the Nazis, just as we do not know exactly how many people were killed in WW2 as a whole. The original figure of six million jews came from the testimony of leading Nazis at Nuremberg:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Hoettl
So, if you could stick to answering the question, rather than rambling like a mad man, what (good) evidence have you that the Nazis own estimates were wrong? Also, if you believe it is wrong, what do you believe the figure to be?
on 4 April 2009
Mr. Welch accuses me of confusing communism and socialism. Not at all. I am well aware of all the distinctions among the political left to which he refers. Upon one such distinction I am particularly well versed. That is the infighting among the communist and zionist factions to which I earlier referred. To show one more example of those research abilities to which Ron refers, I shall now quote from an oscure but very informative volume entitled: “The Formative Years Of The Israeli Labour Party: The Organization Of Power, 1919-1930″ by Yonathan Shapiro. From Chapter Six, “The Reorganization Of Adhut Ha’ ‘Avoda”, p.160.
“Ben-Gurion wished to unite all Zionist parties in the Histadrut. He, therefore, approached the Gdud as well as Hapoel Hatzair. He met with the Gdud leaders and asked them to join Ahdut Ha’avodah and help build a Jewish socialist society-kibbutzim and other organizations governed by the laborers. They must make up their minds, he told them, as to whether they were for socialist-Zionism or for Moscow…
There are several explanations for this ideological shift. It was related, in part, to the arrival of immigrants who had left Soviet Russia and Poland since 1922. In their former countries, many of them had been in sympathy with the Russian Revolution and with communism-and, at the same time, had belonged to various nationalist and Zionist groups. They had not seen any contradiction between the communist and national ideals. But these dual affiliations and sympathies were no longer possible after 1922; in that year, the Soviet regime (and the communist parties in other countries affiliated with the Bolsheviks) became strongly anti-Zionist. In Soviet Russia, Zionist activities became illegal. This forced many Jews to choose between communism and Jewish nationalism, partcularly Zionism.”
So there we have it , from a reputable Jewish scholar, that many Jews from Russia were both communists and zionists. This was also the perception of the English military and officials in Palestine in the early 1920’s who regarded the Jewish immigrants to Palestine as communists from Russia with bolshevik ideals. Interested readers may consult Segio Minerbi’s excellent study, “Zionism and the Vatican”, for confirmation. Father Luigi Barlassina in Palestine was always sending reports back to the Vatican accusing the Zionist settlers of being Jewish bolsheviks. If readers consult professor Michael Cohen’s book on “Churchill and the Jews”, they will find that the early 1920’s Colonial Secretary, Winston Churchill, also believed that many of the Jews involved in the 1920 and 1921 riots in Palestine were Jewish communists who should be expelled from the Holy Land. (And did not Sir Winston write that infamous newspaper article in the Illustrated Sunday Herald for February 8, 1920, entitled “Zionism Versus Bolshevism: A Struggle For The Soul Of The Jewish People”?)
If one goes back to the pre-revolutionary days in Czarist Russia alluded to by Mr. Welch, there were a number of parties that synthesized Bolshevism and Zionism. One was Poale-Zion, which the communists allowed to operate until 1928 when they shut it down. It continued to operate in adjoining Poland, England and the United States. Another was the Zionist-Socialist Workers Party, which merged with the SERP or Jewish Socialists Workers Party of Chaim Zhitlovsky in May 1917 to form the United Jewish Workers Party. All these facts are contained in the reference works already cited.
Holocaust Deniers are not the Arkansas hillbilly ignoramuses that media propaganda would paint them. They know that the picture of the world painted on the Zionist controlled TV screen is fundamentally false. They know that staged courtroom verdicts do not sustain a historical legend of “six million”. They also know that some very ugly facts ae being buried on other subjects. They can note the disparity between what they read in university texts and what they are told by the media and form appropriate conclusions. A vast historical reformation is underway behind the “Iron Curtain” of media suppression. Word is getting out behind the scenes-and some day it will have consequences.
“
on 4 April 2009
Lee:
The Holocaust dogmatists take two simultaneously contradictory positions.
(1) They argue that the Nazis were conducting a “super secret”extermination program;
(2) They simultaneously try to prove this “super secret” extermination by quoting loud-mouthed Nazis yapping in public about how they were going to get the Jews to the last man.
Does not the obvious problem occur to you?
If you will take the trouble to read Butz’s “Hoax of the Twentieth Century” rather than debating me, you will understand the point he makes about trial strategy. All the defendants knew that the court was committed, a priori, to the proposition that there had been a Jewish extermination. Therefore, the only hope of acquital was to argue, “Yes, there was an extermination, but he did it, not me!” Such testimony is valueless. It is like telling our Supreme Court: “Sexual harassment is bullshit. These are the same twats who were running around in micro-mini-skirts and screwing everbody in the office in the 1960’s before they ever heard of the concept.” Logically very sound, but it is no way to win a case before a rigged tribunal.
The issue is not what some defendant committing perjury said at Nuremberg; the issue is what war time evidence is there for the extermination? Very little. Let us take Himmler’s Posen speech as an example. Let us suppose that it really is genuine (I have my doubts.) Here we have a man conducting that “super secret” extermination who “keeps the secret” by recording a speech documenting that supposed extermination. (Brilliant, Heinrich, Brilliant!) He then allows the speech to fall into the hands of his hated political rival, Rosenberg, who then preserves it so that the prosecution can use it at Nuremberg. Meanwhile, Himmler dies a very convenient “suicide” so that he cannot testify to what was really going on in Russia and the real hard evidence, Himmler’s diaries, falls into Israeli hands three years after war’s end and have not been seen since.
Is there no limit to your credulity, Lee?
on 4 April 2009
@Ars
Nobody is trying to debate the deniers - that is never the context in which I post at least.
The Holocaust Controversies blog has done quite a lot of work pointing out how incredibly unreliable/dishonest Sanning is, and what a load o’ crap his book is.
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/search/label/Sanning%20Series
on 4 April 2009
John Thames
I was rather hoping you would stop rambling like a madman. Unfortunately not.
“If you will take the trouble to read Butz’s “Hoax of the Twentieth Century” rather than debating me,”
I suspected as much, you cannot debate or answer any direct questions, because you know you are lying (only to your self). To ignore so much of documented history which is unequivocal in its proof that the Nazis tried to systematically exterminate European jewry, means that I can only conclude that you are motivated by hatred of the jews.
You are trying (rather badly) to deflect from the question I asked of you.
The sequence of historical events are this:
1. The Nazis decide to exterminate European jewry through the Final Solution. I have provided documentary evidence of this in Himmlers speech. You doubt the voracity of this speech through some bizarre and unconvincing logic. But as I noted earlier, this is not the main point that proves that the Nazis performed the Final Solution
2. The Nazis then carry out the Holocaust. It is one of the most documented events in history. Senior Nazis themselves confess to it and they estimate that that they killed six million jews. I notice that this is the question you want to avoid
You think you are clever, but you are not. Unfortunately for you, you need people driven by hatred to believe you. I find it very funny that you call me credulous?
Well fortunately, for my views on the Holocaust I am in the company of a great many great people, including Winston Churchill
1. “There is no doubt this is the most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world, and it has been done by scientific machinery by nominally civilised men in the name of a great State and one of the leading races of Europe ”
Let me see, would I rather be in the company of Winston Churchill, or John Thales……hmmmmm tough one…..but on balance I would not want to be in your company.
You would be funny if you were not so sad. A kind of anti- semitic Vicky Pollard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8s1C_8qg-e0
on 4 April 2009
After reading the various comments on this post, it is clear to me that what is required is a clear exposition of the revisionist position . . . There is no moon.
Any thinking person, untainted by the biases imposed on us by the jewish controlled media, will have no choice but to reach the same conclusion I did..
Since the end of World War II, how many billions of dollars have been poured into this hoax? And who profited - jewish so-called “scientists” who “gained prominence not through merit.”
And just how much of this money have Jews paid so-called “eyewitnesses” - some of them Jews themselves (or astronauts and psuedo-astronomers looking to cash in fame)?
Considering the age and poor quality of the so-called “evidence” of physical rocks, documents, pictures and films that the public was allowed to see , how do we really know that they were real?
Shouldn’t we be suspicious of the unanimity of astronomers, when universities are supposed to be forums for open debate of controversial issues? Could you imagine a university granting a degree to an educated, hard working revisionist who argued the moon doesn’t exist? At jewish controlled universities? Hah.
What evidence do I have that the moon doesn’t exist? Since it is impossible to prove a negative, the mere fact that I have demonstrated that the moon hoax has NO reliable eyewitnesses, NO reliable documents, and, above all, NO reliable physical evidence whatsoever, should be enough to discredit this clever hoax - and the jewish profiteers supporting it.
on 4 April 2009
Thanks for acknowledging my comments.
For “Ron” re.:
“I find it odd that you think it’s wrong to say JT is anti-Jew in light of his repeated anti-jewish insults.”
From reading this thread it looks to me like he is responding to insults. While it’s not right, I would do the same. You guys started in on him, unless there is something I am missing, or missed, here.
“The reason …I’m underwhelmed with JT’s ‘carefully expressed facts that are sourced’ is because the sources he cuts and pastes from have been exposed as written by frauds and constitutes fraudulent historiography. In fact, his sources have been exposed to the harsh light of the adversary system and have been found wanting.”
What dos this mean? Isn’t this the point? You say they are (his sources) exposed as frauds, he says the traditional view is a fraud. He backs up his writing with “cut and pastes” or as I would say, citations, and you back yours up with the traditional history he is arguing against. Doesn’t seem correct or even logically valid for you to refute an argument against the traditional view of the holocaust with the traditional view of the holocaust.
“And yet, these same sources are routinely dragged out of the garbage bin, dusted off, and presented as startling new unimpeachable evidence on racist websites.”
Again, I am no racist, but I am not overly prejudiced towards my heritage either. I want to know the truth about my heritage, not just what some have said about my heritage. Maybe you should consider just the slight possibility what maybe, just maybe there is another possible truth about the history of the treatment of Jews by Nazis. Love, no surely, but do you not think it a possibility that just maybe there was a little exaggeration?
“At least JT has done some research, and isn’t just spewing his hatred.” I hope that this is one of those ‘truth revealing visions’ you warned of.”
Did I warn against that? I think what I said was “If that be insight at all.” Truth be told, I am open to visions and revelations. Skeptical, but open to the possibility. As I am to the possibility that we have been given a half-assed explanation of a very serious subject in human history.
More bothersome to me is that you would think the Jews today—or for that matter all us “civilized” folks aware of at least some of the atrocities us men have committed against other men—would be the most peaceful people on Earth. What I see is more hatred, blind in that Muslims hate Jews, Jews hate Muslims, Christians condemn everyone but themselves, and supposed scientists and historians spew unverifiable nonsense, while they all hurl the infidel into the waste bin. A good measure of the sacred books of all these religions are in fact stricken with the same partisan, biased, axe-to-grind chauvinism of the particular time or interpreter.
No, rather than peaceful because we see what happens when a nation really commits to warring, we rather expand our arms, our spectrum of killing, our hostility towards those unlike us, for whatever reason. I love fire, even anger, even a good beating for someone who deserves it. I draw the line at killing for no reason, because it is my daddy’s enemy, or because it is your enemy, or because I am told to do so by my capitan. In other words, the real lessons we should have learned from the events of WW II—like what the human being is capable of doing under the directions of men who never get their own hands bloodied, like what one charismatic man can convince a whole nation of, how people treat other human beings as dogs simply because of their skin color, religion, or geography—we have not learned at all.
Let me also repeat this admittedly provocative comment for you Ron, because I have a suspicion that unless someone addresses this you will not yourself:
“angelo has made a point you don’t hear much in mixed company, but I’d like to hear the reactions from other jew haters:
‘I think it is a fact that the supposed “Holocaust” and the reparations involved has elevated the Jew to prominence throughout the word, not only on merit’.”
I am not a “Jew hater” and I resent being labeled this way. That you assume this, and expect me to reply that you are a jackass, only shows that not only do you not read correctly, but you ask for trouble, by parroting old opinions, and trying to start controversy, divide the discussion into factions, rather than use the associations to better come upon truth. As for the statement, I stand by it.
The consequences of war are never good, yet we continue in the practice, in fact lean towards it rather than diplomacy, in the nation, and in ourselves, proving, as the metaphysicians say, as above so below.
How many Jews were killed by the Nazis, and in what way? To me, this question is still debatable. Few people anymore believe the “6 million” number, a few more but still few even think there were that many Jews killed total. The numbers keep changing. The sites of the atrocities keep changing. Understand that for me one person killed is too many. But the unsure nature of much of this “history” is disturbing. why not
5, 567, 892? Why 6 million? What is the real number, and is this alone not enough to consider the matter not quite yet closed?
Again, I think a lot of the hostility and discrepancies will fade away if we understand that retelling the story being debated is condescending, and no more on point than telling a child not to do something because you say so.
on 4 April 2009
Hi William
Despite what you say about your own post not wanting to debate the deniers, the fact that there are over 90 responses to this post (so far) suggests that you might have created a debate anyway.
Yes, there is a lot of crap being spouted by the deniers both here and elsewhere so why give them a voice on CK ? - unless you want a debate of course!
on 4 April 2009
The efforts of my opponents to counter my arguments really are rather pathetic. I am constantly accused of mindless Jew hatred, a charge I thoroughly debunked. Then I am confronted with absurd analogies, such as “Where is the evidence that the moon really exists?” I am accused of failing to respond when in fact it is my critics who have nothing to say to the points which I raise.
I note that Mr. Welch and Mr.Henderson, the more superficially knowledgeable and rational of my critics, now remain silent. They have decided that discretion is the better part of courage. It is Ron and Lee who continue the inanities.
on 4 April 2009
Angelo and JT you may not like being confronted with your overt prejudice and discrimination, but I’ve quoted extensively from both of you (mostly alex) and your blatantly racist, xenophobic and especially jewish prejudice is plain to the reader.
What I like about reading these posts is how the hatred and prejudices of the counterknowledge clowns like Atlanteans, nazis, crystaliners, 911 truthers UFOers etc is exposed after even the most mild of pressure.
What I meant by Jt’s sources being frauds is that there have already been court proceedings, and under the harsh light of the adversarial process, JT’s sources have been exposed as liars, frauds, unscholarly and even anti-historical in practice and result.
on 4 April 2009
Ars
as a P.S. it was never a debate, there is no debate about historical or scientific fact like the moon or the holocaust’s existence.
This is an exercise in exposing the raionale behind people who don’t want to face historical or scientific fact: what their motivations are, political leanings, and inner hatreds and prejudice. Sometimes, with a prolific poster like jt, you can almost feel the hatred.
I think this is a good forum for that exposure - and maybe to correct one or two glaring facts or ommissions - but not debate, never for debate.
And hey we may break the 100 mark!
on 4 April 2009
Thanks Ron
You raise a good point - what exactly is the rationale behind the arguments offered by the deniers on this site ?
People who are motivated by hatred are hardly ever rational.
This post takes it over the 100 - so shouldn’t we get a telegram from the Queen or something ?
on 4 April 2009
Overt prejudice and discrimination, Ron, on my part?
Sorry you understand me this way. No doubt we cannot, at least I cannot, refute a charge, when a pseudo-psychologist implies I am “in denial.” Once you are in denial, baby, you are in denial. You are an alcoholic whether you admit it or not, an obsessive-compulsive, a Jew-hater whether you ‘fess up or not, a Commie or Nazi whether you know it or not.
This type of reasoning, by the way, is the product of arguably Jewish psychology, and it is pure baloney. Suffice it to say, if I love to drink, or have habits or aversions, or “hate Jews” (how silly is such a thing! to make all Jews “bad Jews”! All Muslims “bad Muslims”! Ha!), I would have absolutely no problem admitting so to you or anyone else.
Let me then just repeat the perspective. Almost all of what you think you know is wrong, especially when it comes to your “unquestioned fact” and “scientific facts.” “Question authority” doesn’t mean argue with the cops; it means question everything, like Descartes did or tried to do, like every seeker of (counter?) knowledge in my opinion ought to do. Speaking of the moon “dance” you did, are you sure that those things we call “other galaxies” are really other galaxies? Are you sure the sun itself, inside the flames, is even hot? Of what is “space” composed? Is there no ether? What made the flag wave when we landed on the Moon? Wouldn’t busting holes in the atmosphere with rockets, spacecraft, and satellites, have an adverse effect on the environment? Buy global warming?…Which “science” about it? Pluto still a planet to you? How would/do you know? Do you know the theory behind how scientists calculate long distances? Do you believe them?
Parroting what you are told without criticism is the mentality of a slave to fashion. This may be the way to win Jeopardy, but it isn’t the way to Truth, about the Nazi treatment of the Jews, or anything else. But don’t believe me, dig in to some of the basic things you think you know. Or even better, just go ahead and trust your doctor, believe your science, read singular versions of historical events, trust your rabbi, deacon, or priest, wave that flag, do what they say, hate who you are supposed to, whatever is the accepted thing to do…just like the Nazi soldiers and civilians under the authority of Hitler. It was to him “fact” that Jews are inferior. Yet another fact faded into fallacy, no?
It’s funny the dogmatic slumbers some of us can fade into in these “so advanced” omniscient days.
on 4 April 2009
I have but a few things to add to Angelo’s cogent comments.
Instead of assuming that revisionists “hate” Jews, as does Ron, the other debaters would better be advised to rationally consider the arguments. This they refuse to do. Ron asserts, again and again, that revisionist arguments have been “disproven” in adversary proceedings. Ron seems not to understand the concept of a “kangaroo court”. Would he argue, for instance, as did many enlightened “liberal thinkers” of the 1930’s, that Stalin’s purge trials “proved” the guilt of the defendants? Does Ron really think that courts in western countries are any less beholden to powers behind the scenes? Does he think that the Supreme Court of the United States is honestly interpreting the intent of the founding fathers, for instance? Has Ron ever read the book “Doenitz At Nuremberg” where innumerable criticisms of the Nuremberg kangaroo court were made by jurists the world over? Has he he ever heard of Justice Rahobinade Pal’s classic definition of a war crime as “an act perpetrated by both sides in a war, which can safely be blamed on the losing side without undue embarrasment to the winning side”? Has it occurred to Ron that there is big political capital tied up in this hoax of “six million” murdered Jews and that letting the truth come out might undermine the entire post-WW2 political order? Is Ron really so dense that these obvious considerations do not occur to him?
As to the charge that anti-semites “hate” Jews for no reason, Ron might try reading the works of professor Kevin MacDonald. Jews have done a lot of “hating” of the non-Jewish world. Anyone who reads the Talmudic scriptures quickly realizes this. The treatment of the Palestinians might qualify as “hate”. Ditto with the behaviour of the Jewish bolsheviks in Russia. And, of course, there may be a great deal of very justifiable “hatred” when this hoax of “six million” is finally exposed.
Ron is hiding behind slogans and ducking the real issues. Perhaps he has no better arguments to offer.
on 4 April 2009
Angelo
Nobody has ever said that the figure of six million jews was entirely accurate. The truth is that nobody knows entirely, like nobody knows (excluding jews) the true number of people that died in World War 2.
The initial estimate of 6 million was based upon the testimony of leading Nazis. All rational data analysis agrees that the figure was between 5 and 6 million. Himmler thought it was 7 million.
By the way, since you seem so interested in figures, could you please tell me how many russians (excluding the jews) were killed by the Germans? What is your exact estimate 20 million? 19.9 million, 23.2 million or 30 million? 50 million? 49.365 Thousand? 24.2 million? 32.3 million?
If your estimate is inaccurate….because it is not possible to be accurate to determine how many russians were killed by the Nazis, records were not kept to the same degree they are now. Are you going to suggest that the Nazis did not attack Russia in a war of anhialation between the Aryans and the slavs ?
on 4 April 2009
John Thales
I am still waiting for your answer to my question? Or do you concede that you are incapable of debate, because you are ( a long winded) liar?
With absolutely no facts to back up your insane ramblings?
I await in expectation.
on 4 April 2009
John Thames,
I never said revisionists hate jews, I said you and angelo do. I try not to discriminate against people based upon their religion, race, or ethnicity - or even, as in this case - based upon their political views, such as, uhm, admiration for Adolph Hitler.
My views came solely from yours and Angelo’s output. Call it my sinister, evil “Jewish Psychology”
I probably learned it while eating gentile blood in my matza while reading the talmud at a meeting of the zionist elders on how to make more money from those german dupes to buy arms to brutalize impoverished arabs while at the Auschwitz swimming pool which is conveniently located next to the theatre and maternity ward.
on 5 April 2009
Ron and Lee become more inane by the minute.
Is Ron telling us:
(1) that Jews have not collected a lot of money from the Germans or a non-existent extermination?
(2) that Israel does not brutalize the Arabs?
(3) that professor Ariel Toaff is wrong about the Saint Simon of Trent case?
I have no idea what Ron s saying, other than impressing himself with his own sarcasm.
As to Lee, what is the question? There is no evidence for an extermination of the Jews, other than the forged documents and perjured testimonies of a kangaroo court. Let us think about what Lee is telling us. The Germans supposedly exterminated the Jews but no one can tell us, based on povable orders and documents the following:
(1) who ordered the extermination and when;
(2) Who chose a technolgically absurd method like Zyklon B “gassing”;
(3) Who prepared the budget for the extermination;
(4) Who transmitted the orders (never found) to the soldiers in the field;
(5) Wh decided the time tables of the executions and which Jews from which countries would be liquidated (as opposed to which Jews would be allowed to live):
(6) Who coordinated the extermination between all the various departments that would have been involved and where are the voluminous orders documenting same?
All that we are told is that Hitler issued “oral orders” (never proven) and that the extermination took place through its own accord. That is remarkable, given that the meticulous Germans kept voluminous records of everything they did. In addition, Lee does not explain why all the German records of the Auschwitz camp jibe with what the forensic examinations of the “gas chamber” buildings show. Nor can Lee explain why so many Jews were alive after the war playing commissar in Eastern Europe or emigrating to Palestine and North and South America.
Conclusion:
Lee simply does not know what he is talking about.
on 5 April 2009
Deniers are not being persecuted because of a Jewish conspiracy to confirm orthodoxy. They are blatantly WRONG and deny evidence. If the Holocaust didn’t happen, then:
1. Why do you hide behind your right to free speech to support a regime that condemns it?
2. Why would IG Farben need so many workers if it were a chemical facility which requires far fewer employees than a factory assembling goods?
3. Why do you blame everything on Jews hand Jewish this and that?
4. What about 3 million Catholic Poles and Orthodox Russians that disappeared? Homosexuals? Roma? The mentally ill?
5.Why do you deny what eyewitnesses confirm?
6. Why are the people who were “deported” never accounted for, or seen, or heard from again?
Also, as was perviously noted, the 4.4 million figure at Auschwitz was Communist propaganda engineered to provoke shock and awe, as well as to serve the purposes of absorbing the casualties for their own murders, and makink it look as if their regime was less violent than the Nazi regime. Deniers are exactly that, and are intellectually dishonest to boot.
on 5 April 2009
Lee:
You are a fool.
(1) I do not now, nor ever did, support National Socialism as a system.
(2)
Where do you get the idea that I.G. Farben needed fewer workers? In case you do not know it, Auschwitz had 38 satellite camps. Many war time goods were made there. Synthetic rubber, coal distilled from petroleum, etc.
(3) Where did I say that Jews were to blame for everything in the world? I blamed them for communism, which is provably true.
(4) What about Catholic Poles, dead Russians, etc. Millions of prople were killed in WW2. Six million in “gas chambers” are not among them.
(5) Never heard from again? What, once more, are you talking about? For decades one Jew after another has miraculously “survived”. It happens every week. As the little Jewish lady says in Norman Finkelstein’s book “The Holocaust Industry”. “Who did Hitler kill, anyway?”
(6) Eyewitnesses. Great. It is like a man “denying” that he’s the father when the DNA evidence says he is. Eyewitnesses testifying to “facts” refuted by the camp records and the forensic tests. Very impressive.
on 5 April 2009
Marc:
I should have addressed the response to you.
You are no brighter than Lee. It is nice that you can recognize communist propaganda. Too bad that you cannot recognize that the entire Holocaust story is basically “Made In Russia”, to quote the title of Carlos Whitlock Porter’s book.
on 5 April 2009
ron mewled:
“Angelo and JT you may not like being confronted with your overt prejudice and discrimination, but I’ve quoted extensively from both of you (mostly alex) and your blatantly racist, xenophobic and especially jewish prejudice is plain to the reader.
What I like about reading these posts is how the hatred and prejudices of the counterknowledge clowns like Atlanteans, nazis, crystaliners, 911 truthers UFOers etc is exposed after even the most mild of pressure.”
WTF is this bunch of hooey supposed to mean?
Atlanteans…as far as I know, they exist in Marvel Comics as a race called homo mermanus…Prince Namor McKenzie is the ruler of the seven seas…but I haven’t any idea why this would be mentioned on this page;
Nazis - how about ASHKEnazis? I maintain that the reason Hitler was demonized was because he was outlawing usury - remember “Judea Declares War On Germany”?;
Crystaliners - I did a Google search for this, since I’ve not EVER heard of this crap…you’re gonna have to put up or shut up, doop;
9/11 Truthers - I absolutely confess to be one of this population, though I might say that I am at the forefront, being sited just across the water from the aforementioned event, having GIGABYTES of data and research at hand, and having a modicum of understanding of basic physics and chemistry (and those aren’t my strong sciences!), and, most of all, having COMMON SENSE - the common sense to know that BUILDINGS DO NOT DISINTEGRATE REGARDLESS OF AIRPLANE IMPACTS AND/OR FIRES THAT CANNOT MELT THE SKELETONS/SUBSTRUCTURES OF SAID BUILDINGS…not even getting into why the Salomon Brothers building collapsed when NOTHING struck it…Barry Jennings confirmed this as such. You idiots are in way over your heads in trying to match wits with me on this…it’s like an armless Mike Tyson trying to match Alec Baldwin playing RISK…all he can do, like you schmendricks, is mutter constantly, “I’m gonna eat your children!”
I’m not even going to dignify your reference to UFOers with a response. So stupid.
John…Angelo…welcome to the “Sharing A Brain Cell” Club.
These idiots drone on and on about trial judgments…you’d think they’ve never heard of, nor considered the concept of “kangaroo courts” or “foregone conclusions”.
This reminds me of the definition of INSANITY - do the same thing over and over again, yet expecting a different result.
Do you nitwits think that you’ll keep repeated your retarded mantras until you’ve lulled us into some hypnotic state, and we’ll all come around to your way of (non)thinking?
NOT
GONNA
HAPPEN
on 5 April 2009
Thanks to Hanover for his on -the mark -.comments.
I try to post comments that make sense. All I get from the other side is raving inanities. Perhaps it is time to reduce this entire issue to its essentials. All the real exterminations of history have been committed by simple methods of time tested simplicity and effectiveness. That means mass starvation, Ukrainian famine style, working hundreds of thousands to death in Bering Sea/White Canal projects, mass shootingings, etc. No one in his right mind (or even a clear thinking lunatic, for that matter) would choose a technologically complex, time wasting procedure like “gassing”. Moreover, all the real mass murders of history have been known as they were taking place. No one ever needed a kangaroo court with perjured testimonies to prove them. The whole world knew what “Uncle Joe” was doing, despite the attempts at cover up by Walter Duranty and the New York Times. There was never any secret about the millions killed by Mao Tse-Tung or the Khmer Rouge either. The kill totals at the abortion clinic are no secret, either.
Now, we are supposed to believe that the German Nazis with their superlative war machine strained to the limits fighting a war against multiple adversaries, simultaneously found the time and resources to exterminate a purported “six million” Jews that they did not even have under their control while fighting a losing war. Hitler really must have lived up to his super man image, after all. Just make the obvious comparisons with known mass murders and this concocted nonsense, gentlemen, and you shall immediately perceive the absurdities.
What this issue really boils down to is good, old “cognitive dissonance”. (Psych 101, I believe.) If the Holocaust is a hoax (it is), then we have the psychological equivalent of the earth turned on its axis. The oceans flood, entire continents sink, millions perish, all holy hell breaks out. So, too, with the political universe if an “axis” like the Holocaust is overturned. The hoax, by its very nature, raises terribly disturbing (for most people, not me) questions about the nature of reality. Did the English and the Americans fight the wrong enemy in WW2? Were the Germans right about some things? Is there a Jewish international force capable of enormous deception? Was the “gas chamber” hoax the precursor to the 09/11 incident staged by the same tribe? If the Jews are lying about the “gas chambers” are they lying about the infamous Protocols of Zion the same way? Is the state of Israel the temple of the New World Order? Did the Jews create communism as a failed first attempt at the enslavement of mankind? Is Zionism the successor-in-interest to communism? Is the ultimate objective, world government under Jewish auspices, still the same?
If one goes back to the Paris Peace Conference following the First World War (a subject upon which I have written extensively) one finds the visible beginnings of trends that are now approaching their culmination. Both Communism and Zionism emerged onto the world stage at this all-important pow-wow of world big-wigs. The Zionists got the Balfour Declaration translated into the British Mandate over Palestine; the League of Nations was created as the first effort at world government and the Jewish bolshevik revolution erupted in Russia to the applause of the world’s Jews. The Protocols of Zion made their first appearance in the western world and have steadily been fulfilled since. Today, the US government is effectively a vassal of Israel; the British Empire is gone, a scant thirty years after having made a “contract with Jewry” (David Lloyd George) to get the US into war on England’s side . It all appears to add up.
The political implications of the Holocaust Hoax are major league. That is the reason for the”denial laws”, the career destruction and all the rest of it. The stakes are for all the marbles. The hysteria over the issue is grounded upon fear of the consequences if the truth ever gets out. The truth is getting out and there is no way around it. Pandora’s Box has been opened-and the “gathering storm” shall soon be upon us.
on 5 April 2009
I applaud john thames for rising above the false correlation arguments the other side (read: jews and jew lovers) constantly engage in (sipped a few too many martinis at the auswchitz pool you “other side”?)
If one goes back to the (1919) Paris Peace Conference (a subject upon which I ignored extensively) one finds the visible beginnings of trends that are now approaching their culmination (Barack Obama is president and barack means lightening . . . in Hebrew no less. Coincidence? Naive fools).
Both Communism and Zionism emerged onto the world stage at this all-important pow-wow of world big-wigs (think about it Marx wrote his manifesto only 70 years earlier and Zio-nazism 29 years before. Coincidence? Twice in 2 paragraphs? Hah!)
The Zionists got the Balfour Declaration (2 years before Vesailles using a worm hole) translated (into Hebrew probably) into the British Mandate over Palestine; the League of Nations was created as the first effort at world government (which would’ve lasted forever if it weren’t for those meddling kids) and the Jewish bolshevik revolution erupted in Russia to the applause of the world’s Jews (except for those capitalist money grubbing jews who we all know own Wall Street. And a scant 93 years later we get BERNIE MADOFF A JEW!!!).
The Protocols of Zion (translated into Russian a scant 16 years before the paris peace talks - from French no less which is like Hebrew only different) made their first appearance in the western world and have steadily been fulfilled since (can anyone say “Transfats”?).
Today, the US government is effectively a vassal of Israel (trying to get our oil which is why we have to invade iraq, iran, somalia, and uhm Kosovo and uh Haiti);
The British Empire is gone (Aztec and Mayan too Columbus was a Jew ( I’ve learned from a reliable source: my friend who has a GED) a scant thirty years after having made a “contract with Jewry.”
(I know a guy, who made a contract with this Jew once, and lost his car keys that night - little jew key elves!)
It all appears to add up.
And now we have microsoft Windows (a creation of that jew Ballmer and his puppet Bill Gates) in every home, hut and hovel in the world like some picture of the Dear Leader (A communist Jew (he had to be jewish he’s too controlling even in death)).
Pandora’s Box has been opened-and the “gathering storm” shall soon be upon us:
Windows 7 beta version has shipped.
on 5 April 2009
I very nearly desisted from posting on this site because of the crude, snide and ignorant comments. I will not waste time with people whose brains are in their viscera… I have thirty years’ experience in Psychological Warfare, fighting against experts, and most of the derogatory folk here don’t even come close…
As logician Alfred Tarski points out in his Correspondence Theory of Truth, utilizing a metalanguage, the statement ‘the sky is blue’ is true if — and only if — the sky is, in fact, blue.
I refuse to use the term “Holocoaust”, which is derived from the word for “Burnt Offering.” This seems to me to be misleading and inaccurate. I use the Hebrew word “Shoah”, meaning “Catastrophe.”
My support of Israel (with all her faults) is based upon Israel being a beleagured outpost of Western Civilization. I work for an Israeel/Palestine where people live together in a state of cooperative individualism (not methodological collectivism, as now). I have good reason to accept that a catastrophe did befall the people of Europe, including Jewish people. There’s no denying that.
There’s no denying that the Nazis made two anti-Jewish films in their time. There is similarly no denying that over 550 fims have been made which stereotype Germans negatively. No-one seems to care much about this. As an opponent of collectivist hatreds, I do object, strongly.
There is no doubt that atrocity stories were widespread at the end of WWII. This always happens after wars. No one wanted to listen to refutations.
The massive downward revisions for Auschwitz deaths cannot be simply brushed aside. These are colossal discrepancies, and they have to be adequately explained.
I have no doubt whatsoever, looking at the world today, that minorities are often subjected to harrassment, oppression and murder.
In “SS: Himmler’s Black Order”, the author (a senior Scottish police officer) points out that the SS (who owned and controlled the profit-making camps) were exempt from all German State Laws. They could ‘get away with’ almost anything. Their 365 ‘work camps’, with their loathesome Ersatz-”Republican” workfare slogan “Work Makes You Free”, produced a huge part of Nazi wartime production.
The ceaseless appetite for cheap labour led to millions of ‘misfits’ being rounded up and incarcerated, and subjected to Forced Labour on meagre rations, with poor medical care.
The inmates were treated as expendable — SS property to be used up and gotten rid of.
Exactly the same basic mechanisms can be seen in the present-day U.S. prison system, where 2.3 million souls are incarcerated, mostly for victimless crimes or a non-conformist lifestyle. Their cheap work is used to make profits for US companies; and they are often “rented out” on day release to private employers for a few measly bucks a day. Medical care is often grossly deficient; and prisoners can be subjected to attacks by both prisoners and guards. Life expectancy averages fifty years of age. Altogether, 5.3 million souls are trapped in the aptly-named “Criminal Justice System.”
Young prisoners are frequently raped, abused, mistreated and victimized. Amnesty International relentlessly documents all this, as does the American Civil Liberties Union. I am a member of both organizations.
The U.S. prison population is overwhelmingly black, and of “breeding” age. A covert Negative Eugenics Programme is clearly in operation, really in plain sight if only one knows where to look. This fits the definition of Genocide according to the creator of the term, Raphael Lemkin.
“Beams” and “eyes” come to mind…
Tony Hollick
Rainbow Bridge Foundation
———— * * * * * ————
on 5 April 2009
in the future when that voice tells you to desist from posting listen to it.
on 5 April 2009
Tony:
Welcome to the discussion. Glad
to have you.
As to Ron, your attempt at satire was pathetic.
Now, as to the facts. Tony is quite right that the downward revision of the Auschwitz death numbers cannot simply be ignored. The same applies to the massive downward revisionon of the death rates of the camps in Germany and Austria, where even the Jews now admit that there were no “gas chambers”. The one point where I disagree with Tony is about the treatment of the prisoners in the German camps. It is true that the prisoners were used by the Germans as labor for the German war effort. But labor was not plentiful for the Germans-and therefore expendable, as Tony asserts. On the contrary, despite the huge numbers of Russian prisoners of war , Jews and others utilized by the Germans throughout the war, the Germans still faced massive labor shortages because of the huge manpower needs of fighting virtually the entire world. Thus, they had no incentive to kill off badly needed labor. Indeed, Heinrich Himmler issued a documented order that “the death rae in the camps must be reduced at all costs”. German medical care in the Auschwitz camp was remarkably good for war time conditions. The German doctors even delivered several thousand healthy Jewish babies during the war. (Yes, it is in the camp records. This was all documented at the two trials of Ernst Zundel in Canada.) The Germans had detailed records on how to punish prisoners. Camp guards were punished if they exceeded those regulations. These realities (totally at odds with the popular image of German policy) are also reflected in the camp records.
None of this is to deny that the Germans also executed prisoners for sabotage, refusing to work, etc. All that can also be verified. It should also be pointed out that many provable atrocities in the camps were committed in the latter stages of the war by the communist inmates (and there were many of those) who increasingly took control of the camps as German rule crumbled. Large numbers of Russia POW’s perished in Russia because of the scorched eath warfare of the Red Army. The Germans had no food with which to feed the prisoners because the Soviets had destroyed everything in their retreat. The Germans took the blame.
Although not germane to this discussion, Tony is also correct that the US prison system is a disgrace. Way too many people are being incarcerated for things which should not be “go to jail” offenses. As to the rapes committed in the prisons, it is almost always the blacks who are raping the white inmates, not vice-versa. (Tony and I have a little disagreement over the equality of black genes.) The bogus “War On Terror” (Zionist inspired, of course) has increased the artificial crime problem immesurably. One is always reading of some harmless kid being arrested for walking past a public building with a video camera. Tony might be interested to know that Amnesty International officially refuses to help “rascists” or “Holocaust Deniers”. Their solicitude is for those who agree for their leftist views, not for those who disagree with them. The American Civil Liberties Union was, of course, founded mainly by a bunch of Communists.
I certainly do not disagree with Civil Rights as a concept; I merely point out that the concept is always selectively employed. The advocates of “workers rights” in the 1930’s adamantly maintained that Stalin’s purge trials were genuine judicial proceedings. (One such was American ambassador Joseph Davies in his book “Mission To Moscow”) Pinko Civil Rights advocates were generally silent on the tortures inflicted on the Germans at Nuremberg. They said nothing as German officials and soldiers had their testicles stomped on and their faces rubbed in urine and faeces by Negro and Jewish guards in American uniforms.
Logical consistency is not t be found among human beings. Tony Hollick is far more rational than some of the people with whom I have been debating on this post. I see that Tony has finally caught up with my point that Israel has a leftist Labor-Socialist background. I rather doubt that English minds will induce the Arabs and Jews to live together in peace. The English had many oportunities to do that during the Mandate and failed miserably. I mention, incidentally, a book in which Tony, as an Englishman, may be interested. It is called “Zionism: The real Enemy of the Jews, Volume One : The False Messiah” by a former English TV producer. It appears to be quite cogent.
on 5 April 2009
As a jew I feel comfortable speaking on behalf of all jews worldwide with complete authorization from “the elders.”
(It’s the whole “Unimind” thing, I recommend Buzz Light Year, Disney, 2000 for details. It appears quite cogent!)
(as an aside, Disney is in a whole mess of trouble for letting our Unimind secret out. Just see their stock price, down to $19 from $29 a mere 9 yers after the movie was released - coincidence naive fools?)
“After reading the various comments on this post, it is clear to me that what is required is a clear exposition of the revisionist position.”:
Let’s put aside our petty, “little disagreement over the equality of black genes” (pfffft as if that needs debate!)
The bogus “War On Terror” (Zionist inspired, of course) (but of course!) has increased the artificial crime problem immesurably.
Now for the facts. Before the Paris Peace Conference and the Zionist War on Terror (that was precisely predicted at Versailles by a Jew no less) there was no artificial crime - it was all real.
But those cursed jews got rid of all the real crime and we’re left with nothing but artificial crimes!
Blacks are raping white inmates in prison while harmless kids are being arrested for walking past a public building with a video camera.
And the so-called “Pinko Civil Rights advocates” (we don’t need to guess their religion, or do I have to spell it out: j-o-o) are silent.
Folks, as none other than Nostradamus predicted in 1209 (which sounds eerily like 2009 I should add):
“In the city there will be drizzle, two people separated by events, a flower is picked. The cat will cough and when it does, Pandora’s Box will open and the “gathering storm” shall soon be upon us”
That my friends, is the revisionist position. Welcome to the discussion, glad to have ya!
on 5 April 2009
Ron thinks that he is practicing the technique of “reductio ad absurdum”. In reality, Ron is merely demonstrating that Ron is an idiot.
on 5 April 2009
Clearly john tames know the truth (and he’s the only one, save for the people who wrote the 2 precious books he relies upon to cut-and-paste ), and everyone else, including millions of eyewitnesses (Jewish or not) are lying. Cue the ad hominems in 3…2…1…
on 5 April 2009
Marc:
Everyone once “knew” that the earth is flat and that the sun revolved around the earth. Think of something intelligent to say
.
I have hundreds of reference volumes from which to cite. I just haven’t gotten around to it yet.
on 6 April 2009
Let’s begin this discussion with two quotes from Yuri Slezkine’s “The Jewish Century” (Princeton University Press).From p.199:
“The culmination of the story of Jewish commissars in Soviet lirerature was the famous history of the construction of the White Sea Canal, 1931-1934, The book was produced by thirty-six writers (including Gorky, M. Zoshchenko, Vs. Ivanov, Vera Inber, V. Kataev, A. Tolstoy, and V. Shklovsky). The canal was built by labor camp inmates (”reforged” therby into socially useful citizens). The construction was run by the secret police (the OGPU, the successor to theCheka). All the top leadership positions were held by Jews: G.G. Yagoda, the OGPU official in charge of the project; L.I. Kogan, the head of construction, M. D. Berman, the head of the White Sea Canal Labor Camp; Ya. D. Rappoport, the deputy head of construction and of the Gulag; and N.A. Frenkel, the head of work organization on the canal.
By 1934, when the OGPU was transformed into the NKVD, Jews “by nationality” constituted the single largest group among the “leading cadres” of the Soviet secret police (37 Jews, 30 Russians, 7 Latvians, 5 Ukrainians, 4 Poles, 3 Georgians, 3 Belorussians, 2 Germans, and 5 assorted others). Twelve key NKVD departments and directorates, including those in charge of the police (worker-peasant militia), labor camps (Gulag), counterintelligence, surveillance, and economic wrecking were headed by Jews, all but two of them immigrants from the former Pale of Settlement. The ;people’s commissar of internal affairs was Genrikh Grigorevich (Enokh Gershenovich ) Yagoda.” (p.221.)
As Marc can now see, I do not rely on a paltry two books to make my case. I can make the case from dozens of works. Now let us consider the implications of the facts. Jews, collectively, created the most brutal mass murder machine the world ever saw. They killed tens of millions. Jews around the world applauded and supported this enterprise. They covered up its true nature and misrepresented it as a land of “milk and honey”. Many of them in England and the United States returned to “Mother Russia” to become leading commissars in the land of “scientific socialism”. They agitated en masse to get the United States and England into war against Hitler’s Germany to save the Soviet Union from destruction.
Given these facts, the only legitimate charge against Adolf Hitler and the German Nazis for their anti-Jewish policies should be: “criminal leniency”. Jews have never been forced to pay for their crimes in the Soviet Union, any more than they are being punished today for their crimes against the Arabs of Palestine. Jews want eternal vengeance for the fake “six million”; they do not want eternal vengeance for their owmn immesurably greater crimes.
on 6 April 2009
http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Temp/Temp-TheMoralLieBehindTheHistoricalLie-BillGuru-RePortersNotebook.htm
Here is one of my superb essays laying the meaning of it all on the line.
on 6 April 2009
To continue showing why the Germans went after the Jews, I offer the following highly instructive quotation from the book, “After The Holocaust: Polish-Jewish Conflict In The Wake Of World War Two”by Marek Jan Chodakiewicz. From p. 215:
One of the most prominent leaders of the Jewish community in Poland, Stanislaw Krajewski, explains that
“The archetype of the Jews during the first ten years of the Polish People’s Republic was generally perceived as an agent of the secret political police. It is true that under (Boleslaw) Bierut and (Wladyslaw) Gomulka (prior to 1948) the key positions in the Ministry of State Security were held by Jews or persons of Jewish background. It is a fact which cannot be overlooked, little known in the West and seldom mentioned by the Jews in Poland. Both prefer to talk about Stalin’s anti-Semitism (the ‘doctor’s plot’, etc.) The machine of communist terror functioned in Poland in a manner similar to that used in other communist ruled countries in Europe and elsewhere.
I disagree that the Jewish role in the ‘communist past’ was ‘quite marginal’. The number and influence of Jewish communists in post-war Poland was so important that their role was far more than marginal. The challenge for Jews is to accept the fact that in the middle of this century Jews in Central and Eastern Europe were not only among the victims but also among the victimizers. In my view, the number and quasi-religious character of some Jewish communists, for whom Stalin was the messiah, generate a Jewish share of moral responsibility.”
on 6 April 2009
Once again, from “After The Holocaust”:
“According to a Soviet report of July 1944 concerning the Communist Polish army,
out of 44 officers of the (Chief) Political Directorate…(there are)34 Jews…(and) all leadership posts…are staffed with Jews. The deputy commanders of divisions and brigades are Jews, except for one Pole… In the political sections of the division, 17 out of 28 responsible political wotkers are Jews; on the regimental level, there are 31 Jews out of 43 political workers. In the regimental political apparatus of individual regiments…there are (Jews but) no Poles. Out of 86 deputy battalion commanders, 57 are Jews.” (pp. 42-43.)
It should now be obvious where Adolf Hitler got his “mad idea” that Jews and Communism were synonymous. We come to an obvious question: Did Hitler and the Nazis committ “crimes” against the Jews? Or did they, rather, merely deal with the Jews by their own murderous methods? For those who think that the Jews have improved morally since Stalin’s time, does not their murderous treatment of the Palestinian Arabs prove otherwise? Do not the Jews of America support the state of Israel the same way they once supported Stalin?
Why should Americans tolerate these Jews, who run their country and who alienate the entire Moslem world against America? Should not Americans “awake” to the evil within their midst? If American Jews wish to be treated as “Americans”, perhaps they should prove their loyalty like the Jews of Mussolini’s Italy, who sang “Giovinezza” instead of the “Internationale”. Do American Jews fly the flag of these United States or the flag of the Zionist state?
Ron and Marc shall not like these questions, any more than Mr. Welch and Mr. Henderson. But the questions are pregnant, especially as Israel prepares to attack Iran, with or without American help. Jews must decide to whose land they are really loyal because the time when they can walk both sides of the fence, pretending that America’s interests and Israel’s interests are the same, are drawing to a close.
on 6 April 2009
Neo-Nazis don’t seem to have lives, do they. I spent a very pleasant weekend away from the computer - and away from the spewers of hate like Mr Thames (and incontinent lunatics like hANOVER fIST).
I notice that Mr Thames has given up trying to explain away his ‘they all emigrated behind the Urals’ claim. This is an implicit admission that he has absolutely no evidence whatsoever to make this claim.
Mr Thames also persists - like a stuck record - in insisting that somehow the Soviet regime was a ‘Jewish’ regime. A closer analysis of its record would show that the Soviet Communist Party drew its membership from all ethnic/national communities within the USSR, it still had a Russian-Slavic core, and that the contention that ‘Jews’ somehow dominated the regime would be as incorrect as stating that Stalinism was all about Georgians running the Soviet state.
It is also worth noting that he bandies around names from Zinoviev and Kamenev, and also Solomon Lozovsky, without actually mentioning their eventual fates. A Jewish-dominated regime would not purge its own. Nor would it indulge in the anti-Semitic excesses which the East European parties engaged in in the late 1940s-early 1950s. A Jewish-dominated regime would have protected the victims of the Kielce pogrom of 1946 (which the Polish Communist party singularly failed to do). Jewish dominated governments would not have armed Saddam Hussein, Gamal Abdel Nasser or Muammar Gaddafi, nor would they have trained the various groups within the PLO. Above all, a Jewish-dominated regime would not have tolerated the pogroms Red Army troops committed during the Russian civil war. But then these are inconvenient historical facts for our hate-mongering friends to consider.
Let us also turn to Mr Thames contention that Nazi atrocities were a response to the ‘murderous methods’ employed by the Joooos. On which planet is he living? Who invaded Poland on the 1st September 1939 (having surreptitiously agreed to its partition with - guess who? - the previous month). Which started massacring Polish Jews at a time when it was an ally of the Soviet Union? Who invaded the USSR - under the most spurious of pretexts - in June 1941?
Furthermore, if we are to believe that somehow Operation Barbarossa was conducted purely out of revulsion for the excesses of Communism, how come Nazi rule over Poland and the occupied USSR mirrored the worst crimes of the Soviet era. Stalin enslaved Ukrainians and left millions of them to starve to death. Hitler did the same. Some salvation from Communism that was!
Furthermore, in repeating his lie that the Nazi regime ‘only’ recruited European Jews for ‘forced labour’, Mr Thames fails to explain why the round-up of occupied Europe’s Jewish population included those who were too young, too old or too infirm or phyiscally unfit for hard labour. Perhaps in his fantasy planet the children all went to kindergartens so that they could grow up to do manual labour, while the elderly and sick all got sent to hospices and hospitals. He can believe that if he wants. But he shouldn’t be surprised if those of us who live in the real world will reject that and all the other sick fantasies he peddles.
Mr Thames may prefer the output of crazed cranks whose rubbish would not receive any attention were it not for the internet. I prefer my sources to be reputable scholars like Ian Kershaw and Michael Evans (for Nazi Germany), or Norman Davies (for Poland) and Robert Service, Geoffrey Hosking, Richard Pipes and Robert Tucker (for the USSR). Pardon me for preferring patient archival study, the critical analysis of evidence, and the testimony of witnesses, rather than the rantings of diseased minds, who embellish fragments of the ‘truth’ while ignoring the vast weight of evidence which disproves their sick efforts to deny one of the worst acts of mass murder in history:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/holocaust/5114.shtml?all=2&id=5114
I should also add that I try to avoid ad hominem attacks, but it’s very hard to do this when I come across the hard right. The fact that they are the sewage of humanity makes it very difficult for me to treat them with anything other than contempt. Mr Thames deranged screams about the ‘evil’ in America’s midst and the supposed ‘dual loyalty’ of US Jews puts him firmly in that category.
I would also respond to Mr Thames’ assertion about the ability of the broad mass of the public in democratic countries to judge for themselves the veracity of the Holocaust. I will set him this test. Go and meet with people beyond your closed circle (away from your cross-burnings, and whatever it is you people do when you’re not obsessively trawling the net for Fascist filth). Go to a party, or a bar, or any other place where normal people meet. Start telling them about your ‘theories’, and count the sections before you are either (1) shunned, (2) insulted to your face, or (3) punched. I think you’ll find that your attitudes and your ideology will make you as obnoxious and as contemptible to the broad mass of the public as it is to me. That is - after all - the reason why the only place that deniers feel home is in the company of their sugar-daddy, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in Tehran.
on 6 April 2009
Mr. Welch is purely laughable.
He simply ignores the documented quootations and evidence that I have presented. He does not allege that they are either inaccurate or taken out of context, because he cannot. As to reputable scholars, let us take two which Mr. Welch quotes: Robert Service and Norman Davies. In reviewing Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s “Two Hundred Years Together”, Service was quoted by a British newspaper (’The Guardian”, I believe) as saying that “Solshenitsyn was absolutely right”. The early Soviet Union was dominated by Jews. Professor Davies was turned down for a position at Stanford University for having written that troubles between Poles and Jews “were not entirely the fault of the Poles”.
Mr. Welch resorts, again and again, to the tactic of using the post-WW2 Soviet Union as “proof” that Communism was anti-Semitic. He deliberately ignores that what I have written about Jewish control of communism pertains to the pre-WW2 period and the immediate five years theafter (until 1950). Shall Mr. Welch kindly stop setting up straw men and knocking them down? Mr. Welch’s claims that Jews do not cannibalize their own is transparent nonsense. If he believes that, he should consult Nachman Ben-Yehuda’s book, “Political Assassinations By Jews” (SUNY ) and he will find innumerable documented examples of Jews doing that very thing. As to Mr. Welch’s claims that the rounding up of Europe’s Jews for forced labor is inconsistent with the fact that children and the infirm were deported as well, the explanation is very simple. The Germans did not want to break up families; therefore the children were deported with their parents. How very inhumane! I have not abandoned the documented fact that the Soviet Jewish population was deported en masse behind the Ural Mountains to work in the Soviet arms factories by the heavily Jewish Soviet regime. That is precisely what was done.
I note that Mr. Welch is completely silent on the Jewish admission on the truth of Jewish involvement in Communism that I quoted. Any claim that a mythical “six milliom” in any way compares with the much greater kill totals of the Jewish communists is ludicrous. It is a confession of intellectual dishonesty on its face. Here is some more evidence for the deliberately lying Mr. Welch to consider: According to several reference works, including “Dark Times, Dire Consequences: Jews and Communism”, edited by Dan Diner and Jonathan Frankel and “The Roots Of Radicalism” by Rothman and Lichter, out of 200 top officials in Bela Kun’s Hungarian Communist regime of 1919, 160 were Jewish. According to the Lusk Report in the United States, 18 out of 22 top officials in the Hungarian Communist regime were Jewish. That puts the percentages between 80%-85% . Just a few Jews, Mr. Welch? The distinguished historian of the American Communist Party, Theodore Draper, himself Jewish and present at the beginning of the Party, confessed quite openly that Communism was a Russian Jewish movement. So did another original Communist, Melech Epstein, in his 1950’s book, “The Jew And Communism”. Among the names of the founders and heads of the Party in the ’20’s through ’40’s were Benjamin Gitlow, Jay Lovestone, Betram Wolfe, Harry Gold, etc. If one looks at the famous Hollywood Ten screen writers, one encounters names like John Howard Lawson (Jewish), Lester Cole, Herbert Bieberman, Albert Maltxz, Ring Lardner, Jr., etc
Mr. Welch refuses to be impressed by facts so further quotations are probably futile,but let us add some more evidence to the fire so that the learned Mr. Welch can continue to trip over his “Party line” tomgue. Mr. Welch pretends that only “a few” Jews were attracted to Communism in post-war Europe. But in Robert Levy’s book, “Ana Pauker: The RIse And Fall Of A Jewish Communist” we read the following revalatory quotation from p.236.
“…only Jews (and, to a lesser extent, Hungarians) were attracted to the RCP’s antagonism toward Romanian nationalism, for only they were victimized by it.To them, Communism represented the sole means of both waging class warfare and ending national oppression by eradicating nationalism entirely. It represented their “entrance ticket” into Romanian society, and it appeared to fulfil that promise after the war. Indeed, Romanian Jews readiness to fill vacated government and civil service positions seemingly was crucial in consolidating the revolutionary regime in postwar Romania-just as Lenin had credited it with being in Russia two decades earlier. But, as in the Soviet Union during the 1920’s, the Jews sudden and conspicuous presence in the new regime created mass resentment among ethnic Romanians. Having till now been barred from government posts and from a whole series of important professions, Jews suddenly appeared in prominent positions for the first time, and ethnic-Romanians widely considered them a Trojan Horse bolstering the Soviet-sponsored regime-the true power behind the Commubist regime.”
In Albert Lindemann’s masterful “Esau’s Tears: Modern AntiSemitism And The Rise Of The Jews” under the section entitled “The Red Terror-A Jewish Terror?” we read the following:
“Aside from such speculations, the reasons for the Jewish ovverrepresentation in the Cheka appear fairly obvious. Given the high proportion of Jews in the revolutionary movement and their generally higher educational levels, it is not surprising that many of them turned to intelligence activity…It is instructive that the high percentage of Jews in the secret police continued well into the 1930’s, when the proportion of Jews gradually diminished in most other areas of the Soviet and party cadres.
From Jaff Schatz’s book, “The Generation: The Rise And Fall Of The Jewish Communists Of Poland” we read:
“As previously noted, throughout the whole interwar period, Jews constitured a very important segment of the Communist movement. According to Polish sources and to Western estimates, the proportion of Jews in the KPP was never lower than 22 percent. In the larger cities, the percentage of Jews in the KPP often exceeded 50% and in smaller cities, frequently over 60%. Given this background, a respondent’s statement that ‘in small cities like ours, almost all Communists were Jews’ does not appear to be a gross exaggeration. ”
Enough. Interested readers may get the research volumes and judge for themselves. Mr. Welch is not merely deliberately lying; he is lying through his teeth. Now as to Mr. Welch’s brazen pretense that America’s Jews do not have dual loyalties, perhaps he should consult Phillip Weiss’s “Mondo Weiss” website. Mr. Weiss is a trifle more candid on the subject than Mr. Welch. Mr. Welch is also no doubt aware of the strenuous behind the scenes efforts by “American” Jews to get Jonathan Pollard out of jail. Does this fact not speak for itself, Mr. Welch?
Finally, as to Mr. Welch’s proposal that I consult the opinions of the average American on these subjects. The average American is so brainwashed, dumbed down, ignorant and stupid on so many subjects that he is utterly incapable of analyzing any subject logically. My facts speak for themselves; Mr. Welch’s brazen intellectual dishonesty also speaks for itself.
on 6 April 2009
on 6 April 2009
The average American is so … dumbed down, ignorant and stupid . . . he is utterly incapable of analyzing any subject logically.
It is clear to me (”a man who possesses the vast historical acumen you suck offs so obviously lack”) that what is required is a clear exposition of the revisionist position:
“For those who think that the Jews have improved morally since Stalin’s time . . .”
“Should not Americans “awake” to the evil within their midst?”
If American Jews wish to be treated as “Americans”, perhaps they should prove their loyalty . . .”
“Do American Jews fly the flag of these United States or the flag of the Zionist state?”
Thanks for the whole “clear exposition” thing - you uhm really cleared that up.
Phew! For a minute there I thought you were just some jew hating conspiracy crank who spews out thousands upon thousands upon thousands of racisit invectives all day long.
Good to see you proved me wrong.
on 6 April 2009
First, let’s deal with this bunch of chicanery:
Joseph Welch muttererd:
“Neo-Nazis don’t seem to have lives, do they. I spent a very pleasant weekend away from the computer - and away from the spewers of hate like Mr Thames (and incontinent lunatics like hANOVER fIST).”
Please…I visited Barnes & Noble for the day…you will notice a lag between postings yesterday. I, too, had better things to do than to sit at a PC knocking the c0cks out of nitwits’ mouths while they work.
William Henderson murmered:
“Denial of communist atrocities is specifically illegal and an imprisonable offence in Poland and the Czech Republic.”
This is AMERICA, pal…those dopey laws will NEVER come to pass. Even your fifth column among our “elected” representatives know now that this is the kiss of death. Their houses will be burned down and their children chased out of school.
Here is the trick of the scumbags (best illustrated by Joseph Welch, William Henderson, Ron and Marc); they make INEXACT COMPARISONS between atrocities, thereby lessening the evil being performed in the current atrocity by invoking an earlier, possibly more heinous, murderous act.
For example:
The current murderfest in Gaza is not much worse than,say, the Holocaust, right? You know…it was only 1400 “ragheads”, right? They’re barely human…”we” call them “roaches” or “crocodiles” that can’t get enough meat, right?
So stupid.
John Thames easily illustrates the uselessness of your rebuttals; I am just here to smack you bitches back down. I love it that he has access to such damning material, and that you putzes are reduced to quoting from biased sources such as Nizkor…who cares what a bunch of shills have to say?
Wait until the outrage from the revelations regarding the attack upon the U.S.S. Liberty sink in…you tools better be wearing chastity belts, or else you better tape some Vaseline to your ankles, so the penetration doesn’t bruise your hemmorhoids.
on 6 April 2009
Mr. Welch thinks he has scored a debating point by pointing out that the Czech Republic has laws against denying communist crimes. How many Stalinists are sitting in Germany’s, France’s or Canada’s jails for denying communist crimes, Mr. Welch? Answer: Probably none. Do the ADL and Simon Wiesenthal Center spend their time looking for “deniers” of Stalinist crimes to prosecute? They do not. Does Deborah Lipstadt write books about Stalinist deniers? She does not.
You are laughable, Mr. Welch-and so are your “debating” techniques.
on 6 April 2009
It is time to continue toying with the “erudite” Mr. Welch and Mr. Henderson. From Sharman Kadish’s book, “Bolsheviks and British Jews: The Anglo-Jewish Community: Britain And The Russian Revolution”, we now present the infamous “Letter Of The Ten” as it appeared in the London “Morning Post” of April 23, 1919:
“Bolshevism And Jewry
A Repudiation
To The Editor Of The Morning Post
Sir-We have read with the deepest concern and with sincere regret certain articles which have already appeared in two closely associated Jewish newspapers in this country on the topic of Bolshevism and its ‘ideals’. In our opinion, the publication of these articles can have no other effect than to encourage the adoption of the theoretic principles of Russian Bolsheviks among foreign Jews who have sought and found a refuge in England. We welcome, accordingly, your suggestion that British Jews should ‘disassociate themselves from a cause which is doing the Jewish people harm in all parts of the world’. This is profoundly true, and we, on our own behalf and on behalf of numbers of British Jews with whom we have conferred, desire to disassociate ourselves absolutely and unreservedly from the mischievious and misleading doctrine which these articles are calculated to disseminate. We repudiate them as dangerous in themselves and as false to the teachings and tenets of Judaism.
Partly in order to counteract the mistaken policy of the newspapers referred to, the League of British Jews was founded in November 1917. The proceedings and views of the League are published in a monthly bulletin, entitled Jewish Opinion which can be obtained at the offices of the League 708-709. Salisbury House, EC2, and which may eventually be merged in a larger journal appearing at more frequent intervals. For we thoroughly concur with your criticism that ‘the British Jewish community, most of whom’, as you rightly say, ‘are by no means in sympathy with this (Nationalist) crusade, are being served very badly by their newspapers’. Meanwhile we take this opportunity of repudiating in public the particular statements in those newspapers to which you have felt it your duty to call attention,-Yours &c.
LIONEL DE ROTHSCHILD
SWAYTHLING
PHILIP MAGNUS
MARCUS SAMUEL
HARRY M. SAMUEL
LEONARD L. COHEN
I> GOLLANCZ
JOHN MONASH
CLAUDE G. MONTEFIORE
ISIDORE SPIELMANN
The “Letter Of The Ten” needs to be reissued. It should be signed:
RON
LEE
MR HENDERSON
MR. WELCH
on 6 April 2009
Readers of this thread should be aware by now just how much my crics like to read documented reference from their own works thrown in their face. So let’s take one directly from this research volume: “Of Moses and Marx: Folk Ideology and Folk History in the Jewish Labor Movement” by David P. Shuldner. On p.35 he quotes Emma Lazarus:
“the modern theory of socialism and humanitarianism..has its root in the Mosaic Code…The very latest reforms urged by the political economists, in view ofthe misery of the lower classes, are established by the Mosaic Code, which formulated the principle of the rights of labor, the right of private property in land, asserting that the corners of the field, the gleanings of the harvest belonged in justice, not in charity, to the poor and the stranger, and that man owed a duty, not only to all humanity, but even to the beast of the field, and ‘the ox that treads the grain.’ In accordance with these principles we find the fathers of modern socialism to be three Jews-Ferdinand LaSalle (1825-1864); utopian socialist); Karl Marx (1818-1882, of Communist Manifesto and Capital fame) and Johann Jacoby (1805-1877; leader in the German socialist movement).”
I will, of course, be accused of confusing socialism and communism. I am doing no such thig but I am documenting where certain ideas come from.
on 7 April 2009
Hmmm
All Bolsheviks were communists.
Many Bolsheviks committed mass murders
Some Jews were Bolsheviks.
Ergo all Jews committed mass murder.
Hitler merely dealt “with the Jews by their own murderous methods.” Which in bizarro world, didn’t even happen because “there is not a single German document that speaks of a program to exterminate the Jews.”
Got that?
The logic of the conspiracy crank truly boggles the mind.
on 7 April 2009
ron tried to pin this
“All Bolsheviks were communists.
Many Bolsheviks committed mass murders
Some Jews were Bolsheviks.
Ergo all Jews committed mass murder. ”
Oooh…an axiom.
You utter fool.
Got a 91 on my regents exam, even while sitting behind a lovely Rumanian heart-shaped ass. My teacher was Jewish, and one of the better teachers I’ve ever had.
on 7 April 2009
Ron:
Go buy yourself a brain, as Hanover suggests. You have not written one thing that makes the slightest sense.
As to your attempt at a syllogism, it is purely pathetic.
on 7 April 2009
“ooo an axiom you utter fool”
fish, barrel etc.
on 7 April 2009
“Fish, barrel, etc.”?
Please…admit that your pathetic attempt FAILED.
First, you try the inexact comparison (hereby trademarked by hANOVER fIST 2009); then the syllogism(”axiom”, as I termed it)…what will you try next?
White phosphorous?
Waterboarding?
It’s like…hmm…SHOOTING FISH IN A BARREL.
The difference here, asshat, is that you think you’re a marksman, while you’re using a blunderbuss.
Also…you screwed up the concept of Bizarro World.
Hello - me love you.
on 7 April 2009
The debate is more or less over. The other side has lost on all counts. Specifically, it has been conclusively established that:
(1) six million Jews were not exterminated by “gassing” or any other means;
(2) that the vast majority of the allegedly exterminated were in fact hiding out in the Soviet Union behind the Ural Mountains during the war;
(3) that communism world-wide, 1880-1950, was a Jewish movement for which the Jewish people do bear the collective responsibility;
(4) that there is a co-ordinated Jewish power in the world that was active at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 promoting minorities treaties, a mandate for Palestine and a League of Nations (an “old Jewish idea”-Nahum Sokolow);
(5) that Communism and Zionism grew up side-by-side in the ghettos of Czarist Russia with the Jews being split between the two movements;
(6) that all of these points can be documented from Jewish refernce works and university press titles.
It has further been established that my critics have no substantive rebuttals to any of any postings but can only engage in ad hominen attacks, libel my character, accuse me of psychological problems, falsely accuse me of neither possessing, reading nor understanding the reference works I quote in extenso or confront me with absurd attempts at reductio ad absurdum.
The rest speaks for itself.
on 7 April 2009
The rest speaks for itself.
indeed
on 8 April 2009
Who was it again that started this whole “superior” or “chosen people” business?
A question, perhaps, a point.
on 8 April 2009
Leave “the commentary to a man who possesses the vast historical acumen you suck offs so obviously lack.” -John Thames
I “got a 91 on my regents exam.” -hanover fist
At times its a bit humbling to be in the presence of such superior chosen people.
on 8 April 2009
Ron:
We are not superior. We have merely done the research and seen through the lies.
on 8 April 2009
The Insemination And Embryonic Development Of Zionism
There is altogether too much writing and discussion on the present of Zionism. Oceans of ink are spilled on the latest atrocity, invasion of a neighboring country, peace discussion, photo finish election, etc. This is called by media blabbermouths “keeping the public informed”. It is nothing of the kind. It is simply treating the present as the reality of the problem.
The reality of the problem lies deep inthe past. That does not mean that it goes back thousands of years, as many suppose. That view is equally uninformed. In reality, from the defeat of Mehmet Ali and his son, Ibrahim, in 1840, peace prevailed in Palestine from that year until the outbreak of the First World War in 1914 (actually, until Enver Pasha broght Turkey into the war against the English in 1915). No organized problems of any kind occurred in Palestine during those years. When, then, did the problems begin?
They began about the time of the assassination of Czar Alexander Two in Russia in 1881. Actually, we can go back fifteen years earlier to roughly 1865. Around this time Russian Jews began to conceive the idea of a “return” to Palestine. One of the first early works proposing this idea was Moses Hess “Rome and Jerusalem” published in 1862. The Russian Jews were unhappy under the Czars and developed the idea that since there was no future for the Jews under the Czars, the solution was to migrate either to Palestine, England, Argentina or the United States. These ideas had been gestating in Russia for some time before Theodore Herzl formally developed them into the doctrine of Zionism in Vienna. Among the Russian Jews attracted to this novel idea were Leon Pinsker in his “AutoEmancipation”, Nachman Syrkin, Dov Ber Borochov and Moishe Usshiskin, who all promoted the idea of the “return” in various ways, usually from a Marxist perspective. This Marxist Zionism came to a head following the assassination of the Czar in 1881. The Russian monarchy passed its famous “May Day” laws, a precursor of Adolf Hitler’s Nuremberg laws, excluding the Jews from participation in large segments of the economy and “confining” them in a large area of western Russia known as the Pale of Settlement.
Following the assassination of the Czar the Jews began their first “aliyah” to Palestine. Jewish agricultural colonies were planted in Arab Palestine beginning in 1878 with Petak Tikvah, Rishon-LeZion and others. Contrary to what they later pretended, the Zionist pioneers quickly discovered that Palestine was full of Arabs, most of them farmers, plowing the land with oxen. The coastal cities were already populated with Arabs and Arab olive trees, orchards, vineyards, wheat fields and soap factories already dotted the land. The Arabs were extremely apprehensive regarding the Jewish colonies from inception. Arab newspapers in Egypt, Syria and Palestine regularly discussed the threat that the colonies represented to Arab interests. Arab delegates to the Turkish parliament in Constantinople were always bringing up the Jewish colonies and demanding action against them. Nothing meaningful was done and by the outbreak of war in 1915 there were 600,000 Arabs and 100,000 Jews in Palestine, most of them Russian and Eastern European Zionists of recent arrival.
There is no need in this essay to go into the history of Lord Balfour’s declaration and the subsequent history of the British Mandate. That has been done in previous essays. The relevant point here is that the beginnings of Zionism originated in conditions in Russia extraneous to conditions in Palestine. The Arabs were never responsible for conditions in Eastern Europe. Neither were they responsible for the later policies of Adolf Hitler. To review the gestative stages of Zionism is to realize immediately that Zionist cclaims to Palestine have always rested on sheer presumption. The presumption has been, from day one, that the Arabs of Palestine should be pushed aside to solve Jewish problems in Europe. So long as that presumption prevails, as it still does, there shall be no resolution to the crisis in Palestine.
on 8 April 2009
http://zundelsite.org/english/zgrams/zg1997/zg9709/970923.html
Well worth reading. A review of the extremely hard to find title, “The World Conquerors”, by Hungarian author Loius Marschalko, published in 1958.
on 8 April 2009
john thames, thank you for your reason and clearly stated point of view. Obviously, it is because men like yourself that caused many European governments and others to outlaw debate on this subject. Your research and delivery of your views were met with insults and hysterical accusations. But, people that want to hear the truth are listening. We are here and we are listening.
on 8 April 2009
Perhaps john thames will enlighten us further on UFOs, 911 truths, and Earth Pilgrims.
Counterknowledge readers are equally enthusiastic to hear about those as well. And let’s face it, you can only hear so much about Auschwitz’s swimming pool and peace loving nazis without beoming a little bit . . . skeptical.
on 8 April 2009
Many thanks to Karl. I really was not trying to convince the other side; that is impossible. However, it is good to know that others are reading and listening.
on 8 April 2009
Ron…here you go again…”Perhaps john thames will enlighten us further on UFOs, 911 truths, and Earth Pilgrims.”
WTF is wrong with you?
I was going to let you slide with this…but WHAT THE HELL IS A CRYSTALINER?!?
I want an answer, or your admittal to being a purveyour of TOTAL BULLSHITE!
Karl…right on point. When facts are present, the scumbags rely on ad-hominem attacks.
Ron…why don’t YOU tell us all about these pithy little subjects that you keep remarking upon - your attempts to align John, Karl, myself and others with these COMPLETELY OFF-TOPIC ITEMS have FAILED, and will continue to FAIL.
on 9 April 2009
May I join Messrs. Moutoux and Fist in commending Mr. Thames for illuminating us on the issue of Judischer Bolshewismus and on all the good work done in the 1940’s towards its Final Solution.
My thanks to Mr. Thames for reminding us that socialism’s roots are to be found in biblical tradition. I might add that communist societies like the Essenes and the early Christian communities, were also based in that biblical tradition. Thanks to the papacy, Luther, and Calvin, most Christians today are free from the poisonous influence of early Christianity. Deo gratias.
on 9 April 2009
Steven Spielberg Presents: “The Holocaust”
All cinema fans are acquainted with “Blue Screen” technique. It works this way. First, the live action is shot. Then, staged scenery and accessories are painted against a blue screen and shot seperately. Then, the two images are combined to create the composite shot. “The Holocaust” works exactly the same way.
The “live action” consists of the camps, the deportation policy, the deaths from typhus, the use of Zyklon B as a delousing agent, crematory ovens to dispose of the dead, etc. The “paint on” consists of the mythical extermination program, the fictional six million victims and the non-existent “gas chambers”, etc. Combine the two images and “Voila!”, the Holocaust.
“The Greatest Sob Story Ever Told”, then, is a cheap cinematic trick
on 9 April 2009
The Proof Of The Hoax
The best proof that the Jews are lying about their extermination hoax is the utter futility of the arguments that they offer in rebuttal. Those arguments are completely devoid of content. Usually the arguments consist of references to the Nuremberg Trial, citations of Polish Communist forgeries, survivor testimonies and assertions that rigged court verdicts “prove” that revisionist experts are quacks and frauds. Other than these shop-worn techniques, the Jews offer nothing but ad hominem attacks and vituperation.
It should be obvious that had the German Nazis really killed six million Jews it would be the eaiest thing in the world to prove it. The bodies loaded with hydrogen cyanide would be everywhere. No kangaroo court at Nuremberg would have been necessary. Instead of coming up with the bodies and the presence of the poison in the deceased, the Jews instead resort to perjured testimonies, forged documents and the suppression of real camp records telling an entirely different story. People who have real evidence of a crime do not resort to forged evidence. People who are lying through their teeth do precisely that.
on 9 April 2009
Norman Bentwich was the first Attorney General of Palestine and a famous English Zionist. In his book, “Judea Lives Again”, published by Victor Gollancz in London in 1944, he makes many remarkable comparisons between Soviet socialism in Russia and Zionist socialism in Palestine. One such comparison occurs on pp.27-28.
“…The seizure of power in Russia by the Bolsheviks and…the issue of the British Declaration about the Jewish National Home (in Palestine)…might seem to have little direct connection, but there was a deeper relation between them than that of chronological coincidence. In the first place they had affinities in their consequences. (Soviet) Russia and Palestine represent the most striking achievments in our time, of reconstruction for peaceful ends, of daring social experiment and of creative intellectual movement. In both lands a people (Jewry) has been reborn, and gone forward two hundred years in one leap. The two movements were contrasted in scale; the one (Communism) involving a continent and nearly two hundred million people, and the other (Zionism) directly transforming the least of countries (Palestine) and half a million Jews. But both profoundly affected societiesoutside their territories. In origin also they related as twin aspects of man’s (the Jew’s) perpetual effort to establish God’s kingdom on earth, although one claims to be godless. They go back to that millenial vision of the (Hebrew) Prophets, for whom the return of the people of Israel to Zion was bound up with a just order and peace on earth. For (Soviet Russia), too, inherited a Messianic faith, and a passion for the regeneration of mankind. And she established the first Socialist State on the principles of a Jewish thinker. If the Bolshevik revolution expressed the universal (Jewish) striving for a just social order, the Home in Palestine illustrates the other and more national aspect of the Hebraic vision. Planted again on the soil, the Jew has undergone within one generation, an extraordinary physical, mental and spiritual transformation. He has ceased to be bent and acquisitive, and is becoming understanding and creative. At the same time, the ideal of a socialist order derived from the Mosaic institutions has been in large measure realized without violence and without the authority of the State, by the collective will of the people. It offers in miniature an example of a social system based on an ideal of humanity and a conviction that the well-being of the individual is the well-being of the community. So in their origin, the two movements (Communism and Zionism) are aspects of the (Jewish striving to establish on earth justice in our time, and give a hope to humanity.”
on 9 April 2009
It is often said that Judaism is the driving force of Communism; but this does not… prove anything beyond that which is expected and only natural… Is it surprising that Judaism should become the fermenting and destructive element in countries which have always despised and persecuted it? That peculiar facility for intrigue, strategem, conspiracies, and that patient, almost uncanny waiting for the hour of never-failing revenge, are all characteristics…of the ‘chosen people’…”
Professor F.A. Ossendowski, in “The Nineteenth Century and After” (London), January 1926, p. 29.
on 9 April 2009
“On his return from a visit to the Soviet Union, S. Mikunis, secretary of the Israel Connunist Party, stated on Jan. 18 (1957) in Tel Aviv that…there were 260,000 Jews in Soviet State apparatus, the (Communist) Party, science, literature and art,. He added that 40 percent of all Soviet professors were Jewish.”
“The control of Russia by Bolshevik Jews, with the eclipse of Christianity in that country which it has brought about, was an indispensable preliminary to the accomplishment of the Zionist aims in Palestine.”
Lord Sydenham of Combe, in “The Nineteenth Century and After” (London) April 1921, p. 628
“Jewish Life”* (New York), March 1957, p.9
on 9 April 2009
One of the best proofs that Communism was a Jewish movement is the vast number of Communist periodicals published in the Yiddish language in the period 1880-1930. The examples are innumerable. “The Morning Freiheit”, “Der Hammer”, “Der Emes”, etc. The number of Bundist and Labor-Socialist journals with names like “The New World”, etc. are also voluminous. If Communism was not a Jewish movement, why were not Communist journals published in Welsh, Polish, Magyar or some other language (and yes, I do know that there were also a lot of Finnish and German socialist journals and newspapers). But always one particular languageof one particular minority predominated. Why?
My critics become ever more silent as they are hammered with the facts. How amusing.
on 9 April 2009
http://www.middleeast.org/comments/1/2969.shtml
This is pretty well done.
on 9 April 2009
ex scientia vera…
on 9 April 2009
Damn straight. Without them Jewish teachers, the Chinese and Vietnamese would have loved Western domination.
Without them Jews, always with their big noses in books, Russian, German, and Italian workers would have been satisfied with starvation wages.
Even Blacks in the American South would have been satisfied if they had not been egged on by Jewish troublemakers from New York.
They always write, they have journals and papers. Something must be done about it.
on 9 April 2009
I’m trying to remember who it was who said that quantity has a quality all of its own. Anyone consulting this thread and reading Mr Thames’ rants will beg to differ.
Mr Thames says that ‘[the] debate is more or less over’. This is a misnomer from the start. In a debate, at least two open-minded and reflective individuals will try to persuade each other that their views are factually correct. It is however impossible to have a ‘debate’ with Holocaust deniers, because these rather sick individuals are not looking to ascertain historical truth, but to peddle lies about one of the worst acts of genocide in 20th century history. That is why ‘the other side’ teach in universities, and why (as even Mark Weber has admitted) the deniers have failed in over thirty years of effort to convince anyone beyond their circle to share their twisted beliefs:
http://counterknowledge.com/2009/01/holocaust-denier-mark-weber-admits-weve-failed/
Let us deal with Mr Thames’ lies one by one.
‘(1) six million Jews were not exterminated by “gassing” or any other means’.
Mr Thames has not offered a shred of evidence to justify this claim. If we are also to believe it to be true, then we should assume that there are a lot of people telling the same lie. This will include officials not only from all three allied governments (including British officials transcribing the ENIGMA decrypts I referred to above), but also the Free Polish government, whose agents in the Armija Krajowa (AK) - rightly judged the most efficient and combat-effective of all the resistance movements in Nazi-occupied Europe - provided detailed reports on Nazi genocide against the Jews (this included the reports of Jan Karski, which are impossible to refute).
We would also have to assume that not only are the survivors of the Shoah liars, but also their former persecutors who testified to their crimes - the likes of Franz Stangl, Rudolf Hoss and Adolf Eichmann, for example. Mr Thames is asking us to believe that these men willingly incriminated themselves by accepting responsibility for a supposedly non-existent atrocity, and that they were willing to either be executed or sentenced to long terms of imprisonment despite their innocence. I don’t know what planet you would have to live on to find this plausible, but it wouldn’t be this one.
Mr Thames would also have us believe that three entire generations of academic historians working world-wide on the history of Nazi Germany are all telling the same lies about the Holocaust - regardless of their ethnicity or political beliefs. He is asking us to believe that these scholars have all systematically distorted the archival and documentary record.
We can either believe that all of the above are telling lies about the Holocaust, or we can conclude that a handful of charlatans and parasitical neo-Nazi scum are actually guilty of deceit and distortion. Mr Weber - on of your own kind, Mr Thames - has woken up and smelt the coffee. Clearly you are incapable of doing the same.
‘(2) that the vast majority of the allegedly exterminated were in fact hiding out in the Soviet Union behind the Ural Mountains during the war’.
Mr Thames has offered no evidence whatsoever to back this assertion up. This is because it is an outright fabrication.
‘(3) that communism world-wide, 1880-1950, was a Jewish movement for which the Jewish people do bear the collective responsibility’.
Which would come as a big surprise to Mao Zedong, Kim Il-Sung and Ho Chi Minh, for starters. If we are to believe that Communism was some massive Jewish conspiracy, then why exactly were Communist parties able to seize power in China, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia (the North Korean regime did benefit from the Soviet occupation of 1945-1949)? How did the MPLA seize power in Angola, or Castro in Cuba, or the Dergue in Ethiopia? Perhaps Mr Thames would have us believe that Agostinho Neto and Megistu Haile Mariam were cunningly disguised Zionists. But I digress.
Furthermore, Mr Thames wilfully conflates the presence of Jews within the Bolshevik party with a Jewish-dominated movement. To do this involves ignoring the fact that the Bolshevik movement was Russian-dominated, with sizeable ethnic minorities from other parts of the former Tsarist empire (Georgians, Latvians, Ukrainians etc) . It also involves ignoring both the pogroms Red (as well as White) troops were involved in in the Russian civil war and also the suppression of the Jewish religion in the 1920s (see the works of Richard Pipes, for example). It also ignores the fact that - notably under Stalin - individuals like Kaganovich had to downplay their ethnicity, because the ‘boss’ was an unredeemed anti-Semite (See Simon Sebag Montefiore’s ‘The Court of the Red Tsar’). It overlooks the fact that ‘Zionism’ was banned in Soviet Russia, and even after Stalin’s time Jewish ‘cosmopolitans’ were treated as traitors (hence the refuseniks in the 1970s). It also overlooks the fact that Soviet (and later foreign) Jews were as likely to be the victims of Soviet state terror as non-Jews (see Ann Appelbaum’s ‘Gulag’, for example).
Mr Thames’ comments on the composition of East European parties in the immediate post-war period is also a distortion of the facts. He points to names like Jakub Berman in Poland, while ignoring the fact that Jews fought alongside the AK, which of course was subject to firstly the hostile attentions of the Soviet occupiers (from 1944 onwards) and then the Polish Communist regime (see Norman Davies’ rising). He also points to the influx of Romanian, Hungarian and Czechoslovak Jews into the ruling party, without pointing out what happened next.
Mr Thames’ method here is to cherry-pick selected statistics at various points to prove a trend. Only someone who is monumentally ignorant of Soviet and East European history can do this while assuming that they can get away with this. If Mr Thames is to prove his contention about Jewish domination of the Soviet and East European Communist parties, he would have gone through the membership lists of each party from 1917-1991 (in the case of the USSR) and 1945-1989 (in the case of Eastern Europe) to show through statistics a consistent trend. He would also have checked to see who held the key positions in the ruling parties. The fact that he has not done so speaks volumes.
‘(4) that there is a co-ordinated Jewish power in the world that was active at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 promoting minorities treaties, a mandate for Palestine and a League of Nations (an “old Jewish idea”-Nahum Sokolow)’.
Promoting minority treaties and multilateral organisations to settle international disputes by peaceful means - how evil is that?
On a more serious point, I feel here as if I’m reading a translation from ‘Der Sturmer’. The Palestinian mandate had everything to do with British imperialist ambitions, and nothing at all to do with any form of Jewish machinations. If the opposite was true, why was there no effort to found a Jewish state in 1919? How does this proposition explain the restrictions the British authorities imposed on Jewish emigration to Palestine, particularly after the Arab revolt of 1936-1939? How does this explain the fact that the British military authorities fought (to little avail) to prevent the emergence of a state called Israel? Again, you’d have to be a historical ignoramus to believe that proposition.
‘(5) that Communism and Zionism grew up side-by-side in the ghettos of Czarist Russia with the Jews being split between the two movements’.
Presumably the Communist inhabitants of these ghettoes included Vladimir Ilych Ulyanov (the son of a schools inspector from Simbirsk), Feliks Dzerzhinsky (the scion of Polish nobility), Josef Jugashvilli (the seminar boy from Gori, Georgia), Alexandra Kollontai (the daughter of a Tsarist General), and Vyacheslav Skriabin (the son of a clerk from Kukara). That’s just to pick out a few names of what was a movement led from start to finish by an elite group of revolutionaries from a middle/upper class background.
I will ignore the slight about Zionism, except to point out that if Mr Thames was a Jew in Tsarist Russia in the late 19th-early 20th (particularly after the Okhrana concocted the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion’), he’d probably be forced to conclude that it might be a good idea for he and his brethren to have a country of their own, rather than be the subject of periodic pogroms and socio-economic discrimination.
‘(6) that all of these points can be documented from Jewish refernce works and university press titles.’
As someone who studies and teaches history - rather than someone who quote-mines - I can tell Mr Thames that he is a liar.
And that, I think, wraps up this so-called ‘debate’ neatly.
on 9 April 2009
Mr. Welch,
Re:
“I’m trying to remember who it was who said that quantity has a quality all of its own. Anyone consulting this thread and reading Mr Thames’ rants will beg to differ.”
Again, it is an insult to Thames that opens the conversation. I have found his comments cogent, relevant, not padded, and always on point. As for quantity, sometimes the subject matter, or the trying-to-convince requires extra material…as you yourself prove in your last post.
re:
…In a debate, at least two open-minded and reflective individuals will try to persuade each other that their views are factually correct. It is however impossible to have a ‘debate’ with Holocaust deniers, because these rather sick individuals are not looking to ascertain historical truth, but to peddle lies about one of the worst acts of genocide in 20th century history.”
One of them, indeed. Once again, the argument presented by Welch is not one of historical or scientific reference, but of a nature of an attack on the character of whomever might question this “established” historic view. Let me restate what I believe to be true, namely that Thames and everyone else here already know the established view. How might it not be correct, is the question. Instead, Welch calls names to people, such as “sick,” or deniers, which of course is no argument in any debate at all. Such people teaching children ought to be a concern. My heartfelt remorse goes out to anyone instructed by Mr. Welch that this is how to debate.
re.:
‘(1) six million Jews were not exterminated by “gassing” or any other means’.
Mr Thames has not offered a shred of evidence to justify this claim.”
Oh but he has, you can read them yourself, above. You might not “believe” them, or “like” them, but he has provided information supporting his position that anyone, so inclined, can examine for themselves. The problem is, too many, especially the Jews among us who, incidentally do run the scholastic textbook presses, the media, and hold the records. An analogy for this debate is that concerning Evolution and Creation. You must know, by now, that much evidence exists disproving Evolution. Scientists who dare challenge this theory, however, are quickly labeled, in the manner of Welch, as ignorant of facts, stupid, and so on. The fact remains, though, that these scientists arguing with the established view, can nevertheless not get published, and the textbooks are slow to change. In my opinion, JT’s work with the holocaust parallels the work many Creationists are doing with Evolution, as bad a theory as has ever existed, so bad that it makes Creation look more consistent than it really is. In this way, those of you arguing against Thames from a standpoint of accusing him of being ignorant, actually make his argument appear better than it is. “You are a stupid racist” might work to get a chuckle from your students, for those of us who really know debate and argumentation, the rest of all you say becomes less believable. Not one of you has taken any of his sources and disproved it, or found fault in it, or cited any information of which he is not already aware. Finally, no respected historian on either side, today, admits 6 million Jews were “gassed.” At best this is a figure of total casualties, and as I have alluded to before, even this number seems to be dwindling as the years go by. How do you, in your retelling if this horror, account for the change in locations of these mass murders, the failure to find burial sites where they were supposed to be? Do you ever wonder about the blind faith you put in the “censuses” taken back then, their accuracy, by virtue of which we come to the estimation of Jews killed?
More questions come to mind. An Italian, who is Jew, is he included in the number? An American, a Jew, is he? Someone of Jewish parentage, himself a Catholic, would he have been counted “Jew”? Have you ever asked to see these numbers yourself? Etc.
re.:
“If we are also to believe it [Thames's contention] to be true, then we should assume that there are a lot of people telling the same lie.”
Why?
Let’s use a simple, understandable analogy. Today, in America, there are no less than a hundred organizations, government and non, clubs, clinics, religious organizations, leeching of taxpayer dollars, force-feeding to children in schools, etc., of a doctrine which makes the claim that “Drugs are Bad” and makes a policy of harrassing, arresting, fining, imprisoning, and otherwise ostracizing people based on a downright lie. In fact, the government imprisons, to the tune of over 50% of all arrests in this country—to the further melody of this country having the highest incarceration rate in the history of the world, including Germany under Hitler—for a “fact” that is just a downright blatant lie, ignorant of all experience, fact, science, and history of, let’s call, a sacred herb. Add to this the growing number of two-faces coming out of their closets by the day, finally now, in protest. Count the lives ruined for the “criminal” executing no tort upon anyone other than, possibly, himself. Think of the torments we have put the Constitution through, justifying this Crusade.
I realize this is not our topic, and I would be happy to wake anyone unfamiliar with this continuing atrocity out of their “dogmatic slumber” elsewhere, but understand the relevance here. If you smoke pot, or know people who do, let’s say you are a holocaust denier. To, let me say first, a person with a vested interest in the established “law,” someone who owns a “treatment clinic,” a DEA officer, a prison owner or official whose income depends on keeping beds full, a pseudo-religious type who thinks these people are analogous to real criminals like thieves of murderers (or also to me, liars), or rapists, pot should remain illegal and these imprisonments are justified. This, we will by analogy call, the established view of the holocaust.
If, second, however, you believe these laws unjustified, and so, the history and laws as we have them NOT correct, then you are an enemy of the state, a criminal, more usually referred to as a “dope addict”, “Stupid pot head”, etc.
Now I do not know with any certainty, still yet, about this thing “the Holocaust” we now discuss. I have heard JT’s argued dissent, and no answers to them other than already answered by him. I do know, though that this established and continued lies paraded as truth, or “science” regarding marijuana is long-standing, but nevertheless proven time and again to be full of shit.
on 9 April 2009
They build monuments for the heroes of the various nation-based SS divisions. All over the Balkans and Eastern Europe they are celebrated and honored. By liars or lunatics? No, by good, honest, well-meaning Nazis or by nationalist right-wingers whose grandparents were on the Nazi side in WW2.
Are they “sick individuals”? No, they are normal, regular right-wingers who have the courage of their sometimes unpopular opinions. Nazis are unpopular in the West, but are very respected in some places.
on 9 April 2009
Angelo, John…good stuff, boys…but you are preaching to the retarded.
That is not an ad-hominem attack…judging from the blotting out of reality, I can only conclude that John, Angelo or I told you that it was a mix of oxygen and other gases you are breathing, you’d consistently argue that you’re breathing hydrogen cyanide.
on 9 April 2009
http://911liarsexposed.blogspot.com/2009/04/wtc7-and-british-brainwashing.html
Come on, doops…Let’s hear some of those cogent thought processes that you so highly tout.
I even left Larry “Two Sheds” Silverstein out of this discussion, as much as I wanted to rail on the whole “pull it” commentary.
But now…back to the issue at hand…Joseph Welch…you know how law works in this country - one can prove a POSITIVE…one CANNOT PROVE A NEGATIVE. So…John Thames doesn’t need to prove that “six million Jews were gassed”, or however you attempted to twist his words; rather, YOU need to prove that there were ANY gas chambers specifically used to murder Jews ONLY, AND that were in existence before the end of hostilities.
Ron…still waiting on your information on CRYSTALINERS. I guess you just pull that crap from your tuchis, yes?
on 9 April 2009
Far be it for me to argue with someone who got a 91 on their exam (*gasp* a 91!) it’s spelled tuchus.
And if you would get your head out of your tuchus you would know that the crystaliners are the earth pilgrims in the post below this one. Crystaline is only the highest stage of how the universe works and comes back to you from the vacuums created by our reality - duh.
While I’m gone, someone please explain after we rid the country of all these pesky jews what were going to do about all those black genes and the poor white rape victims - its getting to the point that you can’t take videos of public building with cameras anymore!
I’m skiing this week so its tough to keep up with all the exciting “raciialist” posts.
on 9 April 2009
James
“Neo-Nazis don’t seem to have lives, do they. I spent a very pleasant weekend away from the computer”
Have to agree with you there. Perhaps if they got girlfreinds thay would not be such angry losers.
John Thales
- You have still not answered my question, perhaps becasue you cannot. Winston Churchill said that :
“There is no doubt this is the most horrible crime ever committed in the whole history of the world, and it has been done by scientific machinery by nominally civilised men in the name of a great State and one of the leading races of Europe ”
Disprove one of the best eyewitnesses of history, whom I believe. Are you calling him a liar?
If you want to call Winston Churchill a liar, just have something to back it up. All you need is a few sentences to describe your “smoking gun”. killer evidence.
Please do not hide your lack of evidence in a load of drivel, it is such a cheap trick that fools only the retarded such as hUNGOVER aR$EHOLE
on 9 April 2009
I see that I shall have to, once again, undertake the tedious and time consuming task of refuting Mr. Welch, who constantly accuses me of his own offense-lying. I shall begin by quoting the philo-semitic Mark Twain, who once remarked that ” a lie can travel half-way around the world in the time that it takes the truth to lace its boots”.
First, why did the British and the Americans go along with the hoax? The answer is not hard to find. Going along with the hoax helped to divert attention from tha much greater crimes of the British and the Americans. Those crimes included the saturation bombing of German civilians (which practice was started by tnhe British, not the Germans, as admitted by professor Charles Snow in his 1960 volume, “Science and Government”), the repatriation of at least a million Cossack and Russian POW’s to Stalin to be murdered under Operation Keelhaul, the deliberate starving to death of over one million German POW’s by Dwight David Eisenhower as documented by James Bacque, etc. Another simple reason for going along with the hoax was fear of a Jewish international financial power capable of destroying them in an instant if they did not go along. It might be analagous to Hollywood, where actresses keep their mouth shut about the price of fame and fortune, except when on their knees fellating circumsized pricks like Mr. Welch’s. (Surely Mr. Teacher has heard of the Zwi Migdal, the 19th-20th century Jewish sex slave trading ring which operated out of Russia-Poland, kidnapping thousands of women and sending them to brothels in Brazil and Argentina. It was those anti-Semitic Russian laws that made otherwise decent Jew boys like Mr. Welsh into entrepenurial kidnappers of women, obviously. The Talmudic passages about “all non-Jewesses being whores” had nothing to do with it.) Mr. Welch asks why universty professors go along with the hoax. Maybe they do not want the Norman Finkelstein treatment, Mr. Welch.
Now on to the claim that there is no evidence for a mass evacuation of Soviet Jews ahead of the Germans. Let us consult Walter Sanning’s well-researched volume, “The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry”. On p.48 we read the following:
In 1946, the American scholar and professor at Princeton University, Dr. Frank Lorimer, published a book, “The Population of the Soviet Union: History and Prospects”, under the auspices of the League of Nations…”
On p. 68 we read, again quoting professor Lorimer:
“Finally, we come to the most important poulation movement in the U.S.S.R. during the war-…namely, the planned, selective evacuation from the path of the invader. When the Germans crossed the frontiers, plans were immediately put into effect for the rapid removal of people and equipment. In fact, large scale evacuations of persons from the annexed areas bordering on the German zone seems to have been initiated at least several days before June 22, 1941. ..”
From pp.69-70 we read.
“The Zionist historian Reitlinger wrote:
‘…it became the Russian policy to remove the working population so that the towns should not benefit the enemy…Not to consent to be evacuated was regarded as a hostile act, often visited with dire consequences later.’
And the Jewish chief of the Soviet Information Bureau, S.A. Lesovsky, announced the official version of the Soviet Government with
‘In fact, the Germans never did occupy any territory with a population of 75,000,000. Well aware of the wolfish proclivities of the Nazi plunderers, ravishers and murderers, the mass of the Soviet population departed beforehand for the Eastern districts of the Soviet Union.’”
So, once again, Mr. “no evidence” Welch turns out to be the real liar. Next, bullshit artist Welch repeats the same tired old bromides about Communism not being a Jewish movement. This time, he asserts that because Chinamen and others have also been involved in building Communism, that this somehow refutes the fact that the Russian and Eastern European originators of the system were Jewish. Perhaps Mr. Welch should read the Hungarian historian, Istvan Deak, who candidly admits that “Jews created the left wing movement”. Or, if that does not please him, he could get a copy of Jack Jacobs book, “On Socialists And The Jewish Question After Marx”. I would suggest going straight to p.127 and reading the section entitled”Lenin vs. the Bund on Kautsky and the Jewish Question”. We do not want Mr. Teacher to have to waste his time reading the whole book. (He has better things to do, like “refuting” me.)
Mr. Welch constantly impugns my scholarly abilities. Both professors Albert Lindeman and Kevin MacDonald who I know personally, have a much higher regard for my research abilities. As to the standard Jewish apolgetic defense that Communist Jews were “renegade” Jews who had repudiated their faith, I will have much more to say on that pretense laster on. For the nonce, I shall quote the well-known Jewish journalist Alfred Nossig to the contrary.
“Socialism and the Mosaic code are programmes which are not at all in opposition…present day world socialism forms the first stage in the accomplishment of the Mosaic teaching, the beginning of the realization of the future state of the world announced by our prophets. ..this is why all Jewish groups whatever they are, Zionists or adepts of the Diaspora, have a vital interest in the victory of socialism; they must exact it not only on principle, not only because of its identity with the Mosaic doctrine, but also on tactical grounds.”
Integrales Judentum
Now let us look at another piece of evidence. From the very knowledgeable English journalist Geoffrey Wheatcroft’s 1996 book, “The Controversy Of Zion: Jewish Nationalism, The Jewish State, And The Unresolved Jewish Dilemma” , we read the following interesting words from pp.196-198.. “Before long there was a cause which captured the imagination of the Jewish salariat of the Hollywood studios, but it was not Judaism, Jewish humanism or Zionism, it was Communism… Not only in Hollywood but on the east coast, Jews played a disproportionate part in far-left politics, although not all were Stalinists. In New York, much more than in London or Paris, there was a lively and influential, albeit numerically small, Trotskyite movement. Indeed it was said that New Yotk in the 1930’s and 1940’s was the most interesting part of the Soviet Union, since it was there alone that the conflict between Stalinist and Trotskyite Bolshevism was conducted noisily in public. And those who conducted it were mostly Jewish.”
Enough for right now. I will deal exhaustively with Mr. Welch’s false claims regarding Zionism and the British Mandate later. Those assertions are as blatantly false as all the rest of his Talmudic twist think historiography.
“
on 10 April 2009
Lee:
Shall I quote Winston Churchills famous old “Illustated Sunday Herald” article entitled “Zionism Versus Bolshevism”: A Struggle For The Soul Of The Jewish People” dated February 8, 1920? It would appear that Churchill is credible when bellowing about a fake extermination of Jews, but not credible when testifying as to Jewish control of communism. Which way do you want the argument, pin head?
To HanoverFist:
I fully realize that I will never convince my opponents. But by cutting through their twist think arguments with documented facts and clear reasoning, I think I can demonstrate to outsiders that:
(1) Revisionists do know what they are talking about;
(2) Help expose the standard techniques by which Jews and their apologists, like Mr. Welch, try to confuse the facts.
As to getting the Jews to admit the facts, that will never happen.
on 10 April 2009
I must say that I am impressed by neo-Nazi scholarship. It sounds good. Worse, to our shame, half of it is true.
The terror bombings were recklessly started by Churchill–Coventry was German revenge for the bombing of German cities.
The insane extermination of German POW’s in French and American death camps did occur.
Equally incredible was the delivery, for execution, of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians, Russians, Croats, Bosnian Muslims, Albanians, Estonians, Lithuanians, etc. These were the guys who entered the Wehrmacht as SS divisions or who soldiered for European Nazi-allied regimes. What was odd was that such exterminations came at the very same time as the OSS was taking over the Gehlen organization for espionage against Stalin and trying to finance and organize terrorist groups to send across. One branch of the government was hiring Nazis, while another branch was exterminating the POW’s.
The other half of the Thames story is nonsense. The orderly evacuation of children and of factories began after the major concentrations of Jewish populations were overrun. Lesovsky is giving us some happy Soviet propaganda nonsense. Millions of Jews of the Baltics, Poland, and Ukraine were left behind during the Red Army rout of the summer of 1941, together with hundreds of thousands of POW’s, most of whom also perished.
The Nacht und Nebel disappearance program was started under Hitler, for the Reds. It was well imitated by U.S. sponsored disappearance programs in Latin America. The Reds were led away at night, and disappeared. For Jews and Gypsies in Europe, the program was officially one of orderly mandatory migration East. They were led away and disappeared.
We do not need bones or death certificates to convict a kidnapper. The target was led away and did not return. That’s enough. I do not need a death certificates or bones to prove that my grandfather was murdered. He was led away, together with a few million others, and was never seen again.
on 10 April 2009
First, my compliments to Matteo B for at least acknowledgeing that half of what I write is true. If he thinks that I am making up the deportation of the Jews by the Soviets to areas outside German control, I can only reccomend that he read Sanning’s well documented study. It may change his mind. Next, if he will consult my original post on this thread, he will see that the claim of Jews “disappearing, never to be seen again”, is flatly false. They have appeared, again and again, camoflauged as Hungarians, Poles, etc. in North and South America after the US government deopped the classification “Jew” to assist the camoflauge in November 1943.
Now, on to Mr. Welch and his prevarications about Zionism and the British Mandate. Let me begin with “Bolsheviks and British Jews” by Sharman Kadish. In the cover blurb of the book we read the following:
” Immigrant radicalism alarmed the established Anglo-Jewish community, who feared that the Jewish-Bolshevik connection was being vindicated on their own door step. In fast-changing conditions of war and revolution, emancipatory political responses were becoming outmoded, and the communal leadership found itself forced into the politics of cultural pluralism.
This tendency was further encouraged by the progress of Zionism. The genesis of the Balfour Declaration on Palestine, which came about almost concurrently with the Bolshevik Revolution, owed a great deal to government preoccupation with the Jewish role in Bolshevism and the misplaced supposition that Zionist nationalism could act as a corrective to it.”
That is a fair statement of the case. That was exactly the mentality of HMG at the time. The distinguished Israeli journalist Tom Segev says the same thing in his book, “One Palestine, Promised”. So does the Israeli, Leon Hadar, in his book “Quagmire”, published by the Cato Institute. Now, as to Mr. Welch’s claim that the famous Balfour Declaration was issued exclusively for British imperial interests, and not because of Zionist machinations.
There is no doubt that a multiplicity of motives lay behind the declaration. But that one of the prime motives was to curry favor with real or alleged Jewish influence over the US government and president Woodrwow Wilson is established by the statements of the British statesmen themselves. If we consult Robert John’s classic (and very hard to find study), “Behind The Balfour Declaration: The Hidden Origins Of Today’s Mideast Crisis”, we find the following quotations which are worth quoting in extenso. David Lloyd George, Prime Minister of Great Britain at the time the Balfour Declaration was issued, made the following remarkable claim on p.726 of his “Memoirs of the Peace Conference”:
“There is no better proof of the value of the Balfour Declaration as a military move than the fact that Germany entered into negotiations with Turkey in an endeavor to find an alternative scheme which would appeal to Zionists. A German-Jewish Society, the V.J.O.D., was formed, and in January 1918, Talaat, the Turkish Grand Vizier, at the instigation of the Germans, gave vague promises of legislation by means of which ‘all justifiable wishes of the Jews in Palestine would be able to meet their fulfilment.’
Another most cogent reason for the adoption by the Allies of the policy of the Declaration lay in the state of Russia herself. Russian Jews had been secretly active on behalf of the Central Powers from the first; they had become the chief agents of German pacifist propaganda in Russia; by 1917 they had done much in preparing for that general disintegration of Russian society, later recognized as the Revolution. It was believed that if Great Britain declared for the fulfilment of Zionist aspirations in Palestine under her own pledge, one effect would be to bring Russian Jewry to the cause of the Entente.
It was believed, also, that such a declaration would have a potent influence upon world Jewry outside Russia, and secure for the Entente the aid of Jewish financial interests. In America, their aid in this respect would have a special value when the Allies had almost exhausted the gold and marketeable securities available for American purchase. Such were the chief considerations which, in 1917, impelled the British Government towards making a contract with Jewry.”
There are many other such documented quotations from prominent Englishmen of the WW1 era regarding the real motivations behind Lord Balfour’s declaration in the late Dr. John’s remarkable study. I believe that one quotation is sufficient to show Mr. Welch’s (dare I say it?) deliberate lying on this particular issue. Now, on to his pretense that Jewish activity at the Paris Peace Conference was just some kind of exercise in international relief and good will. I shall quote from a book, “The Cause Of World Unrest”, by Mr. H.A. Gwynne, the former editor of the English “Morning Post” newspaper and a man who, like this author, thought that the Jews were up to no good in Paris in the year 1919. On pp. 188-189 of his interesting study, Mr. Gwynne quotes the political analyst, Edward J. Dillon in his book onthe Paris Peace Conference as follows:
“Of all the collectivities whose interests were furthered at the Conference the Jews had perhaps the most resourceful and certainly the most influential exponents. There were Jews from Palestine, from Poland, Russia, the Ukraine, Roumania, Greece, Britain, Holland, and Belgium; but the largest and most brilliant contingent was sent by the United States.
It may seem amazing to some readers, but it is none the less a fact that a considerable number of Delegates believed that the real influences behind the Anglo-Saxon peoples were Semitic. They confronted the President’s proposal on the subject of religious inequality, and, in particular, the odd motive alleged for it, with the measures for the protection of minorities which he subsequently imposed on the lesser States, and which had for their keynote to satisfy the Jewish elements in Eastern Europe,. And they concluded that the sequence of events framed and enforced in this direction were inspired by the Jews assembled in Paris for the purpose of realizing their carefully thought-out programme, which they succeeded in having substantially executed. However right or wrong these Delegates may have been it would be a dangerous mistake to ignore their views, seeing that they have since become one of the permanent elements of the situation. The formula into which this policy was thrown by the members of the Conference, whose countries it affected, and who regarded it as fatal to the peace of Europe, was this: ‘Henceforth the world will be governed by the Anglo-Saxon peoples, who, in turn, are swayed by their Jewish elements.’ ”
Now, a few closing comments. Throughout this thread, I have been challenged by my adversaries to document everything I say. I have done so, again and again. My opponents, however, document nothing. They take their own assertions at face value and treat them as immutable fact (while teaching the kiddies to do the same, like Mr. Welch). Perhaps it is time to force the other side to meet their burden of proof. I say they cannot do it.
on 10 April 2009
http://mideastfacts.org/facts/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=51&Itemid=9
Since Mr. Welch pretends that he knows something about Zionism perhaps he should test his acumen against my essay. Now, as to the asinine questions (Does Mr. Welch know any other kind?). We have seen that there were indeed Zionist ambitions hiding behind the issuance of the declaration. One was the fear of that silly old Jewish Communist charge which high school level “scholar” Mr. Welch poo-poos. The Zionists, like any other group of manipulators had to “go slow”. As Max Nordau himself admitted they coined the term “homeland” in order to lull suspicions and conceal the real objective , a Jewish state, in order to allay both the fears of the Arabs and the non-Zionist Jews. Surely “Cagey Welchy” has picked up on such obvious points?
The Zionists wanted both the headwaters of the Litani river in Lebanon and the territory east of the Jordan. They had to settle for less because of the objections of the British. If one reviews the power politics of the ’20’s through ’40’s the Zionists sometimes got what they wanted, sometimes they didn’t . When it came to the Passsfield White Paper of 1930 condemning discriminatory employment practices against the Arabs, those “powerless” Zionists were able to induce Ramsey MacDonald’s “Black Letter” repudiating the White Paper. In November 1947 when the United Nations General Assembly was overwhelmingly against partitioning Palestine between Arabs and Jews, those “powerless” Zionists did it again. They used their agents within the US government ( you know, Mr. Welch, fictional characters straight out of the “Protocols” like Colonel Hildring, David “Mickey Marcus, Herbert Bayard Swope, Robert Nathan, Bernard Baruch, etc.) to pressure unwilling delegates to vote for partition. You remember how the government of Panama was pressured into reversing its stand against partition by the threatened loss of six US loans, don’t you? And, of course, there was dear old Harvey Firestone of Firestone Tire and Rubber threatening to pull his factory out of Liberia if Liberia didn’t vote for partition. And what about the change of regime in Siam which got Siam’s vote against partition reversed by Jewish lawyer types?
No, Mr. Welch. Jews are just as powerless and inoffensive as can be. And let us not start quoting the private papers of Harry Truman on all the Jewish pressure that was brought to bear on him by those kike SOB’s who care about no one but themselves. (Harry wrote it; I didn’t.) I just love debating with you, Mr. Schoolteacher. It gives me the opportunity to show the world what an ignorant, stupid, deceptive, lying kosher SOB you really are.
on 10 April 2009
One other point for Mr. Welch to consider. If I fail to quote sources for my beliefs, then I am an ignorant hillbilly right winger. If, however, I quote reputable sources extensively, then I am a monomaniac with a one track mind. Such are the sliding scales of judgement of a circumsized schoolteacher.
on 10 April 2009
John Thales
I have not commented at all on Churchills comments on the jewish involvement in communism, and I am not really interested (I am not really obsessed with the jews as you clearly are i.e I do not hate them). I thought this thread was about the Holocaust?
Stop trying to evade the direct question. A childish ploy for fools. What is your number one piece of evidence that Winston Churchill our wartime leader was lying when he confirmed that the jews had been exterminated in gas chambers from direct first hand reports from his armies who liberated those camps.
Just sit down, have a think, and write down your best evidence in a succinct sentence. …..Go on try it….If you have something I will willingly believe you. I am neither for nor against the jews, they are just another race to me.
on 10 April 2009
Actually Churchill –and those other two Jew-haters, Roosevelt and Truman–had motives for minimizing the extermination of the Jews. Since they refused to bomb the extermination machinery and the rail lines to Auschwitz, since they sent Jewish refugees back to their deaths, since they even refused to help feed Jewish children offered passage to Sweden by the Nazis, the Allied leaders shared in the guilt. Thus, rationally, they should have minimized the Nazi crimes, especially since they wanted to rebuild the German army for use against the Soviets.
On the six million missing Jews, I like the latest argument of Mr. Thames. It’s the kind of line you hear from guys who murder their wife and say that she must have run off with her lover.
So a few million Jews get on the train, and never write a postcard to Christian friends. They never come back to reclaim their house. Not even their bank account. Why? They went to Bolivia, of course.
on 10 April 2009
http://www.earthpilgrims.com/ehome.html
There is a total of FOUR results from Earth Pilgrims, you incredible asshat. That includes THIS PAGE. Ron…however I spell tuchis…you have your entire head up it.
Hooah!
At any rate, you’re running on an empty tank, Ronnie boy.
John…keep on smashing in the wafer-thin thoughts of these doops. Matteo…you’ve just explained the drug trade with your last statement. This is why they’re illegal…so that cheaply-grown “narcotics” can be made hugely profitable.
The only reason hemp and cocaine are illegal is because of two things:
1. Pharmaceutical companies
2. Monied interests
I do, however, detect a bit of snark in this comment: “On the six million missing Jews, I like the latest argument of Mr. Thames. It’s the kind of line you hear from guys who murder their wife and say that she must have run off with her lover.”
Let’s not give ANY credence whatsoever to the number in question - it still has NOT been proven that there were six million people missing that purport to be of jewish heritage. Since this number was being used during the First world war, it should be disregarded.
“There’s no business like SHOAH business!”
on 10 April 2009
Lee…is there something wrong with your level of reading comprehension, that you must have everything made digestible to you in tidbits?
It seems apparent to me that John THAMES has answered your question thoroughly. If you cannot fathom the answer from his postings…I’d recommend to you ABC blocks.
on 10 April 2009
Lee and Matteo:
You are both simply stupid.
In case Matteo has not noticed, Jews have been resurfacing constantly since WW2. Every day some Jew reunites with a relative who was supposedly exterminated. Where does he think that these “survivors” are coming from? After the war, Matteo, there was very little for the Jews to “return” to. Their homes had been bombed out of existence, their assets had been confiscated by the Nazis. What alternative was there, but to go elsewhere? As to the comparison about wife murderers, perhaps you have not noticed that in criminal courts these days defendants are being convicted based on no evidence whatever. Look at Scott Peterson, for example. The fact that a woman has disappeared does not prove murder, any more than the disappearance of your grandfather proves murder by the Germans. You simply refuse to consider alternative possibilities. How do you know that he did not die of disease or starvation? Or that, if he were old, that the stress of internment did not kill him?You simply assume that he was the victim of an extermination program. What entitles you to that assumption?
It is interesting how the same people who deny overwhelming circumstantional evidence that Roosevelt set up the fleet at Pearl Harbor will seize on any thread of evidence to believe either that :
(1) The Germans killed six million Jews or (2) that every man so accused is a wife murderer. The “evidence” being used to convict alleged wife murders is every bit as flimsy, in many cases, as the evidence being used to convict the Germans. The argument, in both cases, is that both Germans and husbands are inherently bad people and, therefore, are capable of anything. Hence, they must be guilty as charged.
Let us take the case of Scott Peterson . No one provided any direct evidence whatever at the trial that Scott Peterson murdeed his wife. There were no witnesses to the crime. No murder weapon was found on Peterson. All that the case consisted of was the wife’s body found at a location where Scott Peterson frequently fished. What does that prove? Absolutely nothing. Anyone could have noticed Scott fishing at the location and then figured that dumping the wife’s body there would be a good way to implicate Scott. Two jurors on the case, one of them a law school student, were kicked off by the judge for telling the other jurors that there was no evidnce that Scott Peterson had committed any crime. That sounds like Nuremberg jurisprudence to me.
Your problem, Matteo, is that you do not understand the concept of proof. The fact that large numbers of Jews were deported by the Germans does not prove that they were murdered. The fact that many of them chose to remain in Jewish communist Russia after the war does not prove that they were murdered. The fact that large numbers of them migrated to Palestine and the Americas does not prove they were murdered. But when a president of the United States with a huge incentive for maneuvering his country into war removes the fleet from its base in San Diego and moves it to the much more vulnerable base at Hawaii, when he does everything in his power to provoke the Japanese into war by cutting off their raw materials, when he denies the base commanders of necessary intelligence about Japanese intentions, when he removes the essential aircraft carriers from the base but leaves the obsolete and disposable battle ships, in short, when he does everything a man looking to set up an incident would do, that proves nothing because no one has produced the signed order by Roosevelt ordering the destruction of the fleet. Such are the shifting standards of evidence of enlightened historical dick heads.
on 10 April 2009
Lee:
The British armies liberated Bergen-Belsen and the other camps in the Reich, along with the Americans. It has been admitted by the Jews since the early 1970’s that there were no extermination camps with “gas chambers” in Germany proper. Therefore, Winston’s intelligence about those camps must have been wrong. Right?
I take it that you are English since you refer to Churchill as “our’ leader. Are you not aware, Lee, of al the outrageous lies your leaders told about the Germans in WW1? Why do you think that the same English politicians who lied so thoroughly in those years would be any more honest the second time aroind? The issue of Jewish involvement in communism is not irrelevant to the Holocaust debate. Whatever the Germans did to the Jews in Russia is directly related to the Jewish involvement in communism and German fear of same
I note that schoolteacher Welch has not posted anything since I took his high school Ph.d. “brain” apart with my latest rebuttals.Maybe now he will go back to kindergarten where he belongs.
on 10 April 2009
“All that the case consisted of was the wife’s body found at a location where Scott Peterson frequently fished.”
Not only does this have nothing to do with the holocaust, it’s quite astonishing to me that you want us to swallow that a trial which lasted as long as the Peterson trial consisted in its entirety of a one sentence argument.
On top of that, the case is well documented, and one simply need read the transcript themselves to bear your statement out as a lie.
http://www.courttv.com/trials/peterson/
But you wouldn’t employ the same argumentative fallacy on the topic of the holocaust, would y ou?
on 10 April 2009
When someone is detained and disappears, we know we are dealing with some unpleasantry that ought to be investigated. When the police lie about some detail, we know something’s up.
Western Jews had plenty to go back to: friends, family, and country. They had houses and businesses to reclaim. They did not go back because they had some unpleasant experience. Gas or bullet or medical experiment or starvation or typhus, what’s the difference?
on 11 April 2009
Matteo and Fangbeer:
You are both shit-for-brains.
What does the length of a trial have to do with the validity of the proceeding? Both Nuremberg and the Stalinist purge trials were “long” proceedings. Does that mean that either were genuine proceedings? As to standards of evidence it matters not whether you agree with me on Scott Peterson. The point is the double standards of evidence being employed. Every day jury supposition and speculation is being substituted for hard fact as a basis for conviction. We find exactly the same thing at Nuremberg and related trials where “testimonies”, forged documents and technological absurdities are substituted for millions of bodies pumped full of hydrogen cyanide.
In case you had not noticed, Fangbeer, innumerable wrongful convictions are obtained yearly in American law courts. One of the big reasons for this process is the constant downgrading of the concept of “evidence”. It is like Jean-Claude Pressac’s thirty-seven “criminal traces” of gassing. Take one debatable point after another, pile them on top of each other and then claim that this constitutes “guilt beyond a reasonable doubt”. Similary, take a deportation program under harsh wartime conditions, take one to two million deaths from mass shootings, starvation at wars end and various diseases which tjhe Germans tried to control, and then claim that this constitutes proof of an extermination of “six million” by a technologically absurd method. The parallellism does not occur to either of you.
When it comes to the real questions, both of you babes-in-diapers are silent. Where are the orders for the extermination? How do we explain the order by Himmler to “reduce the death rate in the camps at all costs”? What about Hitler’s stated intention of “delaying the solution of the Jewish problem until war’s end”? (The Hans Lammerer phone conversation.) Why provide medical care and theatrical entertainments for the Jews at the supposed extermination camp at Auschwitz? Why believe the stories about mass exterminations at Sobibor, Belzec, Treblinks and other camps when the stories about exterminations in the German camps and Auschwitz have now been proven false? (”False in one thing; false in all things”, as the lawyers say.) How could the Germans have deployed all their manpower fighting a war on two to three fronts simultaneously and still have conducted a murder of “six million” Jews as a sideline? Where did they get the resources for that when their resources were already strained to the limit fighting the war? How could the exterminations have been conducted in secret when Auschwitz was located in the middle of Polish villages and farmland? If the Germans were really conducting exterminations of millions of Jews on the Eastern front, then why not use the real evidence of the real extermination, rather than resort to the bogus “gas chamber” story? Mr. Welch to the contrary, the Communist satrapies in Eastern Europe were 75% Jewish after the war. (Consult American ambassador to Poland Arthur Bliss Lane, in his book “I Saw Poland Betrayed”, if you do not believe it from me.) Where did these non-exterminated Jews come from? And to dear, enlightened Matteo: You rejected Soviet testimony about the mass deportations of Russian civilians ahead of the Wehrmacht, but you said nothing about the Zionist historian Reitlinger or the American professor Lorimer who said the same thing, remember? And why do we need a kangaroo court after the war to prove an extermination that would have been known to everybody if it had really been taking place?
Let’s return to standards of evidence, children. Matteo and Fangbeer just love to believe that courts rightfully convict both Germans and alleged wife murderers. Have either of you heard of the cases of Dr. Sam Shepherd and Captain Geoffrey MacDonald, both wrongfully convicted of murdering their wives in the 1950’s and 1960’s? Do you adolescent dick brains think that the situation has improved since then”? Are you even remotely cognizant of the immense feminist bias which pervades our legal system? Do either of you stop to consider that the same all pervasive bias against Germans pervades the question of what really happened to the Jews during the Second World War?
But, just to tickle your brains, let us compare standards of evidence in ritual murder cases (that good ‘ole “blood libel”, allegation) with standards of evidence for war crime trials. Neither of you enlightened SOB’s would believe that for a second. How could you? (That would make you worse than professor Ariel Toaff.) However, if we look at the Father Tomaso Damascius case of 1840 the evidence there is just as good, much better actually, than at Nuremberg. It is true that the Jewish defendants were tortured, but so were the Germans at Nuremberg. It is true that the Turks were committed to a pre-determined verdict, but so was the court at Nuremberg. Now let us look at the facts, geniuses. The Jewish defendants were all questioned and tortured separately. They were not given the opportunity to co-ordinate their stories. They were all asked the same questions and they all gave the same answers. Miracle of miracles! The bodies of Father Tomaso and his man servant were found, with their throats cut, exactly where the Jews said they were. How unlike Nuremberg, where none of the inconsistency ridden stories meshed and where the bodies were nowhere to be found!
Of course, the Jews were not going to stand for this. They immediately bribed the Khedive of Egypt for an apology, which did not include an admission that the Jews were actually innocent. Jews in Europe put immense financial pressure on both France and the Austro-Hungarian monarchies, demanding immediate repayment of outstanding loans. This was necessary to shut up the French and Austrian consuls in Damascus who were adamant that the Jews were guilty as charged. The English Consul in Damascus was the world famous orientalist , Sir Richard Burton. He made a thorough investigation of the ritual murder charge, concluding that it was entirely true. When he died, his investigation, in the form of an unpublished appendix to his book, “The Jew, The Gypsy and El Islam”, was obtained by English Jews as an assignment of rights from his widow and deep-sixed. The Jews have refused to allow anyone to see it (with a few exceptions granted to Jewish scholars, who have remained silent as to its contents.)
It all sounds exactly like Nuremberg, where all the German records of what was really going on at Auschwitz were carted away and buried in the Soviet Union for fifty years. So much for standards of jurisprudence and logically consistent minds-like those possessed by Matteo and Fangbeer.
on 11 April 2009
Where, oh where, is poor Mr. Welch? After I proved him a liar on the Balfour Declaration and the Paris Peace Conference he has been shame facedly hiding.
Please come back, Mr. Welch. I need more opportunities to take you apart. Perhaps you can next try ressurecting Jpoan Peters and “From Time Immemorial” by telling us that there were no Arabs in Palestine. I do so enjoy humiliating you. After all, I must be a Nazi sadist, right?
on 11 April 2009
This man Churchill couldn’t be wrong could he, after all, he’s not a savage…is he?
I was going to BOLD and italicize some stuff, but, well, it’s hardly necessary for speaking against the “impeccable” character of that Churchill, the single most important reason that, today, Americans and Israelis still kill Palestinians and Arabs, and so Arabs and Palestinians keep killing Israelis, Americans, and Brits. WhoTF was THIS guy, think about it, to decide the fate of one of the richest historical lands on the globe, by drawing lines in the sand, lines any schoolboy will try to cross just “because”? A genius, he’s been called!
First Jerusalem (Canaan), then Baghdad (Sumeria-Babylon-Tigris/Euphrates for Pete’s sake), soon it will be Kabul, and likely further places (Tibet? Nepal? Tbilisi?) where even today, likely in fear, the holiest men in the world live, where there is nothing like the extent of Western consumerism, where tradition is many thousands of years old, where all their power-people want is to set their own price for their main national resource, and to sell to whom they choose. What could be guiding this almost systematic take-over and control of these mightiest cities of history…ever since Churchill?
Anyway, here, your hero, Winston Churchill, running his prolific mouth (cut and pasted from WikiQuotes):
“I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gases: gases can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected… We cannot, in any circumstances acquiesce to the non-utilisation of any weapons which are available to procure a speedy termination of the disorder which prevails on the frontier.
[Statement as president of the Air Council, War Office Departmental Minute (1919-05-12); Churchill Papers 16/16, Churchill Archives Centre, Cambridge]
Having spewed this, I shall confess that I cannot yet say I think Churchill was anti-Semitic. He was very aware of “the People” and considered his People, and so himself, superior to all, and very flippant, perhaps sometimes too facetious for his own good…The phrase “pompous ass” comes to mind.
But importantly, look at the commentary about this quote:
“Many argue that quotes from this passage are often taken out of context, because Churchill is distinguishing between non-lethal agents and the deadly gasses used in World War I and emphasizing the use of non-lethal weapons; however Churchill is not clearly ruling out the use of lethal gases, simply stating that “it is not necessary to use only the most deadly”. It is sometimes claimed that gas killed many young and elderly Kurds and Arabs when the RAF bombed rebelling villages in Iraq in 1920 during the British occupation. For more information on this matter, see Gas in Mesopotamia.”
Gas in Mesopotamia. Ah but no protest about them there savages.
A Holocaust continues, upon “savages” in the name of democracy and freedom.
on 11 April 2009
You sure are a windbag.
I made no claims about the “validity of the [Peterson] proceeding.” What it did claim was that the conviction was based on more than just the proximity of the body to Peterson’s fishing trip. Your summary of the case conveniently whitewashes months of evidence and argument presented to 12 members of a jury of Peterson’s peers.
I then alluded to the fact that you’ve done the same thing with the rest of your argument regarding the actual topic.
“Every day jury supposition and speculation is being substituted for hard fact”
You mean like the idea that Jews the missing Jews are hidden in the Ural mountains?
“The vast majority of them were hiding out east of the Ural Mountains in the Soviet Union during the war. ”
And how about this fact filled statement:
“After the war, [the missing Jews] terrorized the populations of Eastern Europe”
I’d love to see you bring that little nugget into a courtroom.
There is a reason that people laugh at you. The fact that you think we are the ones that are logically inconstant idiots, that’s part of it.
on 11 April 2009
Government leaders, whether democratic or authoritarian, somehow, if annoyed, come to the conclusion that they ought to wipe out some group of people. Be they Jews, or American Indians, or Gypsies, or Serbs, or Armenians, or German POW’s, or Palestinians, or Branch Davidians, our leaders decide that, to save the nation, said group must be deleted.
Afterwards, without fail, admirers and patriots appear, saying that those leaders were noble, kind, and thoughtful, and did their best to succor the afflicted, to the point of providing them with church sacraments or musical entertainment before they regretfully died, of natural death, having been crucified.
on 11 April 2009
Fangbeer:
You are an incredibly stupid shit. You have written nothing which makes any sense.
(1) It is a fact that the missing Jews were deported behind the Ural Mountains ahead of the German advance. Go back and read the sources I quoted.
(2) It is also a fact that after the war Joseph Stalin installed many of these Jews who had been hiding out the war in Russia, as the chief commissars in the Iron Curtain countries (read the quotation from Professor Ginsberg’s book , earlier in the thread).
There is no inconsistency in any thing I have written; the inconsistency is entirely in your scrambled egg “brain”. Now, to address another point. You are employing the same tactic that Ron and the others have been using since inception. Instead of addressing the main points of my argument (once again spelled out very clearly in my latest posts), you instead seize upon a tangenital point of comparison, the Scott Peterson trial, and allege that because I am supposedly distorting the record on that one, that therefore I am distorting the record on the Holocaust the same way. This is exactly like trying to refute the thesis of a thousand page book by endlessly quibbling about one footnote. It takes attention off the substance of the issue and leads the debate into a blind alley (exactly the intention, I am sure). I note that Mr. Welch’s massive distortions on the real extent of Jewish involvement in communism and the intent behind the Balfour Declaration do not perturb you the same way.
Now to Matteo. Here we have the technique of a valid general point being used to confuse a specific point. It is certainly true that past misdeeds tend to get minimized and explained away by future generations. But none of this addresses the specific points disproving the “six million” legend. As to the feeble attempts at satire by referring to those “voluntarily crucified” for their own good by a benificent Fuehrer, I’ve read equally stupid attempts by Ron and Lee.
As usual, the bottom line is that you pathetic idiots have nothing substantive to say.
on 11 April 2009
I would now like to address a point made by Angelo earlier.
It is quite true that there is a remarkable similarity between the Nazi “gas chamber” hoax and the Darwinian evolution hoax. Both operate by appeal to authority. Both attempt to smear their legitimate critics as “cranks”. Both suppress data which conflict with their theses. Both appeal to “traces of evidence”, rather than provide direct evidence of their claims. Both are established religions posing as established facts.
Both have legitimate critics within their own disciplines who are marginalized and simply shut out of debate. Professor Michael Buhle and Professor Arthur Butz are analogous. Both hoaxes cannot explain facts which other theories can. Both hoaxes serve as a cover for powerful established interests. Both hoaxes seek to crush without question all competing interpretations.
The Darwinians and the Holocausters are birds of a feather. They are both liars; they are both fronts for the establishments of “science” and “history”.
on 11 April 2009
John Thales
I asked for your best bit of evidence. As usual you are incoherent. But I think you are saying that your best bit of evidence is:
“It has been admitted by the Jews since the early 1970’s that there were no extermination camps with “gas chambers” in Germany proper. Therefore, Winston’s intelligence about those camps must have been wrong. Right?”
Are you going provide a source for this assertion that it has been “admitted by the jews”. You can also see that it is a silly statement. As I would be failrly convinced that Mateo B is not admitting to it?
Using your poor logic I am English and I admit that the Holocaust happened. Therefore the holocaust happened.
If that is your best evidence, I would not bother with the rest, it is simply the drivel of a fantacist
on 11 April 2009
hUNGOVER aRSEHOLE and John Thales
“It seems apparent to me that John THAMES has answered your question thoroughly. ”
Well thank you for proving me right I did say John Thales arguments (as above) were so childish that they would appeal to retards.
In answer to John Thales question as to the whereabouts of Mr Welsh. I am presuming:
1. He has a life/ girlfreind
2. He has realised that John Thales has no points worthy of response
Probably both
on 11 April 2009
The issue is that a couple of million workers were taken from Western Europe to work for the Germans. They came back. A few millions Jews were taken from Western and Eastern Europe to work for the Germans. They did not come back. Where did they go?
Holocaust revisionists spot contradictions between the reports of thousands of different reporters, and conclude that the entire final solution story is false. To quote Mr. Thames: “This is exactly like trying to refute the thesis of a thousand page book by endlessly quibbling about one footnote.” Precisely–and well written.
Mr. Thames says that it would have been irrational for the Germans to kill their workers. Just as it was irrational for Truman to kill German POW’s by the hundreds of thousands. Still, it was done.
on 11 April 2009
John Windbag Thames,
Oh this is too rich to pass up - even when skiing is so great.
“It is quite true that there is a remarkable similarity between the Nazi “gas chamber” hoax and the Darwinian evolution hoax.” (Boy are you ever right - holocaust deniers and creationists both eskew rationalism and reason in favor of faith and bias)
“Both operate by appeal to authority” (yeah the authority of scientific method, v. holocaust deniers/creationists’ appeal to faith).
“Both attempt to smear their legitimate critics as “cranks”. (Actually the holocaust deniers and creationists do a great job of proving that themselves see Fitzmiller v. Dover and Irving v. Lipstadt)
Both suppress data which conflict with their theses (hard data too, like the Protocols, Of Pandas and People, and Mein Kampf)
Both appeal to “traces of evidence” (you know, like observation, hypothesis and testing v. making stuff up out of thin air).
Both have legitimate (legitimate as in: thoroughly discredited) critics within their own disciplines (using the term broadly) who are marginalized and simply shut out of debate (which is a nice way of saying: exposed as frauds, convicted of perjury or denied relief under the world’s most liberal libel laws).
Both hoaxes cannot explain facts which other theories can (Duh, there are unanswered questions in every discipline. Newton’s law of gravity left unexplained facts but people didn’t return to calling gravity divine - even though divinity explains all facts ).
Both hoaxes serve as a cover for powerful established interests (there is simply too much money to be made - by the Jews - in exposing the moon hoax (see my utterly hilarious entry above which I paraphrased from another website).
Both hoaxes seek to crush without question all competing interpretations (which have no basis in fact)
The Darwinians and the Holocausters are birds of a feather. They are both liars; they are both fronts for the establishments of “science” and “history.” (And hey, what’s wrong with simply teaching in science class: “God done it?” or in history class “It was da joos?”
Windbag Thames would make school alot easier but I don’t think he’d be serving science and history very well.
on 11 April 2009
Lee…got your hockey helmet on?
“Windbag”, indeed. Your breath smells like turd after all the time you spend in Joseph Welch’s crack. Are YOU the “girlfriend” you so certain Welchy has?
You are starting to get the point, in that you are correctly linking the Holocau$t with the term HOAX.
I do so wish Merkel would wake up, and remove all Holocau$t legislation from Germany’s laws, and free Ernst Zundel, Robert Faurrison and Germar Rudolf from their unlawful confinment.
on 11 April 2009
I like it how John Thaes expects us to simply take his word that he’s right, and to use his thouroughly fabricated evidence to prove it. (like the creationistswho use only the Bibleto attempt to refute their critics). Bonus for the attempts to change the argument and the “baffle with bullshit” super long posts, laced with copy-and-paste, and personal insults. I know that this is a waste of breath/bandwidth, and that someone like John will never be convinced. But, in his mind it is WE who are the fools. Ignorance, aster all, is bliss.
on 11 April 2009
Ronny want a cracker?
Is this sort of “argumentation” typical of the “regulars”?
Before I begin, let’s just address the “get a life” question, fairly common a proscription these days, especially in conversations involving teen girls. Here we have people indeed with lives spending some of their time trying to shake sheep out of their “bah bah” mentality and, in the absence of better evidence we have other people supplying variants of the same insulting nonsense without even a smidgen of originality at that, and under cover of the internet and so sure to keep their eyes unblackened, like raw fish indeed.
I don’t think anyone wants to compare fullness and breadth of lives, nor is this the issue. Just another chance for the sheep to justify their flockdom when faced with the reality of an unstable pasture. I will respond to Ron, because for me he is symbolic of the arrogant ignorance taught and believed by this devolving society of ours. My only qualms are about relevance to this topic, I hope they are apparent.
[inflating lungs so as to be able to fully expand the bag...]
Please, for goodness sake man, knock your silly authorities down a notch and actually question some of the parroting and remembrance of disconnected speculative facts by virtue of which you consider yourself educated. My guess is you are still a young man, and have not quite broken out of that “he is a doctor, he must be right” and “that is what science says so it must be correct” ludicrous evaluation of people and ideas. Here, for example:
re.:
“Boy are you ever right - holocaust deniers and creationists both eskew rationalism and reason in favor of faith and bias”
Rationalism and reason? Forget the insults, it is for this statement that you prove your immaturity. In epistemological terms, that is blasphemy. Your “science” is in every instance a FAITH, of the lowest sort, in that it promises you NOTHING for belief in it. It is indeed a religion, without morality, and with nothing to tell.
Less than a dozen “great inventions” make you any better technologically than Pythagoras, and as regards to the meaning of life and the courses once should take, in short the nature of wisdom, he surpasses you by aeons. Not only has science given little other than toys, it has made man to think he is a chimp, and he strives to make himself this way, as you so clearly epitomize. You are the poster boy for what’s on the end of a leash.
Again, tell me, how many planets are there?
re.:
“‘Both operate by appeal to authority’ (yeah the authority of scientific method, v. holocaust deniers/creationists’ appeal to faith).”
No increase in lifespan since Socrates. No expansion of his consciousness or basis for morality. No cures for the cancers we likely, through science, created, or even the common cold. Yet you hand your son and daughter to this doctor him or her, as if they are priests. You let them tell you to get new tits or a nose job when aesthetics they can’t even pronounce. The right to buy what results you want from the laboratory of any University in the West. This is scientific method, which by true definition, you must know, brings only probability. This is not what a seeker of Truth, about the Holocaust or anything else, is after.
Thames is right. The analogy is perfect. Problem here you do not want to admit you are guided, in your science, by faith as well. A faith in nothing, at best, in men like yourself. Let me give you some advice. Fear your doctor, and consider while you slalom (really…who cares man?) that 90% of what you know is bullshit.
re.
“‘Both suppress data which conflict with their theses (hard data too, like the Protocols, Of Pandas and People, and Mein Kampf’)
Oh not the dreaded Mein Kampf! Hard data, like what? How old is the earth, the universe? Red shifts are a fairy tale, the wet dream of invalids and space geeks hoping to cream themselves over a UFO sighting. If only such stupid aliens could do the Earth a favor and take to their far far away places all NASA. Radiocarbon won’t even get you 10,000 years into the past. While microevolution is true and proven every day, macroevolution is the Genesis story of that religion called Evolution. Once again Thames is correct, and you…let’s hope for just a minor bump to the head.
re.
“Both appeal to ‘traces of evidence’ (you know, like observation, hypothesis and testing v. making stuff up out of thin air).”
Actually, it is science that more or less creates the world out of thin air, and some slime. All the great creationist beliefs have traditions millenia old, from China to the Americas. They persist not because they are against reason, but rather because they are substantiated by reason and history. Archaeological idiots, were it not for the sacred texts of bygone human history, wouldn’t know where to look or for what. Conservationist idiots stalk, tag, and contaminate with their very odors the environment of, the animal they are trying to save, all the while not knowing or grasping with their feeble brains the fact that the dinosaur dies when its time has come.
This is exactly the same with global warming, and the now “chic” order to “go green.” There is no scientific proof of any such thing, statements usually made by people who cannot even build a fire or skin a rabbit, who accumulate more trash than the banks of the Ganges, and who have never planted anything but parroted ideas into their abiding friends who, 9 out of 10 times, would desert you at the slightest threat to their safety or freedom. There is no global warming, Evolution is a fairy tale for suckers and the product of scientific dishonesty (as I have I think proven on my website), and species, just like you, will one day die. I hardly think any of these statements are made up “out of thin air” perhaps too much of which you are now breathing, on skis invented by primitive people without government funding. Finally, re:
“And hey, what’s wrong with simply teaching in science class: ‘God done it?’ or in history class ‘It was da joos?’”
You are really a simple young man. The mysteries contained in the books and myths you look down on, even the classical stories about hubris and perhaps thanatos would seem to be enough to shake you of your certitude. “God done it,” for creationists, is only the beginning of scientific investigation, one which opens up not merely the potential for advancement in the physical world (which science has provide little other than the toys I mention), but also in the world of the mind, and of the soul or spirit, the things most real, by which comes Truth and not just probability. Much damage has been done by religion in the past, perhaps all major conflicts have had their origin here. This is because prejudice and nationalism alike, the “we are superior” or “god favors US” mantras partition off the wisdom of the ages whereas they were meant to be universal. So a blind religion is just as bad as anything scientific. But the fact remains, clear to me, that Science is indeed a religion, its believers, the same type of people who get cravings to buy french fries when they see a McDonald’s commercial.
on 11 April 2009
“God done it,” for creationists, is only the beginning of scientific investigation.”
(By saying God is a cause in science, you by definition, can investigate no further - it’s a non-starter. Science is not religion and religion is not science.)
on 11 April 2009
To Lee:
The admission about the camps in Germany not having ant “gas chambers” was first made by Simon Wiesenthal back in 1975 in “Books and Bookmen” magazine, I believe. Why don’t you read the revisionist literature, Lee?
To Matteo:
You, too, need to read Sanning’s book “The Dissolution Of Eastern European European Jewry” where you will find the answers to all your questions about where the Jews really went.The bulk remained in Soviet Russia where the Soviets deliberately undercounted them by half in their official statistics.
To the idiots who think that Darwinian evolution is “scientific”. Consult the following books:
(1) Evolution: A Theory In Crisis”, Michael Denton
(2) “Darwin On Trial”, Philip Johnson
(3) “The Black Box”, Michael Buhle
(4) “Shattering The Myths Of Darwinism”, Richard Milton
These critics of Darwinism are anything but irrational creationists. I, myself, do not go to church or regard Jesus as my saviour. I merely take the same position as these gentlemen: the actual facts do not support Darwin.
on 11 April 2009
I’m going on holiday soon. When I come back and click on this post am I still going to be reading all this self-righteous garbage from John Thames et al ?
on 11 April 2009
Matteo:
Are you blind or merely stupid?
It has been explained to you, over and over again, where the Jews really went. Since you are incredibly dense, here is the “Final Explanation”.
(1) Soviet Russia (approximately four million)
(2) Palestine
(3) North and South America (camoflauged as Rumanians, Hungarians, Poles, etc.)
As the dog returns to its vomit, Matteo (a real bow-wow), shall return to the same res adjudicata non-issue.
on 11 April 2009
It’s always amusing to watch the insane rationalize insanity.
It’s a tragic amusement, but humorous none the less.
John, let me remind you that you were the one raving about the intrusion of speculation into the veracity of claims. Ironically should we eliminate the speculation from your argument, you are left with very little cohesive evidence on which to support your argument.
You toss aside vast sources of tangible evidence that refutes your claims under the auspices that it was concocted by conspirators. You do not apply any sort of objective criticism of evidence that does support your claims. Most egregiously you completely manufacture claims without any evidence. In fact, your arguments are in their majority tedious shotgun blasts of such unsupported claims. When this fails to impress us you resolve this cognitive dissonance by calling us dumb. Your argument them boils down to the completely unsupported claim that we’re too stupid to piece together this fallacy that you subscribe to.
Meanwhile there has been compiled volumes of evidence to support the notion that the Germans had intended to affect endlösung der judenfrage through genocide. Much of this evidence was recorded by the Germans themselves. The kept records, they took photos, they wrote letters to their loved ones, and they left behind the instruments of their madness for all to examine.
Though all of this is meaningless to you because you read a book that claims the Jews are all hiding in the Ural mountains.
Yeah. Quite amusing.
on 11 April 2009
I will consult the book suggested by Mr. Thames, although I doubt that it will explain why would the Jews of Greece decide, in 1945, to stay in the Auschwitz neighborhood or how “they terrorized the populations of Eastern Europe as the chief commissars.”
In 1943, 49,000 Jews left Thessaloniki, Greece, and went to “work” in Auschwitz. In 1945, 2000 came back. The rest, apparently, chose not to reclaim their homes and businesses, and stayed as policemen for the Bierut regime, or went to Palestine or to the Americas, “camouflaged as Rumanians, Hungarians, Poles, etc.”
Likely story.
on 11 April 2009
The trouble with this blog post is that there is nothing here to engage my emotions - it’s just words!
Come on John, tell me in less than 100 words why I should take any notice of your views - and make it passionate!
on 11 April 2009
Ars:
Why should I take any notice of comments devoid of content?
Matteo:
I posted earlier in this discussion a link to a Polish website giving the names and photographs of the commissars. There are hundreds of them. Peruse them carefully-and then tell me that I am wrong about the Jewish commissars in Eastern Europe.
Have you forgotten that there was a huge exodus of Jews out of the Balkans to Palestine after the war, Matteo? That should give you a very good idea where to start looking. When I get a chance, I will post several pages from Butz’s book as to where the Jews went. Incidentally, failure to return to the original location does not imply death and extermination. There were vast population movements of many peoples in Europe after the war (including many Germans). In many cases, original locations had been destroyed because of the devastation of the war and there was nothing to return to. In others, such as the expulsions of the Germans from the east, there was political motivation involved, also as in the politically motivated exodus of Jews from behind the Iron Curtain on their way to Palestine.
I would be very careful about jumping to conclusions based on manipulated statistics in a time of vast poulation movements when very powerful political interests were encouraging those movements and hiding what was actually transpiring. I will have many more posts in the future on this vital issue, because the question of what happened to the Jews after the war and where did they really wind up is a legitimate one and a key to the debate.
on 11 April 2009
Fangbeer:
You are not merely stupid, you are ignorant and uninformed.
I doubt that you have ever read a single revisionist volume on the subject; I have read dozens. Many people think they “know” all kinds of things on all kinds of subjects. You are quite correct that the Germans kept voluminous records. However, you base your analysis of what these records contain on media propaganda, not on actual knowledge of what the German documents actually say. Presumably you believe the Nuremberg Trial records. If you actually examine the transcripts, you will be amazed at the nonsense they contain. Thus, there are utterly absurd claims about the Germans steaming the Jews to death like lobsters, mass electrocuting them, and doing all sorts of things straight out of the science fiction manual.
If you will actually consult the records, you will find that all the German records speak of deportation and emigration of the Jews, not extermination. The claim that “special treatment” was a euphemism for mass murder is demonstrably false. It could and did mean killing in certain cases; it was also used to cover such things as as extra rations or first place at the camp brothel. May I suggest that you get online and start looking up the books of Italian researcher Carlo Mattogno, he has extensively reviewed German camp records that you have never consulted? You might learn something.
on 11 April 2009
John
Perhaps you should take notice because despite your verbal diarrohea (also devoid of content) you offer nothing other than words
on 11 April 2009
Matteo:
To save you the time, here is the link with the Polish Jewish commissars. It was the same in all the other countries.
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=pl&u=http://www.polonica.net/mordercy_Polakow.htm&ei=V_vgSZeeD8_unQfSzaixCQ&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=2&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dwww.polonica.net%2Bmordercy_Polakow.htm%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DX
on 11 April 2009
Just out of interest John, why are you and your like-minded friends bothering to swap your inane comments on this blog ?
Who are you hoping to influence ?
Wouldn’t it be better to set up your own little space somewhere where you could just contragulate each other on what wise and wonderful historians you are ?
Sorry if this is devoid of content too, but a response would be nice if you can lower yourself to offer one.
on 11 April 2009
Ars:
In case you have not noticed I have responded at great length to every intelligent question on tnis thread. But if you think that I shall cease and desist merely to keep you happy, think again.
on 11 April 2009
All Thessaloniki Jews sent to Auschwitz would have thoroughly enjoyed returning to their city, homes, and work. What held them back somehow, was the minor inconvenience of having already gone up through the crematorium chimney.
The Jews, Reds? I hope so. Of course there were hundreds, nay, tens of thousands of Jews, active in Eastern Europe’s communist governments. Should they have supported their killers? In 1941, Lithuanian and Ukrainian nationalists initiated the mass killing of the Jews. By and large, the only resistance group open to Jews between Poland and Russia were the Red partisans.
on 11 April 2009
Matteo:
You miserable little Jew cocksucker. At last you make your political colors perfectly clear.
Those poor, innocent Jews only turned to communism because those beastly Nazis exterminated them! How touching. It reminds me of the WW1 claim that the Jews only turned to bolshevism because of Ukrainian pogroms. Let us try to turn the facts right side up, you stinking little socialist shit. The Jewish communists of Russia mass murder tens of millions of people in their “workers paradise”-and then snivel because the Germans pay back blood with blood! Why, that is almost as bad as Arab suicide bombers blowing up a few Zionist settlers squatting on their stolen land! how dare those goddamned Arabs use against the Jews the same terror and violence that the Jews used against them.
I do not believe for one second that the Germans killed “six million” of your stinking tribe. But if the day ever comes for “Payback” you pink, circumsized piece of greasy pork, I, and millions of other whites who finally know the truth, will hunt you down and nail your kosher ass to a crucifix with your amputated balls stuffed between your circumsized lips. You deserve it, and so do millions of others of your satanic tribe.
The Germans had no idea how to commit a mass murder program. You had better believe that I will get it right.
on 11 April 2009
John thales
john thames said
on 11 April 2009 To Lee:
“The admission about the camps in Germany not having ant “gas chambers” was first made by Simon Wiesenthal back in 1975 in “Books and Bookmen” magazine, I believe. Why don’t you read the revisionist literature, Lee?”
As always I am struggling with your “logic”.
Still after so many words (drivel) you cannot answer a simple question. It is simple really:
Winston Churchill says that the Nazis perpertrated the holocaust. Leading Naxis confirm this. What is your very best evidence that this historical fact, so well documented in history and proven in law by the Nuremberg trials and the trial of David Irving trials.
So far you are suggesting that your best evidence is that Simon Wiesenthal said that the holocaust did not happen……..????
Could you please confirm this?
I eagerly await your response, to a simple question.
on 11 April 2009
Angelo Ciaeo
If you do not have anything to say, then do not say it.
on 11 April 2009
http://www.intergate.com/~daniel41/middleeast/2006/12/about-this-group.html
Mr. Welch, who accuses me of ignorance of history, should love this one.
on 11 April 2009
Lee:
I gave you the answer. Read it.
The fact that Winston Churchill, bought and paid for by Jewish money, testified to a Jewish propaganda legend, proves nothing. You should read him on February 8, 1920, when he was more honest.
on 11 April 2009
John
Yes indeed, you have responded at great length - and what a great length that has been! I get the impression that you think you can just brow-beat people into submission with words and pseudo-arguments.
When it comes down to it John all you’ve really got to offer here is hatred hiding behind words, but you lack the moral courage to state it openly - and yet your motives are more transparent than you realise.
In a year’s time, do you honestly think the bullshit you’ve posted here will have made any real difference to anyone’s lives (other than your own) ?
on 11 April 2009
Mr. Thames will answer, rationally and correctly, that Churchill a Jew hater himself, a terrorist, a mad bomber, and a thoroughly unreliable witness and that Nazi confessions were obtained under torture.
What he cannot explain, apparently, is fact that 95% of Thessaloniki Jews perished. A death rate similar to that of death camps for German POW’s.
on 11 April 2009
John Thales
“I gave you the answer. Read it.”
Only in your childish brain have you given an answer.
You said that your best evidence to contradict Winston Churchills testimony on the extermination of the jews was Simon Wiesenthals testimony. You have not provided a link or any back up of your claim.
What is your source, where is your evidence…..just one piece would convince me. I cannot be fairer than that can I?
Your evidence (with no drivel) please…..
on 11 April 2009
Mr. Thames did answer that point as well. He says that C talked of gas chambers in Allied liberated camps. A lie, since even W agreed that gas chambers were at work only in Poland. Excellent legal arguments.
on 11 April 2009
Thus, the Nazis are innocent of having gassed anyone at Dachau or Mauthausen.
on 12 April 2009
To My Critics:
You are completely full of shit.
I have documented my positions, over and over again, with innumerable citations and references. It is you assholes who take your own assertions at face value. I have not seen one reference or citation from any of you on anything. Dick head Lee to the contrary, Winston Churchill’s alcoholic blabbermouth “proves” nothing. As to Commie Boy Matteo, I do not give a flying fuck about the Jews of Thessalonica. They could have gone to a hundred and one other places rather than being killed, as Matteo asserts.
The relevant fact is that the vast majority of supposedly exterminated Jews survived the war. They were still there. I have explained, again and again, where they went, only to be confronted with the same stupid, repititious arguments by stupid, lying assholes incapable of a logical thought. Lee: Why don’t you send an Email to Deborah Lipstadt asking her whether there were any “gas chambers” at Dachau? And here is another better one for you, Lee. If you read John Cobden’s pamplet on the Dachau camp, you will discover that an American MD and forensic pathologist named Charles Larsen performed thousands of autopsies on dead Jews and others in Dachau and other camps after their liberation and found not a single case of death by poison gas. Not one. He gave an interview in a Wichita newspaper back in the 1980’s to that effect.
Now, take your lies and shove them up your ass!
on 12 April 2009
Innocent, I say, totally innocent.
Look Ma, no gas–in Dachau. Only ovens.
on 12 April 2009
“the vast majority of supposedly exterminated Jews survived the war.”
Hold yourself to your own burden of proof and produce them. Answers such as: They could have gone thousands of other places or They hid beyond the Ural Mountains or They continues to terrorize Europe are empty and baseless.
You asked why the Germans would want to kill their labor force. We know they existed. We know they were taken by the Germans and forced into concentration camps. We know how many were taken, and we know their ages.
Here’s a simple question for you: What does your EVIDENCE show the Germans do with all the children, the sick, and the elderly who were unfit to work? I don’t want supposition. I don’t want your opinion, or 17 paragraphs of mindless prattle about criminal trials that took place 60 years later. I want your data that shows exactly what the Germans did with them. What was their plan for them? Where are they now? Where are the German documents that show what was done with them?
We know that far more Jews were placed in concentration camps then the camps were able to hold. The log books show that Auschwitz registered more than 405,000 prisoners between 1940 and 1945. Far more were sent there then were logged, but let’s just take that number for the moment. That’s more than 80k people a year registered. Trouble is, Auschwitz 1 2 and 3 were no where near large enough to house 400k people. What did the Germans do with them considering that by the time the Soviets got there, there were only 7000 people left?
on 12 April 2009
The Russians always lie. They found 406,000 prisoners and hid them in the Urals
on 12 April 2009
Better yet, if they were only concerned with a labor force, why did they take the sick, the elderly, and children to begin with?
on 12 April 2009
It was kindness. They wanted to put them in a good decent clean well-organized German hospital and nursery.
on 12 April 2009
Yeah, if there was one thing the Germans had, it was a deep respect for the Jewish family unit.
on 12 April 2009
“What held them back somehow, was the minor inconvenience of having already gone up through the crematorium chimney.”
What bloody chimneys?!?
Post a link with one bloody picture of a chimney on a building that functioned as a gas chamber before the end of WWII.
You CAN’T.
John…you see how exasperating this convocation of fools can be…you have just proven the absolute falsehood that has been foisted upon Americans as the Holocau$t, as the Khazars who masquerade as “jews” wantonly murder Palestinians, crush little girls like Rachel Corrie with Caterpillar bulldozers, shoot people like Tom Hurndall in the face with a rocket, and terrorize the elderly like John Dejamjuk and Ernst Zundel.
Once again…Hitler was only guilty of ending usury in Germany. You cannot prove anything else.
How many Russians died in WWII? Over twenty million…yet, one doesn’t see funding for a Russian Holocaust museum.
And I didn’t forget.
How many Japanese died in WWII? Over forty-five million…yet, one doesn’t see funding for a Japanese Holocaust museum.
And I didn’t forget.
How many Germans died in WWII? Uncounted millions…yet, one doesn’t see funding for a German Holocaust museum.
And I won’t forget.
Mark Weber seems to have been a control agent, sent in to control IHR, then to derail its efforts, or was compromised in some fashion. I certainly hope that Michael Santomauro is made of sterner stuff.
The title is right on point…and after reading John’s information, I can now proudly say this:
The Holocau$t is a goddamn lie, a complete hoax, and every penny of monies paid should be returned, with interest. $114 billion paid to Israel by our “representatives” must be repaid.
Tear down every Holocau$t museum in existence; they are an affront to every German murdered by the bombing in Dresden and other locations.
Elie Wiesel should be tarred and feathered.
Misha Defonseca/Monique DeWael should be thrown in a pit with wolves…let’s see how she does as an adult.
Herman Rosenblat should be mandated to reciting Mein Kampf in Times Square on a megaphone.
The “goyim” are coming to trample you bastards under our hooves.
Dig it, suckers.
on 12 April 2009
Another astonishing display of your superior reading comprehension skills Han. And you even quoted it right before you got it wrong.
The quote says CREMATORIUM CHIMNEYS. You say chimneys on buildings that functioned as gas chambers?
Well. I’ll give you a picture of both.
Here’s the one you asked for:
http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/intro-columns/majdanek.jpg
And Here’s the one for the statement that was quoted.
http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Poland/Birkenau/CrematoriumIV.jpg
on 12 April 2009
Fangbeer:
You stupid, mindless SOB.
If you want to debate with me, you should first:
(1) Read the relevant revisionist research and
(2) Read what I have already posted.
You will not do either, because you hate to read long, boring quotes (not to mention heavily documented research works). Here are the answers to the objections. Not all of the Jews and others passing through Auschwitz stayed there as labor. Quite a few were deported further east to the occupied territories in Poland/Soviet Russia. The Germans were not just employing Jews as labor; they were also clearing them out of Europe. You also ignore the fact that the Germans evacuated the camps and moved the prisoners westward to escape the Soviet advance. This mass transfer of prisoners from east to west was one of the main reasons the western camps became so terribly overcrowded in the last months of the war. It is also one of the main reasons for the mass starvation in the camps as the German supply system broke down. Clearly, had the Germans been exterminating the Jews there would have been no need to evacuate them westward.
Now, I am not going to explain to you prevaricating assholes all the information contained in all the revisionist books you have not read and never will read. Do the research, then stop with your confuse the issue nonsense.
on 12 April 2009
Fangbeer:
Did you not know that the chimneys were built after the war by the Polish Jewish communists to lend versimilitude to the legend? Probably not, the same way you do not know that the “gas chamber” at Auschwitz One was a reconstruction built after the war, as admitted by Dr. Joseph Piper, the camp museum administrator.
What a pathetically gullible, stupid shit you are. Show us some more “Potemkin villages”, idiot.
on 12 April 2009
Ooooohhh…looks like you had those at the ready, fung…are they still glued to your scanner with choda?
What a dummy.
Once again, I invoke http://wwwnafcash.com - whatever drivel you have regarding the crematoria…it is IMPOSSIBLE to have incinerated the numbers offered.
Do we really have to beat on ever one of your stupid “points” until you get the idea?
IT DIDN’T HAPPEN…and all of your kangaroo trials, all of your lying scumbag Khazar mongoloids masquerading as “jews”, all of your fifth column infiltrating our government, our families and our lives, are all for naught.
It’s over, nitwits.
on 12 April 2009
Enjoy this one, boys. It really nails you.
http://www.davidduke.com/general/whites-need-to-grow-spines-and-stand-up-to-detrimental-jewish-group-aims_9305.html#more-9305
on 12 April 2009
Like Holocaust Denial, the Protocols of Zion are outside the parameters of polite society. It is easy to see why. If either is true, then there exists a centuries old conspiracy to enslave mankind. Te Protocols are supposedly a forgery by the Czarist secret police; Holocaust Denial is supposedly a fringe movement of Hitler apologists and lunatics. What no one wishes to do is to submit either the Protocols or Holocaust Denial to rational examination. The moment that is done, the more obvious it becomes that both Holocaust Denial and the Protocols fit the facts. More than that, the truth of the one reinforces the truth of the other. That suggests a common ethnic origin behind the conspiracy.
The Protocols of Zion are supposedly a plagiarism of Maurice Joly’s nineteenth century book “Dialogues Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu”. Undoubtedly there are point-by-point equivalences. But all that really begs the question. The Protocols did not describe the world as it existed when they first appeared in the early twentieth century (around 1905 to 1920). But they very much do describe the world as it has subsequently developed in the succeeding century. Why? The predictive validity is the point crying out for explanation. The Protocols became a rallying point for the British press in the aftermath of the First World War. They seemed to confirm the terrible reality of the Jewish-Bolshevik revolution in Russia. The activity of the world’s Jews at the Paris Peace Conference where Jewish delegations from the Old and New world’s congregated and demanded “minorities treaties” testified to the reality of co-coordinated Jewish international power in the real world. It was the British Empire itself which sponsored a Jewish “national home” in Palestine-allegedly as the result of a “contract with Jewry” to get the United States into World War One. The “Morning Post” and the “London Times” hammered on these themes constantly in the years 1919-1923. Today, anyone can see that Jews and Israel First organizations provide the majority of the political campaign financing of the two political parties. Anyone can see the extreme Jewish control of the media. The Cam West media monopoly of the Asper family in Canada, the Samuel Newhouse chain of newspapers in America, the purchase of both the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune by the Polish-Jewish real estate developer Samuel Zell, it all speaks for itself. Anyone can see that Israel First advisors surround both George Bush, Jr. and Barack Obama. The identity of the neo-cons who got the U.S. into the disastrous Iraq war is known; so is the identity of the Israeli Rahm Emmanuel who is Barack Obama’s wirepuller. Anyone can look at these self-evident facts and compare them with the Protocols. Do not the Protocols speak of Jews controlling the press, dictating both sides of every debate and serving as the advisors and controllers of the politicians? Cannot everyone see that this is precisely what is taking place in the real world? The Protocols speak of no-win wars to tear down national sovereignty and promote international organization. Has anyone forgotten the partition of Europe at the end of World War Two? (Rather like the partition of a small Arab country in Palestine at the end of the First World War?) Does anyone remember N.A.T.O., the North Atlantic Treaty Organization or S.E.A.T.O., the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization? Did not Korea and Vietnam follow the pattern of no-win wars and never ending international conferences? The Protocols speak of international organizations under Jewish auspices. What were the original League of Nations and the successor United Nations if not precisely this? When the United Nations passed its famous “Zionism is a form of racism” resolution in the mid-1920’s, a certain power stepped in and forced the repeal of the resolution. Was it the same power which sponsored the minorities treaties and the mandate over Palestine in the 1920’s? The Protocols speak of creating emergencies to control the masses. Does this not accurately describe the staged 09/11 incident and the bogus “War on Terror”? Does it not describe the previous emergency of the Great Depression and the emergency measures of Franklin Roosevelt’s “Jew Deal”? The Protocols recommend a centralization of power in the chief executive and the suspension of constitutional procedures. Does this not sound like the Department of Homeland Security and the Patriot Acts? The Protocols particularly recommend treating the exposure of subversion as more reprehensible than the subversion itself. Does this not sound exactly like the technique that was used to destroy Senator Joseph McCarthy?
If there were an international conspiracy such as the Protocols describe, that conspiracy would need a cover story, a holy lie behind which it could hide its power. That lie would make the imperial power morally unimpeachable and unchallengeable. It might constitute a historical myth making any objective examination of the ruling powers history or behavior beyond the parameters of socially acceptable discourse. The lie, were it questioned and exposed, might even need legal protection making it a crime to write or speak critically on the subject. The lie, were it exposed, might serve as a sort of Pandora’s Box to all the other lies hiding behind it. The lie might be so “ethnic specific” that its exposure would leave no doubt as to the identity of the international conspirators. Is there such a lie at work in the world today? Yes there is. It is the lie of the Nazi “gas chambers” and the supposedly murdered six million Jews. This lie has as much evidence against it as the Protocols have evidence in their favor. The Jews claim that the Nazi “gassing” program is the most thoroughly documented extermination of all time. But all the evidence rests on a kangaroo court at Nuremberg run by the Jews behind the scenes. No one knew anything about the supposed extermination at the time it was taking place, a fact which is more than suspicious. Key German records of the alleged killing camps were carted off to the Soviet Union and not presented to the kangaroo Nuremberg court. Those records tell a story entirely different than the story told at the trial. The records show that the Auschwitz camp where millions of Jews were supposedly “gassed” was a major industrial production center for the German war effort. The records show that the Jews and others interned in the camps were used as labor for the German war effort. The records further show that a total of 140,000 internees died in the Auschwitz camp over its operation, of whom 70,000 were Jews. The main cause of death was typhus and heart attacks caused by typhus. The records show no evidence of an extermination program whatever. In fact, the records show that the camp was shut down in the summer of 1942 because of a gigantic typhus epidemic. The crematory ovens were built in the spring and summer of 1943 to dispose sanitarily of the diseased bodies. The actual disposal rate of the crematory ovens was consistent with the deaths from disease, not with the millions of claimed deaths. The German secret police chief, Heinrich Himmler, issued an order that the death rate in the German labor camps be “reduced at all costs”, an order that is inconsistent with any extermination program. Adolf Hitler was recorded by a German Ministry of the Interior official as stating that he wanted the solution of the Jewish problem delayed until “the end of the war”, a position which is utterly irreconcilable with any claim that he was simultaneously exterminating the Jews. The Germans had a special investigating branch of their judiciary under Judge Konrad Morgen to root out abuses of prisoners in the camps. Numerous camp commandants were tried and convicted for these abuses. In the famous Auschwitz camp, the Germans provided hospitals, libraries, theatres and brothels, among other amenities, for the Jews they were supposedly exterminating. The supposed “gas chambers” were nothing but morgues for storing bodies before they could be burned. Those morgues show none of the design characteristics of real gas chambers. They have no means of heating, distributing or ventilating gas. They are hardly airtight. Some of them are built underground, hardly a design advantage. The morgues are rather small and could never have held the claimed number of victims, all of whom would have died of suffocation without any need of “gassing”. The chambers of the morgues show no traces of Prussian Blue hydrogen cyanide residue. The delousing chambers where the Germans were disinfecting the clothing of the prisoners are covered with Zyklon B stain. And that was the real use of the Zyklon B, which was used profusely throughout the camps-to disinfect clothing and barracks to prevent epidemics. Several forensic reports of the so-called “gas chambers” have been performed. The first was by Fred Leuchter, an American designer of prison execution equipment. Subsequent investigations have been performed by the Viennese engineer, Walter Luftl, and the German chemist, Germar Rudolf. All the investigations have confirmed both the test results and the conclusions- there were no execution “gas chambers” at Auschwitz or any other German camp.
Many other revisionist scholars have investigated the multiple absurdities of survivor testimonies and the endlessly conflicting accounts. Among these scholars are Professor Robert Faurrison, Carlo Mattogno, Gerd Honsik, Jurgen Graf, Enrique Aynat Eknes, Germar Rudolf and many others. The survivor testimonies always suffer from three defects:
(1) They are internally inconsistent;
(2) They are inconsistent with each other;
(3) They are inconsistent with the physical facts.
There are other glaring problems with the extermination story. The Jews in many western European countries were not even deported (not exterminated) until very late in the war. Many of the deportations did not even begin until 1944, after the allies had landed at Normandy. In Russia one-half to two-thirds of the Jews had been deported by the heavily Jewish communist regime ahead of the German advance. That is why most of the Jews supposedly exterminated by the Germans were in fact hiding east of the Ural Mountains during the war. After the war, these Jews poured into the commissariats of the Iron Curtain countries in Eastern Europe. Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Rumania and East Germany were top heavy with very much alive Jewish commissars. A huge exodus of Jews poured out of Russia on their way to invade Arab Palestine. Still more went to America and South America disguised as citizens of the countries of their origin. (Poles, Czechs, etc.) Today, there exist tremendous numbers of “survivors” who logically should not exist, collecting never ending reparations. These survivors all insist that the extermination of the Jews was real, even as one survivor story after another is shown to be a fraud.
The Holocaust tale does not mean that large numbers of Jews did not die in World War Two. The true death total was probably between one to two million. That is a lot of deaths but nowhere near the number of German soldiers and civilians who died during and after the war. The significance of the Holocaust Hoax is now clear. It is the obverse side of the Protocols of Zion coin. The design of the Protocols was proved to be true in the earlier part of this essay. Their platform has been fulfilled. The Holocaust Hoax is the proof that the design behind the Protocols is Judaic. It is the warning to the masses: “Don’t look here!” The ban on inquiry into the Protocols is the same as the ban on inquiry into the Holocaust. The reason is precisely the same. The Protocols are the shoe that fits; the Holocaust is the lie that cannot be sustained. The one leads inevitably to the other. They are the hand and the glove with the perfect fit.
on 12 April 2009
THE FIRE OF REVOLUTION
Tony Michels “A Fire In Their Hearts: Yiddish Socialists In New York” is a tour-de-force expose of the roots of international Marxism. It confirms, with unimpeachable authenticity, every charge which the extreme right wing ever made about the Jewish origins of communism and socialism. Before the Russian revolution and the creation of Zionism in Palestine, New York was the birthplace-and the heartland-of Yiddish socialism. The American socialist movement had begun with the arrival of the Germans who had dominated the Socialist Labor Party (the SLP) before the arrival of the Jews. The Jews picked up their Yiddish from the Germans in New York, not from their sojourn in Czarist Russia, as commonly believed. (Yiddish, as the use of an official language, was banned by the Czarist authorities until the 1900’s.) Influential among the German Jews who sold socialism to New York’s Russian Jewish immigrants were Justus Schwab, Johann Most, Sergius Schewitsch, the editor of the New Yorker Volkseitung., and others. Of particular interest is the fact that there existed an official Yiddish Socialist Post which exported Yiddish socialist periodicals banned in Russia back to the homeland from their publishing base in New York. This confirms the charge of the Czarist government that Jews in New York were exporting revolution back to Russia. It also confirms Michels thesis that socialism originated in New York and traveled back across the ocean to Russia rather than socialism crossing the ocean from Russia to the United States. The original Russian revolutionary organization Narodnaia Volia (“People’s Will”) had 226 members in 1885 of whom only 24 were Jewish. Jews were not the founders of revolution. It was only after Jews from New York began exporting socialism back to Russia that communism really took off.
Communism in New York is really the story of the Yiddish press. Because the Yiddish press in New York was so vast, involved such a large number of writers and was constantly changing as the journals and newspapers failed, shut down, re-organized and restarted again, only a brief survey is possible. However, a certain number of intellectuals and writers constantly wrote for the same columns so it is perhaps best to start with them. Among the more prominent writers, speechmakers and intellectuals were Jacob Schoen of the Yiddisher Arbeiter Fareyn, (the Jewish Workers Association), Mikhail Zametkin, a Russian-Jewish journalist, Morris Vinchevsky, a Jewish socialist from London, Avrom Lesin, the Yiddish poet and long time editor of Di tsunkuft, a Yiddish scientific and educational journal, Louis Miller, a labor lawyer and authority on Marxism, Morris Hillquit, the labor leader, Yankev Gordin, the playwright, Isaac Hourwich, another labor leader and Louis Boudin, another authority on Marxism. These men radicalized the New York Jewish community with Marxism. They had their opponents among the orthodox and conservative press. Chief among them was Kasriel Tsvi Sarasohn, the publisher of the Yiddisher Tageblatt. But there is no doubt that the vast majority of New York Yiddish newspapers were socialist to the core. We have already mentioned Di tsunkuft. Others were Di arbeter tsaytung published by Philip Krants and Abraham Cahan. Cahan later became the editor and virtual dictator of the Forverts (or “Forward”), the most influential Yiddish socialist newspaper of all (and still published today). Among the writers for these newspapers, in addition to the aforementioned, were Adella Zametkin, Anna Amitrin Ingerman (a member of Plekhanov’s “Group For The Emancipation Of Labor” in Russia), Benyomen Fagenboym, a leading Marxist orator and Emma Goldman.
In 1899 an earthshaking intellectual development in the history of Yiddish socialism occurred. In that year Chaim Zhitlovsky published his essay “Socialism and the National Question”. Zhitlovsky had come to the United States as a virtual unknown. He accompanied the famous Katerina Breshko-Breshkovskaia to New York as a fundraiser for the PSR (Party of Socialist Revolutionaries). Zhitlovsky’s innovation was to claim that Jewish national autonomy complemented socialist internationalism rather than contradicted it. Until then, the orthodox Marxist position had been (and still is) that Jewish nationalism, like all nationalisms, would disappear in an international “brotherhood of workers”. Zhitlovsky was not a Zionist, as he thought that national autonomy for Jews could be established in every country in which Jews lived, rather than requiring a Jewish national state in Palestine. Zhitlovsky further advocated the development of “Yiddish Kultur”, the idea that the universalized jargon of the Jewish working man should be raised to the status of a great new language. These ideas revolutionized the Jewish labor movement in both New York and Russia and led to divisions and disputes which have lasted to this day. As for Zhitlovsky’s further career it should be noted that his Jewish nationalism increased after the 1903 Kishinev pogrom. He joined an organization named “Rebirth” (or “Vozrozhdenia”) in 1904. In 1906 he became leader of the Jewish Socialist Workers Party (the SERP). By this time the Russian Jews were split between four revolutionary parties. These were:
(1) The Bund (the General Confederation of the Jewish Workers of Lithuania-Poland, formed in 1897) (33,000 members)
(2) The Zionist Social Democratic Workers Party (27,000 members)
(3) The Jewish Social Democratic Workers Party (Poale-Zion) (17,000 members)
(4) Jewish Socialist Workers Party (SERP) (13,5000 members)
Shortly all these groups were to coalesce into the Russian-Social Democratic Labor Party of Vladimir Lenin. As stated Zhitlovsky’s impact on Jewish revolutionary thought was profound. He established a newspaper, Das Naye Leben, as a competitor to the Forverts which lasted six years (1908-19`14). Zhitlovsky attracted some ardent supporters, including the anarchists Yisroel Kopelov, Moyshe Keats, Hillel Zolatarov and the non-anarchist, Yankev Merison. Zhitlovsky greatly influenced the Bund in favor of Jewish nationality, as distinct from Jewish nationalism. Inspired, perhaps, by Zhitlovsky, the publishing of Yiddish literature and Yiddish translations of socialist classics began in this period. The Kropotkin Literary Society translated one European socialist volume after another into Yiddish. The Chicago book publisher L.M. Steyn founded the Sholem Alecheim Institute and the L.M. Steyn Farlag.
Jewish socialist political organization was increasing side-by-side the advance in Jewish socialist literature. The Jewish Socialist Agitation Bureau was founded by Max Kaufman in 1905 and lasted until 1912. It became a focal point for Jewish nationalism when, after the 1905 revolution failed in Russia, large numbers of Bundists fled to the United States and joined the Agitation Bureau. Among these Bundists the leading lights were A.S. Zaks and Tsivion. In 1912 the Agitation Bureau joined the Socialist Party as its foreign language affiliate, the renamed Jewish Socialist Federation. The general secretary of the Federation was Yankev Salutsky. Prominent members of the JSF were Moyshe Ternan, Hannah Salutsky, (the wife do Yankev Salutsky), A. Litvak, Morris Vinchevsky, Max Goldfarb, Tsivion, Moishe Olgin, Baruch Charney Vladek, Dr. Frank Rosenblatt and Shaknye Epstein. The Socialist Agitation Bureau/Jewish Socialist Federation was generally opposed by Abraham Cahan and the Forverts as too nationalistic. In 1917 the JSF founded the National Workmen’s Committee as part of the preparations for the American Jewish Congress. It was opposed as too radical by the United Hebrw Trades and the Arbeiter Ring.The JSF published a newspaper “Der Naye Veld” (“The New World”).
Another extremely influential Yiddish socialist organization with a mass membership was the Arbeiter Ring, or Workers Circle, formed in 1892. It was founded by Moyshe Goldraykh, Sam Grinberg and Harry Lasker. It was a mutual aid and help society, broad based, tolerant of religion and which included many Jewish feminists. The Arbeiter Ring went national in 1902. Among its most important functions were promoting education among the immigrants. Its education committee was established in 1910. The committee produced the very famous “World and Humanity Series” (Di velt un di mensheyt”) published in 1915 devoted to scientific and political subjects. In 1914 the Workmen’s Circle Library was established. Thee were followed by ABC schools for teaching basic reading and writing skills. The education committee also prompted Yiddish culture. The Arbeiter Ring Choir and Free Yiddish People’s Theatre regularly performed socialist themes for the Yiddish masses. Yiddish schools were also sponsored by the National Jewish Workers Alliance (Yiddisher Natsyonales Arbeter Farband), an offshoot of Poale-Zion. These were the National Radical Schools formed around 1910. The Yiddish schools reached their height around 1920-1925, following the Russian revolution. They started to fail around 1924-1925, when Congress cut off immigration from Eastern Europe.
The Russian revolutions of March and November 1917 marked the climax of Yiddish socialism in New York. Immediately, large numbers of Jews traveled back to Russia to participate in the “liberation” of the land. Among them were Max Goldfarb who became General Petrovsky, Leiba Bronstein/ aka Leon Trotsky, Shakne Epstein, Moyshe Ternan, A. Litvak, Ber Borokhov and Eliyohu Tsherikover. The reader will note the large number of Bundist names. When the communists took over Russia, they made the Bund and other competing revolutionary parties illegal. The Bund then joined the Communist Party en masse This, however, did not take place until after the November 1917 seizure of power. The Bund, however, continued to enjoy an independent existence in adjoining Poland which escaped Soviet control until the conclusion of the Second World War. After communism triumphed in Russia organizational splits and upheavals rocked the New York Yiddish socialist world. The chief split involved the Jewish Socialist Federation which had joined the Socialist Party. The JSF joined the Workers Party which eventually became the Communist Party. The Communist Party then gradually pushed out the JSF personnel including its General Secretary, Yankev Salutsky (Salutsky later changed his name to J.B.S. Hardman.) and replaced them with hard-core communists. The Party attached great importance to Yiddish socialists as the “Red Army” which would staff the Party’s cause in America. However, as in the case of the Bund in Russia, the Party always took the orthodox Marxist position that internationalism would solve the “Jewish problem”. Jewish national and cultural autonomy had no place in the heavily Jewish communist hierarchy. This conflict between Jewish nationalism and Marxist universalism was to occur, again and again, in the communist world over the decades-and not just in the struggle with the Zionists.
YIDDISH SOCIALISM: IMPLICATIONS
We can think of no better way to sum up the implications of Yiddish socialism than to let Tony Michels words speak for themselves.
“For the better part of a century, from roughly the 1880’s to the 1960’s, radical movements and ideas played a major role in the lives of American Jews. Socialism was not a “one-generation” phenomenon, as most historians would have it.” (p.253)
The Jewish labor movements dual character-its universalism and particularity-wrested with itself constantly. Some individuals viewed socialism as a process of cultural assimilation; others considered it essential for Jewish national survival. Some imagined a world without Jews or other national groups; others anticipated an international brotherhood of peoples that included Jews…
A century later one is struck by the persistence of old arguments. A recent debate about the state of Israel attests, unresolved questions continue to burn even as specific applications change. (p.253)
Some disillusioned radicals broke ranks and joined older ex-socialists in becoming neo-conservatives. They would find a warm reception in influential Washington, D.C. think tanks and in the presidential administrations of Ronald Reagan and, more recently, George W. Bush…A thorough genealogy could trace a web of personal and organizational connections-from political parties and unions to schools and summer camps-that begins in New York’s tenement slums and stretches all the way to the White House, branching out in many unexpected directions along the way.” (p.259)
Here we have the history of the twentieth century in a nutshell-from Yiddish socialism in New York to Jewish neo-conservatism in Washington, D.C. It is the story of the failure of Marxism to the rise of Zionism. From the stretching of Marxist tentacles from New York to seize Russia to the stretching of Zionist tentacles from Tel Aviv to seize America, it is the story of the same Octopus which crushed Berlin.
on 12 April 2009
THE TWIN BROTHER OF COMMUNISM
The American political right has never understood the threat of Zionism the same way that they understood the threat of communism. Indeed, they stupidly wave the flag and babble about the threat of “Islamo-fascism”. Why? The most probable explanation is that they do not understand the Jewish origins of both these philosophies. Communism is fairly well understood these days. No one any longer believes that communism had anything to do with “workers rights” or that Joseph Stalin was really “Uncle Joe”. But when it comes to Zionism people continue to fall for the line that the state of Israel is a democracy, that the Arabs were never there, that God promised the Jews the land, ad nauseam. In short, the cover up on Zionism is still intact, while the cover up on communism came clean long ago. The historical facts are clear, even if little known. Zionism, as an ideology, grew up in Czarist Russia, side-by-side with Communism. Many Zionists (although not all) were Marxists. They essentially supported the position taken by Chaim Zhitlovsky in his 1899 pamphlet “Socialism and Nationalism” that the two concepts were complementary rather than antithetical. This was in contradistinction to the orthodox Marxist position that international communism alone would solve the “Jewish problem”. Jews would merge into an international proletariat and all class distinctions would disappear. The Zionists, then, were brother Marxists who wanted their ideal state created in Palestine rather than Russia. Some Marxists took an in-between position. The Bund, the General Confederation of Jewish Labor of Lithuania-Poland founded in 1897, supported Jewish national-cultural autonomy within Russia itself, rather than a Jewish state in Palestine. This provoked fierce struggle with Lenin, who violently denounced the Bund for its heresies. Parties like Poale-Zion advocated Jewish communism in Palestine. The SERP, the Jewish Socialist Workers Party founded by Zhitlovsky in 1906, essentially took the Bundist “Socialist-Territorialist” position ( i.e., Jewish cultural-national autonomy within Russia). The SERP merged with the Socialist-Zionist Workers Party in May 1917 which party obviously wanted a Jewish state in Palestine. The Jewish theoreticians of Marxism included the aforementioned Chaim Zhitlovsky but also Dov Ber Borochov and Nachman Syrkin. Both of these Jewish intellectuals were synthesizers of Marxism and Zionism.
When the British Mandate was set up in Palestine following the First World War, the Jewish immigrants pouring into the Holy Land were overwhelmingly of a communist character. This fact was noted by the British officials then in control of Palestine. When the riots in Jaffa took place in the early 1920’s the eruptions were provoked by two delegations of Jews, one extreme socialist and the other outright communist, fighting on the streets. The Jewish settlements in Palestine before the war were all collectivist and involved communal living, in accordance with the Marxist ideals of the Jewish settlers. Even today many kibbutzim display portraits of Trotsky and Lenin. When the 1948 war was in progress and several years before, the gates of Soviet Communism opened and a flood tide of Jewish emigrants poured from the Iron Curtain countries and Palestine bearing hammers and sickles. Jacob Berman in Poland and Ana Pauker in Rumania were most accommodating to the Zionist deviationists heading toward Arab Palestine. The Soviet Union provided arms for the Zionist invaders from the arms factories in Czechoslovakia. After the establishment of the Zionist state the leaders of Israel wavered for five years (1948-1953) before finally aligning Israel with the west. Israel took the side of the Chinese during the Korean war, furthering State Department fears that Israel would officially align itself with Joseph Stalin and the Jewish Bolsheviks. Many State Department officials of the period, who had spent their early years in Soviet Russia during the height of the Jewish commissar directed gulag system of the 1930’s, were well aware of the real political colors of the Zionists in Palestine. They feared them as a threat to the United States and urged against American recognition of Israel. One such was Loy Henderson. George Marshall, America’s Chief of Staff during World War Two, threatened to resign if Israel were recognized. James Forrestal, the Secretary of Defense, was murdered by the Zionists because of the threat he posed to Israel’s existence.
Israel, the much vaunted “democracy” in the Near East, is the ideological twin of its communist brother in Moscow. It was created by the same Jews who murdered millions in Moscow. The brutality which drove the Arabs into the desert in 1948 was the same brutality which ran the Soviet gulags. It is one of the wonders of the compartmentalized mind that someone like the late Alexander Solzhenitsyn could condemn the Jewish Bolsheviks while praising the Zionists in Palestine. American conservatives babbling about the dangers of “Islamo-fascism” need to wake up. One Jewish evil is dead; the other Jewish evil is alive and well. The infiltration and take over of the American government by the Israel First “neo-cons” is far more dangerous and insidious than the activities of the Alger Hisses and Rosenbergs of years gone by. Communism came and went; Zionism still exists to drag the United States into the Holocaust of a Third World War.
on 12 April 2009
THE PEOPLE OF MARX
Jews usually try to pretend that they had nothing to do with communism. But there are all kinds of facts which betray them. Just to take one example. There existed from about 1906 a Zionist-Communist political party named Poale-Zion, split into both left wing and right wing factions. Poale-Zion rejected the British Empire as the administrator of the Mandate over Palestine and wanted the workers paradise, the Soviet Union, to assume the role of the protector of the emerging Zionist state in Palestine instead. The Soviet Union tolerated the existence of Poale-Zion as an independent political party until 1928, when it banned Poale-Zion because of its dual Zionist and communist ideology. Poale-Zion also got the British Labour Party to issue a declaration in August-September 1917 supporting a Jewish state in Palestine before His Majesty’s Government got around to it on November 2, 1917.
Such interesting historical tidbits certainly seem to show a deep Jewish connection with both Marxism and Zionism. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union also had a special “Jewish Section”, the Evsektsiia, to re-educate capitalist Jews into the new Soviet system. The idea was not to persecute Jews but to get them integrated into a new ideology and a state system which provided Jews with abundant opportunities in the upper echelons of the new regime. The Bund, entirely Marxist and Jewish, dissolved in Russia after the revolution and joined the Communist Party en masse. Outside Russia, the Bund continued to enjoy an independent existence in Poland until shortly after the Soviet post-war takeover. Before and after the Bolshevik Revolution Jews had a vast communist press published in Yiddish out of New York. Abraham Cahan, Philip Krants, Avrom Lesin and others published one socialist newspaper after another espousing Marxist ideals. After the seizure of Russia by communism numerous Yiddish newspapers arose to promote the Party line. The most influential was the Freiheit, later the Morning Freiheit, founded by the actual communist agents, Moishe Olgin and Shakne Epstein. Another was Der Hammer, also published in Yiddish. Communist art was promoted by the likes of Hugo Gellert and Louis Lozowick. Even journalists later to become famous as historians, like Barbara Tuchman (real name Wertheim) were writing for Stalinist New York newspapers. As Eugene Lyons expressed it in the title of his classic study of the 1930’s, it was truly the “Red Decade”. FBI agents and government informers who attended communist meetings during the 1920’s through 1950’s reported what observers of the New York scene reported 1880-1920-that all radical meetings consisted of 80% Russian born Jews. Any reading of the Communist press in those years will show a disproportionate number of Jewish names.
Those who tried to expose the Jewish communist connection at the height of the Soviet terror were savagely crucified in the press. One such was Malcolm Muggeridge, the English journalist who wrote a thinly veiled account of his travels in Soviet Russia, “Winter In Moscow”. Muggeridge was blacklisted for many years because of his scathing references to the murderous Jewish commissars of “scientific socialism”. Even today, an unedited edition of “Winter In Moscow” is hard to find. Many American military officers were fully aware of the Jewish control behind communism but dared not mention publicly what they candidly wrote in their intelligence dispatches. Marlborough Churchill, the head of the Military Intelligence Department, was fully convinced of the Jewish background of communism, as were Ralph Van Deman, Captain Montgomery Schuyler and dozens of other military personnel. The opinions of the illustrious George Samuel Patton on the Jews and their communist connections are well documented but carefully kept out of Hollywood movies and the popular press. Today the Jews operate a dual system of information on the forbidden question of Jewish bolshevism. They deny or minimize it in the popular media while striving to make no mention of it at all. However, in their reference works written for Jewish eyes primarily, they not merely document the fact of Jewish control behind communism but elaborate it in detail. A very good example of this tendency is the book “Jewish Nationality and Soviet Politics: The Jewish Sections of the CPSU, 1917-1939” by Zvi Gitelman.
Thus, it turns out that Jewish involvement in communism was very real. The popular image of reality rarely has anything to do with the facts. Facts are usually deeply buried to preserve the popular misconceptions. Jews and communism is one more case in point.
on 12 April 2009
ONE MAN AT PARIS
Henry Wickham Steed was an English newspaper editor and foreign correspondent who reported extensively on the politics of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. He wrote a famous autobiography, “Through Thirty Years”, describing his experiences on the European scene. He was a very influential participant in the Paris Peace Conference of 1919. It was Wickham Steed who single-handedly prevented Woodrow Wilson and Lloyd George from extending American and British diplomatic recognition to Bolshevik Russia. Before Wilson returned to Washington, D.C. for a month after the conference sessions of February 13th and 14th, he authorized a delegation led by William C. Bullitt and the pro-communist Lincoln Steffens to travel to Moscow to assess conditions there. Bullitt and Steffens returned to Paris enthusiastically recommending that recognition be extended to the new Soviet regime. Wilson had returned to Paris by this time in mid-March and was seriously considering a proposal by Tchicherin, the communist foreign minister, to grant commercial rights to westerners in exchange for diplomatic recognition. Wilson had previously considered brining Bolshevik plenipotentiaries to Paris to negotiate or, in the alternative, meeting with the Bolsheviks at a port in the Sea of Marmara. Wickham Steed published an editorial in a leading Paris newspaper the next day arguing that Wilson’s magnificent “idealism” would be destroyed if he sold out to crass commercial considerations. Wilson, highly embarrassed by Wickham Steed’s dramatic initiative, dropped his plan to recognize the Bolsheviks. Thus, international recognition was denied to the Jewish revolutionary regime at the very time that it threatened to overflow Europe.
Wickham Steed was one of those Englishmen who conceived of Zionism as the proper antidote to Jewish revolutionary subversion. He was not alone in this attitude. Winston Churchill and Arthur James Balfour took exactly the same position. As an advocate of Zionism, Wickham Steed later found himself at odds with Lord Northcliffe, chief proprietor of the London Times, who was strongly anti-Zionist and who had published a series of articles in the Times entitled “The Palestine Deception” by his leading journalist, J.M.N. Jeffries. Steed, then, was pro-Zionist but anti-bolshevik and anti-world government. Henry Wickham-Steed was less than prescient on the dangers of Zionism. But he was a determined foe of the Jewish mass murder machine in Russia. At a critical time during the lunacy of Paris, he intervened to stop what easily could have become a blank check to Jewish communist savagery. Nor did the danger entirely dissipate after March. Bela Kun and his Jewish gangsters were just coming to power in Hungary at this very time. They, too, received an invitation to come to Paris to parley-an invitation which was only barely withdrawn at the last moment. As events unfolded, the Zionist agent Jan Christian Smuts was in Budapest anyway, parleying with commissar Kun in the train dining car.
Henry Wickham Steed was the right man, in the right place at the right time. His philo-Zionism was deplorable but he recognized the menace of bolshevism at its murderous height and stopped recognition dead in its tracks. Recognition of Red Russia would have to wait until 1933 and the advent of the New Deal. That same year of 1933 marked the rise of another anti-communist in Germany. Unlike Henry Wickham Steed, he would deal diplomatically with Bolshevik Russia-while militarily plotting to destroy it.
on 12 April 2009
You boys surely do not like documented facts, do you? It is easy to see why.
on 12 April 2009
To my adoring critics:
Why don’t you “cut and paste” your kosher assholes into your lying mouths? That would make a perfect picture.
on 12 April 2009
tl; dr
on 12 April 2009
Ok, I lied, and had to restrain my laughter.
The Protocols? David Duke? In addition to your tierd, rehashed newspaper articles from 80 years ago?
Come on. You’re really firing from the hip here.
It’s funny in a twisted sort of way almost, and your towering fits would reqire those on the recieving end to have nerves of steel to restrain themselves- from laughter
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megalomania
on 12 April 2009
Apart from the funny idea that Warsaw Jews would have to come to New York to learn to speak Yiddish, these denialists are surprisingly confused about WW2 history.
The idea that the Soviets, who I think lost a million soldiers in the first month of the war, would have the time to organize the migration of their Jews out East, is pretty idiotic. That “efficiency under German fire” is just Stalin’s propaganda.
In 1945, said alleged Russian Jews hidden beyond the Urals, “poured into the commissariats of the Iron Curtain countries.” What “commissariat” is Mr. Thames dreaming about? Were there not enough local communists to run Eastern Europe? I guess he never heard that there were Red partisans in the woods all over Europe.
“A huge exodus of Jews poured out of Russia on their way to invade Arab Palestine.” Nonsense, the displaced people going to Israel were camp survivors and Jewish partisans who did not like Stalin.
on 12 April 2009
“it is IMPOSSIBLE to have incinerated the numbers offered.”
Han, please show where someone claimed that all of the bodies were incinerated in crematories. Your argumentative tactics are boring. They are rife with fallacy. You asked where the chimneys were. I showed you. Are you really trying to argue that the crematories didn’t have chimneys until after the war? What purpose would crematories devoid of chimneys have served? What purpose does it serve to argue that a prison camp crematory doesn’t have a chimney for that matter?
It looks like John Thames has a problem with reading comprehension as well. I asked:
“What does your EVIDENCE show the Germans do with all the children, the sick, and the elderly who were unfit to work? I don’t want supposition. I don’t want your opinion, or 17 paragraphs of mindless prattle about criminal trials that took place 60 years later. I want your data that shows exactly what the Germans did with them. What was their plan for them? Where are they now? Where are the German documents that show what was done with them?”
John Thames responded:
“Not all of the Jews and others passing through Auschwitz stayed there as labor”
This statement completely avoids the question. I did not argue that everyone that arrived at Auschwitz stayed at Auschwitz. I asked: Of the 405,000 prisoners logged into Auschwitz, what was done with the children, the elderly, and the sick? I asked this question because of your unbelievable statement:
“The Germans did not want to break up families; therefore the children were deported with their parents. How very inhumane!”
If you intend to suppose that Jews unsuitable for labor were all shipped westward, your keep families together statement is born out as a lie. Beyond that where are the records to show movement westward from Auschwitz? Where did they move to? Are you really going to try and claim that Polish, Hungarian, Greek and Czech Jews were shipped back into Germany?
If you intend to suppose that they remained at the camp, you have failed to provide any evidence that the camp could even have been able to handle such a volume of people, as requested by my question.
on 12 April 2009
ah use mah FANG ta open muh BEER:
“Are you really trying to argue that the crematories didn’t have chimneys until after the war? What purpose would crematories devoid of chimneys have served? What purpose does it serve to argue that a prison camp crematory doesn’t have a chimney for that matter?”
WILLIAM HENDERSON himself stated that there are ashes all over the camps.
Oh…did you forget he posted that? How did those ashes get there…from the Jew-electrifying machine? The Hebe-Steamer?
Admit that you were taken in by a farce, and we’ll let you work the sewers.
on 12 April 2009
Fangbeer and Matteo:
You are both complete, lying, shit-for-brains. You think you know something’ and yet you know nothing. First, Fangbeer.
If you will consult the recvords of the Dachau camp and others in Germany, you will discover that in the last three to four months of the war as the Red Army advanced, the inmate population of the camp increased from 25-30,000 to over 250,000. Those were precisely the inmates from Auschwitz and the eastern camps. Get Robert Lenski’s book “The Holocusust On Trial” and read it, you stupid jackass.
Now for male bimbo cunt Matteo:
Get the works of Vladimir Rezun (Viktor Suvorov) and read them. There you will discover that the Soviets were preparing for an offensive war which they intended to launch by:
(1) transporting huge numbers of attack formations to the west while
(2) evacuating rail stock, industrial capital and huge masses of laborers east behind the Ural Mountains just in case the German enemy should manage to occupy western Russia if things went wrong (as they did). This process was actually underway several weeks before the outbreak of the war. It is increasingly being documented by even establishment historians. Thus, the means were already in place to evacuate huge populations eastward when the Germans rolled in. The main reason the Soviet divisions were encircled and destroyed so easily is that they were in vulnerable, advanced positions preparing for their own attack.
Do you have anything else to offer, o brilliant shit heads?
And oh, yes, Matteo, you little Commie punk.In actual fact, those Jews who “detested Stalin” were only too happy to serve him as the chief commissars in Eastern Europe. Why don’t you ask some of the Poles, Hungarians, Rumanians, Czechs, etc. who were there? Get on Amazon.com and read some of the reviews of books I have already cited by Mr. Jan Peczis, for example. You are only too willing to believe evry lie the Jews tell you; why don’t you try consulting someone else instead?
on 12 April 2009
You were the one who made the assertion that crematoriums didn’t have chimneys. Did you forget you posted that? Let me refresh your memory:
You quoted: “What held them back somehow, was the minor inconvenience of having already gone up through the crematorium chimney.”
You Responded: “What bloody chimneys?!?”
John also responded: “Did you not know that the chimneys were built after the war by the Polish Jewish communists to lend versimilitude to the legend?”
Do you people even read what you’ve written? Are we really supposed to believe that crematoriums didn’t have chimneys and that fact is antithetical to the idea that Jews were murdered and then disposed of in them? Are we supposed to believe it after you contradict yourself and shout that the camps were covered in ashes?
I’ll say it again, it’s pretty amusing to watch the insane rationalize their insanity.
on 12 April 2009
READING LIST FOR JEWISH STUDIES
JEWISH CONTROL OF SEX SLAVE TRADE
Prostitution and Prejudice, Edward J. Bristow
Oxford University Press, 1982
The Natashas: Inside The Global Sex Slave Trade, Victor Malarek
Arcade Publishing, 2004
JEWISH INVOLVEMENT IN COMMUNISM
The Jewish Century, Yuri Slezkine
Princeton University Press, 2004
The Generation: The Rise and Fall of the Jewish Communists of Poland, Jaff Schatz
University of California Press, 1991
The Jewish Intelligentsia and Russian Marxism, Robert J. Brym
Shocken Books, 1978
The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State, Benjamin Ginsberg
University of Chicago Press, 1993
The Jewish Threat: Anti-Semitic Politics of the U.S. Army, Joseph W. Bendersky
Basic Books, 2001
Jews, War and Communism in three volumes, Zosa Szajkowski
KTAV, 1972
The Roots of American Communism, Theodore Draper
Octagon Books, 1977
Jewish Nationality and Soviet Politics: The Jewish Sections of the CPSU, 1917-1930, Zvi Gitelman
Princeton University Press, 1972
A Fire In Their Hearts: Yiddish Socialists in New York
Harvard University Press, 2005
JEWISH COMMUNISM IN HOLLYWOOD
Hollywood Party: How Communism Seduced the American Film Industry in the 1930’s and 1940’s, Kenneth Lloyd Billingsley
Prima Lifestyles, 1998
Red Star Over Hollywood: The Film Colony’s Long Romance With The Left, Ronald and Joyce Radosh
Encounters Books, 2005
Tender Comrades: A Back Story of the Hollywood Blacklist, Patrick Gilligan and Paul Buhle
Saint Martin’s Press, 1999
Hide in Plain Sight: The Hollywood Blacklistees in Film and Television, 1950-2002
Palgrave MacMillan, 2003
Radical Hollywood: The Untold Story Behind America’s Favorite Movies, Paul Buhle and Dave Wagner
New Press, 2003
MCCARTHY REVISED-THE STORY THE JEWS AREN”T TELLING YOU
Joseph McCarthy: Re-examining the Life and Legacy of America’s Most Hated Senator, Arthur Herman
Free Press, 1999
Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America’s Enemies, M. Stanton Evans
Crown Forum, 2007
JEWISH ZIONISM
The Palestine Diary: in two volumes, Robert John
Booksurge Publishing, 2006
Palestine and the Arab- Israeli Conflict, Charles D. Smith
Various editions from the 1980’s until present
Bedfords Saint Martins
Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, 1881-2001, Benny Morris
Vintage, 2001
A Broken Trust: Sir Herbert Samuel, Zionism and the Palestinians, Sahar Huneidi
I.B. Tauris, 2001
Conquest Through Immigration: How Zionism Turned Palestine into a Jewish State, George W. Robnett
Britons, 1970
on 12 April 2009
“If you will consult the recvords of the Dachau camp and others in Germany, you will discover that in the last three to four months of the war as the Red Army advanced, the inmate population of the camp increased from 25-30,000 to over 250,000. Those were precisely the inmates from Auschwitz and the eastern camps. Get Robert Lenski’s book “The Holocusust On Trial” and read it, you stupid jackass.”
This is an areal map of Dachau
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_gICfPF7hTpM/SHnNv4CGL1I/AAAAAAAAA7g/YUUI4bf5k4k/DSC_1549.JPG
Not only are we to believe that there were 250,000 people physically there, are we also supposed to believe that the “majority of them” snuck back over the Ural Mountains by the time the AMERICANS liberated the camp of only 67,665 registered prisoners? That’s quite an astonishing, completely unfounded claim.
Also astonishing is your lack of a record that these people you assume were shipped from Auschwitz actually came from there.
Auschwitz recorded 60,000 people sent on the death march westward. You want me to believe they shipped what remained of 400,000 people logged into Auschwitz after 100,000 died from disease during the 5 years the camp was in operation along with similar numbers from all the other eastern camps and only 200,000 people actually made it to Dachau?
In what universe does that math work?
on 12 April 2009
Fangbeer:
Whether you choose to believe it or not, a great many “additions” were made to the Auschwitz camp by the Communists after the war. Besides, what is in any way sinister about a crematory building having a chimney, pray tell?
Kimdly enjoy the reading list, you ignorant, head-up-your ass, stupid SOB.
on 12 April 2009
Fangbeer:
Since you are such a mathematical “genius”, why don’t you try computing all the Jewish death totals that do not equal “six million”? You know, first one million for Auschwitz dead, then four million with the magic “six million” always remaing the same? As to the inmates deported westward, not all went to Dachau, obviously. There were other camps, genius. Your point about the Jews deported behind the Ural Mountains by the Soviets is completely irrelevant to the issue. The Germans deported the inmates at Auschwitz and the other Polish camps eastward as the Red army advanced, but obviously the Germans had no control over Jews hiding out east of the Ural Mountains beyond their control. So what is the point, you fucking idiot?
Has it occured to your dinosaiur brain that hd the Germans actually been exterminating the Jews, then by 1945 all the prisoners in the camps would long since have been dead already? And why deport them westward in the first place? Why not just shoot them down? That is what real exterminators would have done.
IDIOT
on 12 April 2009
Again you’ve avoided the question.
I was using your fictional numbers in conjunction with the numbers recorded in German log books. Your numbers don’t add up with their numbers. Hell, their numbers don’t add up with their numbers. Explain this discrepancy using documented evidence.
“Besides, what is in any way sinister about a crematory building having a chimney, pray tell?”
You tell me. You are the one that denied their existence prior to the end of the war.
on 12 April 2009
Fangbeer:
You brilliant shit-for-brain.
The German records from the end of the war are far from complete. Without the total records, it is impossible for anyone to reach definitive conclusions. As to playing with numbers, isn’t this a case of the pot calling the kettle black? Jews have been playing games with the numbers for decades. Again and again, they come up with “revised” figures that never had any valid basis in the first place. So why do you get a bug up your ass about numbers?
If you think you are such a hot statistician, Fangbeer, why don’t you read Sanning’s book, “The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry”, and then write a detailed review proving why a professional statistician (something you are not), is wrong? Come on, foreskin face, rise to the challenge!
on 12 April 2009
Right, Stalin had more airplanes than he had pilots, and lost half of his air force on the ground, but there he was, moving “huge numbers of attack formations”, against Germany.
Stalin lost ten divisions here, twenty divisions there, but managed to get his Jews out to safety. Then. in 1945, he rushed them Russian Jews out of the woods to lord over Hungarians and Poles they could not speak to or understand.
These Nazi phantasists are as smart as their Fuhrer was. Remember, that was the great strategist who could not beat the Brits, so he figured he might as well go to war on the Soviets in June and on the United States in December.
Unless, unless… Could it be that we’ve been fooled? That it was all a put-on, that Mr. Thames is a Jew at his computer in Brooklyn, pulling an April’s Fool? April 1, at 10 pm, it’s 4am on April 2 in London, that’s when Mr. John Thames first appeared here. In which case, “hats off, gentlemen… a genius!”
on 12 April 2009
Matteo:
You will never make it as a satirist, any more than you will ever make it as a historian. Viktor Suvorov is not the only analyst who thinks that the Soviets were going to attack Europe in 1941; the respected American Sovietologist Alfred Weeks also has said so. You have never read any of the emerging research on these and related subjects but you just know that I am wrong.
You keep sneering at the evidence that there was a massive Soviet evacuation of their industrial population ahead the German army but you do not bother to refute that, either.
All you can do is sneer-because that is the last refuge of an, ignorant, stupid little shit convinced of his own omniscience
on 12 April 2009
So you’re unable to answer the question then?
on 12 April 2009
It’s convenient for you that when pressed on the issue of the final solution your response was:
There was never anything in the meticulously kept German reports.
“All that we are told is that Hitler issued “oral orders” (never proven) and that the extermination took place through its own accord. That is remarkable, given that the meticulous Germans kept voluminous records of everything they did.”
When pressed on the issue of the numbers you choose from those meticulously kept voluminous reports, suddenly they are incomplete.
“Without the total records, it is impossible for anyone to reach definitive conclusions.”
You really should take a moment to get your story straight. You keep accusing me of swallowing lies. Meanwhile you contradict yourself in every long winded diatribe you post.
on 12 April 2009
Fangbeer:
You are oh so clever. You imagine that you have spotted a contradiction. Not so fast, circumsized genius.
You forget that in the closing months of the war Germany was in chaos. The front was collapsing, east and west. Transportation was a disaster, supllies were a disaster. Prisoners were being transfered westward as part of a chaotic retreat. Does it perhaps occur to you that record keeping was not as precise as it had been, under these conditions? Are you aware that losing regimes frequently purge records as defeat approaches? Have you considered that many records may have fallen into Soviet and allied hands to be buried, under these conditions? (Such as the deep-sixed by the Soviets records of the Auschwitz camp.)
Why, no. You simply compare complete German records when the Reich was still functional with incomplete records in a period of collapse and chaos. You then start making absurd statistical comparisons based on incomplete data. What a brilliant analyst you are, Fangbeer. Considerations that would occur to a three year old child leave you in the dust.
And, oh yes, not answering questions. You still haven’t answered mine about all the massive statistical inconsistencies in the Jewish accounts.
Now, as to asking questions. People who want to get at the truth try asking the right questions. People who wish to obfuscate the truth ask the wrong questions. Like your fellow bullshit artists on this thread, you specialize in asking all the wrong questions-and then accuse me of dodging issues.
Let’s make it really easy for you, Fangbeer. Try explaining how there could be so many “survivors” collecting never ending reparations when the Germans allegedly killed “six million”. Since you think that I am playing with numbers, why don’t you consult Norman Finkelstein’s “The Holocaust Industry” and read what he has to say on the numbers not adding up? (You could read that a lot faster than Sanning’s book. We know that you are much too lazy to read long-winded presentations, like Reitlinger’s and Hilberg’s 600 page books.)
You need to spend more time researching facts and less time playing lawyer, Fangbeer.
on 12 April 2009
“Not so fast, circumsized genius.”
You’re worried about my dick? That’s just creepy. No seriously. It’s fucking weird.
“Does it perhaps occur to you that record keeping was not as precise as it had been, under these conditions? Are you aware that losing regimes frequently purge records as defeat approaches?”
All I pointed out was it that was quite convenient that part of your argument relies on the meticulousness of the German records, and part of it relies on how incomplete they are. You have not explained this contradiction away.
You’ve deflected.
You’ve flung invective.
You’ve changed the subject.
You’ve questioned the questions.
But you’ve not explained why none of your ravings makes any logical sense.
on 12 April 2009
John reminds me of the cartoon neo-nazi jumping and down screaming Thejew! The Jew! The JEW! Zey…ist… EVERYWHERE!
Again, without speculative, ancient newspaper articles and debunked books, and conspiracy theories about Jews, John can’t prove anything.
And, like the 9/11 denialists, he simply moves on to another whcko theory when one has been debunked, or simply keeps restaing his original idea because evryone else must be using manufactured evidence
on 13 April 2009
Fangbeer:
The problem here is that none of your questions make any sense.
Why don’t you go back to my original post on this thread and read it start to finish. Then, instead of jumping into the middle of the subject, you can start at the beginning. As to your genitals or anything else about you, I could care less.
Marc:
I have been accused, ever since this discussion began, of mental instability, insanity and every other problem under the sun. I suffer from none of these things. Your problem is that you can’t take that which you dish out.
As to my evidence being too old, the Holocaust Hoax is 60 years old.
on 13 April 2009
Fangbeer:
You are simply too stupid to grasp elementary points.
If you think that lying governments do not destroy records, just think of all the records the Roosevelt regime destroyed over Pearl Harbor. Just read about all the naval memoirs suppressed after their authors died exposing what still hasn’t been released about that story.
Did the Germans destroy records? Sure. But look at all the records on Auschwitz that they did not destroy. They did not destroy the death books or the construction records. (And it wasn’t the Germans who suppressed these records; it was the Soviets.) Why did they not destroy them? Because there was nothing in them implicating the Germans in a mythical “gassing” program, that’s why!
Put on your dunce cap, Fangbeer. There would have been a lot more destruction of records by the Germans if they had really been covering up what you claim they were covering up. Understandable gaps in records at a time when Germany was collapsing hardly prove anything. And how do you know that it was the Germans covering up, rather than the victors covering up to conceal that the supposedly murdered Jews were still alive?
on 13 April 2009
“As to your genitals or anything else about you, I could care less.”
I wasn’t the one that brought up my cock. That was you. Twice. What’s the Nazi policy regarding homosexuals? They have a don’t ask don’t tell kind of thing going on?
Hey, do you fantasize about how many Jewish pricks the Einsatzgruppen groped? I’ll bet you do.
on 13 April 2009
“After reading the various comments on this post, it is clear to me that what is required is a clear exposition of the revisionist position”:
“I do not believe for one second that the Germans killed “six million” of your stinking tribe. But if the day ever comes for “Payback” you pink, circumsized piece of greasy pork, I, and millions of other whites who finally know the truth, will hunt you down and nail your kosher ass to a crucifix with your amputated balls stuffed between your circumsized lips. You deserve it, and so do millions of others of your satanic tribe.”
I think that clears the revisionist position up.
Alex, John or whoever, why do you persist in these ever longer, demented posts?
Keep ‘em short and perky! Your shorter tirades are more revealing and are really all anyone needs to know about the “quality” of your scholarship.
on 13 April 2009
“They speak but they say nothing” - Shakespeare
Short enough?
on 13 April 2009
http://www.newsnet14.com/2007/05/the-three-monkeys-by-jayne-gardener/
on 13 April 2009
THE “FACTUALITY” OF JEWISH INNOCENCE
Again and again, revisionists and Holocaust Deniers attempt the pusillanimous technique of pretending that the “gas chamber” hoax was just a big misunderstanding. The Jews did not deliberately lie; there was no organized conspiracy to swindle the world. The Jews just: (1) believed their own propaganda or (2) were honestly confused by wartime anxiety. The appeal of this public relations ploy is obvious. It acquits the Chosen Ones of criminal and civil responsibility for their hoax and allows the “Denier” to escape the charge that he is out to “get the Jews”. This innovative nonsense was pioneered by Bradley Smith but has since been picked up by the pseudonymous Mr. Dalton, author of “Debating The Holocaust”. At least one Holocaust Denier, Arthur Butz, has remained consistent from day one. He has always maintained that the hoax was deliberate, a position which follows inevitably from the facts.
The best proof of pre-meditated intent behind the hoax is what transpired at Nuremberg. It was Nuremberg which provided the pseudo-factual and pseudo-juridical foundation for the hoax. There was nothing accidental or coincidental at Nuremberg. It was all deliberately planned from the beginning. Just as the Jews descended on the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 to promote their agenda, so too the Jews descended upon Nuremberg. In fact, it was the Jews who originated the whole concept of the trial. The British simply wanted to shoot the leaders of the defeated Germans outright. It was the Robinson brothers of the Institute of Jewish Affairs of the World Jewish Congress who first proposed the idea of the trials to the Americans. It was the Jewish organizations, such as the Yivo (the Jewish Scientific Institute in New York) which processed, altered and forged captured German documents for the trial. The man in charge of picking all the personnel for the trials was Colonel David “Mickey” Marcus, an extreme Zionist. (It was also Marcus who originated the idea of “criminal organizations” to dispense with questions of individual guilt or innocence at Nuremberg.) According to Hungarian author Louis Marschalko in his book “The World Conquerors” out of 3000 total personnel involved in the trials behind the scenes, 2400 were Jewish. American judges present at Nuremberg, such as Judge Wennersturm, testified that over 90% of the personnel at Nuremberg were Jewish. The late Senator Thomas Dodd of Connecticut testified in his private letters from Nuremberg where he served as an assistant prosecutor over the dominant Jewish involvement at Nuremberg. Just a few of the names at Nuremberg were Robert Kempner, Benjamin Ferencz and Sidney alderman. The New York Jew actor, Tony Randall, (Rosenberg) and the head of Vox, the third largest classical recording company in America behind RCA and Columbia, Bartholdy-Mendohlsohn, were also there in American uniforms.
Would messrs. Smith, Dalton and Santomauro, among others, have us believe that all these facts about Jewish intrigue at Nuremberg have no significance? Do they suggest that there was no sinister intent operating behind the scenes? Perhaps these gentlemen would argue that although the Jews behind the scenes were manipulating things, that the little Jews in the camps were simply misled. That will not wash either. Surely the Jew in the camps had to notice that his fellows were still with him, day after day, laboring in the factories and the fields, long after they were supposed to have been “gassed”. Surely he had to notice that when his fellow Jews fell ill, they were taken to the camp hospital and rehabilitated back to health. Surely he was present in the camp theatre and playhouse when his fellow Jews were attending concerts in between the “gassing” operations. Surely, he swam in the camp swimming pool with other Jews who had not been “gassed”. Surely, he was not being “gassed” while mounting the camp prostitute. How could a Jew, acquainted with all these facts of daily camp life, have for one moment honestly believed the propaganda about “gas chambers” and the exterminations that were not taking place around him?
Perhaps messrs. Smith, Dalton and Santomauro would tell us that the Jews were not confused at the time they were in the camps, but only became confused afterwards. The Nuremberg Trial propaganda was so overwhelming that it overrode what they personally knew not to be the case. The fact that the German defendants were hung in the middle of the high Jewish holidays, between the Day of Atonement and the Day of Final Judgement, had no significance. There was no message given or intended to brother Jews around the world. The fact that the court official who read out the sentences, Wolf Frank, was a Jew, had no significance. The fact that the executioner who dropped the gallows was a Jew, John Woods Short, had no significance. Truly, the gullibility of messrs. Smith, Dalton and Santomauro exceeds the gullibility of those they try to educate. They insist on the “innocence” of the Jews the same way that the Jews insist on the “factuality” of the gas chambers.
on 13 April 2009
Marc:
“To remain ignorant of the past is to remain forever a child.”
Tacitus
Consult your own scribblings for proof.
on 13 April 2009
that was certainly short enough, but then again, the shakespeare quote certainly applies to you. what i meant was, just post your usual jew hatred and anti-black screeds - they’re more entertaining.
Your attempts at trying to pass yourself off as scholarly or intellectual are laughable - which is why you always end up in racist screeds anyway.
All I’m saying is just stick tot he racist screeds. Oh, and keep em short and perky!
on 13 April 2009
Aww, look! When I linked him to Wikipedia he discovered WikiQuote!
on 13 April 2009
“just post your usual jew hatred and anti-black screeds”
Don’t forget all the blatantly homosexual fantasies. I wonder if it was a “prison buddy” that turned him into a white supremacist. What with all the talk of balls in mouths and foreskins and circumcisions, I’m sure I’m not too far off.
What do you say John? Is the old dirt trail whites only?
on 13 April 2009
What homosexual fantasies?
What prison term?
You invent more “facts” than the Jews lying about “gas chambers”.
on 13 April 2009
‘Where, oh where, is poor Mr. Welch? After I proved him a liar on the Balfour Declaration and the Paris Peace Conference he has been shame facedly hiding.’
I’m here Mr Thames. I just decided that my weekend could be spent in a more pleasurable manner than conversing with Fascist scum like yourself.
Let me also remind you of the following. Regarding your lie about the supposed evacuation of Jews into the USSR after WWII, you have used quotes which refer to Soviet population transfers (notably the evacuation of industrial resources to the Urals) AFTER the Germans invaded the USSR in 1941. This is your pitiful attempt at ‘proof’. The fact that you have misquoted your sources suggest that you have either acquired them second hand from a fellow denier, or you have actually read your original sources and have wilfully misrepresented them. Either way, it is a picture perfect demonstration of the way your sick excuse for a mind works (also represented by your racial slurs against your critics, and your assumption - hysterically wrong in my case - that they must all be Jews).
You have also abandoned your efforts to prove that your selective statistical quotes represent the domination of Communism by Jews. Clearly, you know you’re on to a loser here.
Your rubbish about the Paris Peace Settlement can be redressed by a single consultation of the documentary record. The Balfour declaration was unfulfilled, Palestine became a British mandate - not a Zionist state - and in the 1930s the British restricted Jewish emigration in order to appease local Arab sentiment - not because they were scared that all the Jews would turn out to be commies.
You have also not been able to substantiate any of your claims about there being no Holocaust and no gas chambers. I am indeed grateful for ‘Matteo B’ for reminding us of historical efforts by far-right groups in Central and Eastern Europe to ‘commemorate’ pro-Nazi and Fascist militias raised, armed and commanded by the Nazis during their occupation of the continent. Granted that the Croatian Ustase conducted its own campaign of genocide against Serbs, any Holocaust denier seeking to press his claims has to offer some explanation as to what the Hungarian Arrow Cross, the Latvian Arajs Kommando and the Ukrainian auxiliary SS units were for. The failure of any of them to do so speaks volumes.
Mr Thames also offers us the canard of a Soviet invasion planned in 1941, as presented in the ‘Ledokhod’ bullshit written by ‘Viktor Suvurov’. Mr Thames - that great, outstanding scholar who claims to be such a voracious reader - might have missed the comprehensive refuting of ‘Suvurov’s’ claims by Gabriel Gorodetsky in ‘Grand Delusion’. But I digress.
I could argue with Mr Thames all day (were it not for the fact that I have no way of recovering the hours lost and using them for more pleasurable and enlightening pursuits), but instead I will settle for a challenge.
Anyone can set up an internet site, or post comments on one like Counterknowledge. There is no editing, no peer-review, and no one to something that to Holocaust deniers is highly annoying - namely check facts (hANOVER fIST, take note).
So Mr Thames, if you want to impress me with your credibility as a scholar, get off this site. Put all your rubbish into a 10-15,000 word article, and submit it to an academic journal. I’m not talking about the pseudonymous ‘Institute of Historical Review’ here; I’m talking about a proper scholarly journal of international renown such as the ‘Journal of Military History’, ‘International History Review’ (the real journal published by Simon Fraser University), or ‘The Journal of Modern History’. You will of course be required to submit it anonymously, so that at least 2 other academic reviewers can read your ‘work’ without automatically taking exception to it because of its author.
So do this, Mr Thames. You want the credibility you claim is your due, play the game and try and get yourself in print. Better still, write a book about how the Holocaust is all a ‘lie’, and how Communism was invented and perpetrated by Jews. Perhaps you can follow it up with a sequel about how McCarthy was right all along. Then submit it to a University Press for publication. See how far you get. And when you get the rejection letters telling you that your work is a pile of shit, I suggest you take note of the reasons why, and don’t just do what all you sad little fuckers do, which is automatically blame your failure to peddle your pseudo-academic filth on … you know who.
on 13 April 2009
Let me also follow up with two similarly false claims raised by Mr Caiazzo:
(1) No reputable historian has ever claimed that ‘6 million’ people were ‘gassed’ during the Shoah. The figure of those killed by the Nazi regime incorporates the death camps, but also the victims of the Einsatzgruppen and their local collaborators (see comments above), those who were worked to death in the camps, and also the victims of starvation and disease.
Parenthetically, I should also note the lack of an effort by the ‘deniers’ to explain away the deaths of millions of Roma, Polish citizens (gentiles as well as Jews), Ukrainians, Russians, Belarussians etc. This is an implicit acceptance of the racial and genocidal nature of the Nazi regime, which goes against their efforts to deny that the Third Reich would never have engaged on a systematic exercise to exterminate the one racial/ethnic group that Hitler and his peers loathed the most.
(2) The British never used poison gas against the Iraqi Kurds, although Churchill did suggest it in the memo he cites. See David Omissi’s book on air policing for more on this. Incidentally, the one European state which did use gas against rebels - in both Libya in the 1920s and Ethiopia in the 1930s - was Fascist Italy.
on 13 April 2009
For my final trick, I am hoping to get down to the UK National Archives next week. In the process, I intend to track down the declassified ENIGMA decrypts on SS activities in Poland from 1941-1944, and I will get some digital photos of them and will post them on this site. They will be there for any of you to see for yourselves, and to decide whether the likes of Mr Thames are the ’scholars’ they claim to be, or the two-faced, lying, racist filth that they actually are.
on 13 April 2009
Mr. Welch:
Now is the time to deal with your prevarications once and for all.
I have not abanoned my position that Jews bear the collective responsibility for communism. I have simply rested on the documented facts that you have been impotent to refute. Just to bring up one more example of what you willfully choose to ignore, I suggest you consult Henry Strebnick’s recently published book, “Jerusalem On The Amur”, published by McGill/Queen’s University Press (December 2008). If you read the publisher’s blurb on Amazon, you will find all the interesting comments on how influential Communist Jews were in Montreal, Toronto and the other big cities, and how enthusiastically they supported the Birobidzhan project in the Soviet Union, including suppoerting it financially plus going to live there. You will also note the reviewers commets about this “amazing” and “forgotten” episode in Jewish history. (I think “deliberately suppressed” would be more accurate.)
I would hardly rest my case on this one book; it merely suffices to show what you, Mr. Welch, are deliberately covering up. Your kosher shit continues to excrete through your lying lips. (If you are not a Jew, as you claim, Mr. Welch, you are certainly one of their whores, like Victor Hanson Davis.) Now as to your misrepresentations on the Holocaust.
(1) Six million Jews were not killed by “gassing” or any other means.
(2) There were no execution “gas chambers” in any German camp.
Mr. Welch conflates the fake “gas chambers” with the question of how many Jews died or were killed by whichever method. It is a cheap trick - and typical of a rabbincally trained pseudo-scholar. Mr. Welch can save himself the trouble of quoting British decrypts of Jews executed in Russia. That point is not even in dispute. It is a known fact that the Germans executed large numbers of Jews in Russia. (Given their own communist crimes, they richly deserved it.) All i ever did was question the numbers involved. I still do, for all the reasons already stated. Mr.Welch also deliberately (underline deliberately) distorts what I wrote on the evacuation of the Jews in 1941. If he will return to my original posting, I quoted the American professor Lorimer who stated quite plainly, based on Soviet sources themselves, that the evacuation of civilian industrial populations east of the Ural Mountains was beginning several days before the German invasion took place. Thus, Mr. Welch is a brazen liar. I am well awareof Israeli pseudo-scholar Goredetsky. His book “Grand Illusion” is trash. Professor Goredetsky merely regurgitates official Russian historiography and passes it off as established fact. It has all the merit of Gordon Prange’s/ Donald Goldstein’s scribblimgs on Pearl Harbor and Saint Franklin of Roosevelt’s supposed “surprise” on December 7, 1941. In case the erudite Mr. Welch has not noticed it, there was world war going on in Europe. Millions of volunteers joined the German Wehrmacht to fight communism (and the Jews who stood behind it). That is the explanation for the Latvian SS and other auxiliary units under German command.Mr. Welch apparently thinks that fighting with WW2 Germany was a crime. I do not.
Now as to Mr. Welch’s brazen lies about the British Mandate over Palestine. Mr. Welch takes what I wrote about British policy in the late ‘teens and early ’20’s and tries to misapply it to the 1930’s. It is very clear, from their own documented statements of the English statesmen that Mr. Welch has not bothered to deny, that one of the prime motivations for issuing the declaration was belief in a “contract with Jewry” that would get the United States into the war on England’s side. It is also a documented fact (consult professor Michael Cohen’s book, “Churchill and the Jews”) that when Churchill was Colonial Secretary in the early 1920’s that he, and other English officials at the time, did regard the Jews involved in the 1920 and 1921 riots as infested with communists. Do not take my word for it, Mr.Welch, take professor Cohen’s word for it. It is certainly true that in the 1930’s, the British did try to back off unlimited Jewish immigration into Palestine because that was causing severe problems among the Arabs. It is also true that the Jews had to gnash their teeth and go along with the policy because they needed the assistance of the British Empire in fighting Hitler. All these facts are well-known and I do not need an ivory tower academic prostitute like Mr. Welch to remind me of them. Mr. Welch is completely silent on the two examples of Zionist exercise of ower that I provided, the “Black Letter” and the immense Zionist power politicking at Lake Success in New York during the partition resolution of November 1947. Ditto with Mr. Welch’s silence on what Harry Truman said.
Mr. Welch becomes truly laughable on the subject of Senator Joseph McCarthy . Will I perhaps try to prove that McCarthy was actually right? Why should I, Mr. Welch, when it already has been proven that he was right? Has the ever so learned Mr. Welch perhaps heard of the Venona transcripts of the Army Signal Corps? Has he read either Arthur Hermann or M. Stanton Evans on the subject? Perhaps I am wrong about the erudite Mr. Welch. Perhaps he is not a Jew at all, but merely another “Good War” liberal who believes that America just “had to” go to war to save the world from Hitler, that Charles Lindberg was an incorrigible racist, that Saint Franklin just “never could, never would” have sacrificed the fleet at Pearl Harbor to an attack that he knew was coming, that Jews are the most innocent, morally perfectible minority that ever existed, that all allegations of deep Jewish involvement in communism are just Nazi and anti-semitic propaganda, that the Second World War was the most noble, heroic crusade ever fought and that any who dispute any or all of these verities are a species of intellectual witches called “revisionists”.
Mr. Welch is much worse than a Jew, actually.He is a “true believer” in the myth of World War Two. Let us hope that he has found a bootleg copy of Michael Curtiz’s old film, “Mission To Moscow”, to reinforce his historical illusions as he brainwashes the kiddies each morning as an “educator”.
on 13 April 2009
William
It looks as if you got your debate after all. You’ve certainly given Mr Thames the platform he wants to spout his bullshit. Still, I live in hope that he will eventually run out of words, and get a life in the real world.
I think I know why you’ve let this post run so long (it’s greast fun) but after a while it’s also very boring as it doesn’t really go anywhere, does it ? The verbal ping-pong between Mr Thames and Joseph was interesting to start with but for me it’s now past it’s sell by date.
Mr Thames seems to be calling the shots here.
on 13 April 2009
Mr. Welch is an intellectual prostitute. As such, he is entirely typical of the whores who infest American universities. He challenges me to get published in “reputable” academic journals. This conveniently ignores the power forces which control the universities. Mr. Welch blabs about “reputable scholarship”. He ignores all the proven misinterpretations of these “reputable scholars” down through the decades. If we go back to the WW1 period, all sorts of “reputable academics” (just like Mr. Welch, with Anglophile cock on their pious lips) enlisted in George Creel’s “Committe For Public Information” and produced one scholarly, deadly accurate propaganda pamphlet after another on the Kaiser’s plot to enslave the world. (They passed all the academic and government review boards quite nicely.) I will only mention the distinguished professor Sperry and his “German Octopus” essay as a passing illustration. No doubt professor Sperry had all his ph.d.’s, just like Mr. Welch. I will let him look up all the books, 1915-1925, by all the “learned men” proving that the Germans were out to conquer the world. Then I will let him explain, based on the well-known and scientifically proven principle that human beings are always evolving toward a “higher state”, how the same Ivory Tower shit-for-brains who published this bilge have overcome their past failings. Darwinian evolution may have some proof problems, but the evolution of academic intelligence is a wonder to behold.
Now on to Pearl Harbor. For decades, academic prostitutes like Roberta Wohlstter, Gordon Prange and Donald Goldstein have been pretending that FDR was “surprised” on December 7, 1941. Non-academics, like George Morgenster and Robert Stinnett, have done a pretty good job of proving otherwise. But they lack the credentials of duly certified academic witch doctors, like Mr. Welch, so let us pay them no heed.
Bravo! on your credentials, Mr. Welch. You have impressed all the people you need to impress. You have yet to stumble over the truth.
on 13 April 2009
“What homosexual fantasies?”
These ones:
“balls stuffed between your circumsized lips”.
“a circumsized schoolteacher.”
“on their knees fellating circumsized pricks.”
“Hang on tight, you circumsized, lying SOB’s”
“Not so fast, circumsized genius.”
And now we’re getting into a scat fetish.
“Your kosher shit continues to excrete through your lying lips.”
By the way, what is circumsized? Is that like circus-sized? Are you trying to say you like them really big? That you’re into clowns? Farm animals? Help me out here.
And Joe, careful I think John’s already run off a few batches of dream babies picturing himself running his fingers through your big Jew beard while kissing your shit smeared Jew lips.
on 13 April 2009
I do not see the reason for denying that Jews are naturally drawn towards the left. One of the motives is that their prophets are egalitarian, their traditions communistic (see the Essenes), and their history is one of rebellion and intolerance of empire.(see the Maccabees, the Zealots, Masada, etc.)
We also have non-religious reasons for being drawn to the left: feeling sorry for being poor, feeling sorry for someone else being poor, and being offended by injustice. Since the Jews of Eastern Europe were poor but literate, and thus knew that being oppressed was not divine punishment for some original sin, they were most likely to be on the left. Add the fact that they were oppressed by a church-allied autocracy and brutalized by Christianists who never read their own scriptures because they could not read, and you have the reason why, before Hitler, literate non-religious poor Eastern Jews were either Zionists, Reds, or idiots.
After 1933, Jews saw their cousins being killed for sport in Germany. They saw democratic Spain being supported by Stalin, invaded by Mussolini, and bombed by Goring’s Luftwaffe –with the smiling assent of Great Britain and the United States. At that point, any European Jew who had some brains left, had to join the Reds.
on 13 April 2009
To Fangbeer:
You confuse intense dislike with homosexual fantasies. Shall I merely suggest that you go fuck yourself?
To Matteo:Thank you for the intellectual semi-honesty. Since you admit the undeniable truth that “Jews are drawn to the left” and that this tendency “arose from their prophetic traditions”, I won’t even have to quote from Arthur Liebman’s book, “Jews and the Left” for the benefit of the “educated” Mr. Welch.
To Ars Moriendi:
You had better believe I am calling the shots. My vast historical knowledge, incisive analysis and overwhelming documentation entitles me to do precisely that.
A few more points. The Jewish tradition of sympathy for the underdog is propaganda fiction. There is no such tradition. The real Jewish Talmudic tradition is to cheat, swindle and lie at every opportunity. The Jewish sympathy for the underdog routine is an act. The Jews have never had the slightest sympathy for the Arabs whose land they stole and have none now. (Witness Operation Gaza.) Neither did the Jewish sex slave traders of the Zwi Migdal in Czarist Russia have any sympathy for their victims. The sympathy of the Jewish commissars for their gulag victims is well known. Ask the late Alexander Solzhenitsyn.
To Matteo, once again.
The world was literate long before Jew scumbags like you supposedly enlightened the world. Read the Greek and Roman historians, for example. Your hoary Old Testament has poisoned more minds than any other document ever written. As to your poor cousins supposedly being murdered by the Nazis starting in 1933, the total German camp population was no more than 20-25,000 max before the war, with only 10-15% of that being Jews. A pathetic comparison to the Soviet gulags of the same decade.
I cannot wait for Mr. Welch to respond to my carving up of his arguments. He has egg all over his face again.
Till nextt time, losers.
on 13 April 2009
That’s not egg on his face, John…that’s choda from his girlfriends ron, ars, fung and marc.
Here’s something that will make you tools real ill: Islamic funding
BOB ABERNETHY, anchor: Here at home, amid all the losses in the banking and housing worlds, there is one conspicuous exception. It’s the Islamic practice of doing business without charging or paying interest on a loan. Throughout the recession so far, Islamic financing has been growing at 10 to 15 percent a year. Lucky Severson has the story.
LUCKY SEVERSON: Not too long ago, it would have been almost impossible for General and Candice Sutton to buy a home without violating their faith. They are both devout Muslims who want to finance their new home by following Islamic law, known as Shari’ah, which forbids paying interest.
CANDICE SUTTON: For us, religion and our faith is — we’d like to incorporate it to every means of our life.
GENERAL SUTTON: Islam is not just a religion — it’s a way of life. So when you look at a way of life, you have, you know, different ethical things that you should do, should not do not do. We are not supposed to be paying interest because that’s not in our way of life.
SEVERSON: Ibrahim Warde is a professor at Tufts Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. He teaches a class that’s increasingly popular on Islamic banking and finance and says it was the Prophet Muhammad, himself a merchant, who condemned the practice of charging or paying interest, called “riba” in Arabic.
Professor Ibrahim Warde
Professor IBRAHIM WARDE (International Business, Tufts Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy): There used to be a very common practice of “riba,” which was periodic doubling of the interest. So, in other words, if you owed money and were unable to pay it, then it would have to be doubled and the whole process would end with enslaving the debtor. So with the advent of Islam, there was an end to that practice.
SEVERSON: Candice, who is a transportation engineer, and General, a software developer, are looking for a home closer to work and closer to their mosque. Their real estate agent is Roma Elhabashy, a Muslim himself, who felt guilty about buying his own home through conventional financing.
ROMA ELHABASHY: I waited for a long time then I made a mistake and bought a house with regular financing and I couldn’t live with it so I actually had to sell the house for that reason. Taking advantage of someone who needs money by charging them more money doesn’t make sense.
SEVERSON: He says it’s not just Muslims who are inquiring about Shari’ah financing. It’s non-Muslims as well who share General Sutton’s point of view.
Mr. SUTTON: A lot of the finance companies who are not taking interest, you know, they don’t seem to be as hurt as much as these other companies. And, you know it’s all driven by money. So it’s all about greed. You charge interest, you want more money and that just leads to more things that leads to a bad path.
UNIDENTIFIED LOAN OFFICER (Guidance Residential, talking on phone): How much of a loan are you looking for?
SEVERSON: This is Guidance Residential, in Reston, Virginia, one of a growing number of companies catering to Muslim home buyers, by devising ways to finance mortgages without levying interest charges. Candice and General plan to finance their home through Guidance.
Hussam Qutub
Here’s how it works: Candice and General would make a qualifying down payment and Guidance and the Suttons would then purchase the home as co-owners. But instead of charging interest, Guidance would assess a monthly tax-deductible fee. Hussam Qutub, is the Director of Communications for Guidance, which has financed more than 5,000 home purchases since 2002.
HUSSAM QUTUB (Director of Communications, Guidance Residential): Now, in that monthly payment portion, there are two elements. One is the acquisition element — acquisition portion of the payment. And the second is the charge.
SEVERSON: The fee?
Mr. QUTUB: The fee. With every payment the customer is increasing his or her shares in the property and ours are decreasing. And at the same time, their fee is decreasing because we owning less.
SEVERSON: Professor Warde says skeptics who argue that the finance fee is really not much different than interest are missing the point.
Prof. WARDE: The example I typically give is religiously inspired dietary rules, in that if some people don’t want to eat food that is not halal or kosher, then a nutritionist can come to them and say, “Why are you doing that?” But for these people, for religiously minded people, how the food is prepared is quite significant.
SEVERSON: There are other significant differences. For instance, the late fee at Guidance is never more than $50. Shari’ah mortgage holders are also less likely to default on their payments.
Prof. WARDE: If there’s nothing else you could do in terms of paying a debt and you’ve tried to repay it, then the logic of the Shari’ah is that the loses should be shared by both the borrower and the lender. But it is definitely a sin to be able to repay and yet not to repay it.
SEVERSON: But it would also be a sin for Guidance to foreclose on someone without trying to work things out.
Mr. QUTUB: If for some reason the property value, just as we are seeing today, decrease and we are stuck with proceeds that are not even close to what we are owed on our share, we won’t pursue our partner. We won’t pursue their savings accounts. We won’t go after their personal assets.
————————————————–
Are you idiots up in arms yet? “What…no INTEREST?!?”
Did you guys repeat the Kol Nidre three times yesterday?
Did Operation Cast Lead obviate the need for Viagra?
on 13 April 2009
“You confuse intense dislike with homosexual fantasies”
You described the act of inserting balls into someone’s mouth as an act that would give you pleasure. You also seem obsessed with the cut of a man’s jib, if you know what I mean. You’ve made multiple references to men sucking on other men.
To quote Shakespeare - “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”
Clearly you are fixated on the issue. You say it stems from an “intense dislike?” I say it stems from insecurity and jealousy. But that’s what drives most negative prejudice, so it would seem most fitting in your case.
on 13 April 2009
Looks like Han has gotten into the race to, fantasizing about sperm on men’s faces.
on 13 April 2009
*Ahem hem* My name is John Thames.
With “my vast historical knowledge, incisive analysis and overwhelming documentation” I am “entitled” to “give a clear exposition of the revisionist position:”
You see, “the real Jewish Talmudic tradition is to cheat, swindle and lie at every opportunity.”
“I am constantly accused of mindless Jew hatred, a charge I thoroughly debunked.” (As thoroughly as I’ve debunked the holocaust.)
“I have (also) been accused, ever since this discussion began, of mental instability, insanity and every other problem under the sun. I suffer from none of these things.”
(See? See, how easily I’ve debunked THAT accusation with my vast historical knowledge, incisive analysis?)
And now, before your eyes, I will debunk the latest accusation: that I sit alone in a padded room under my Adolph Hitler poster typing away for hours on end.
I do not. I don’t suffer from mindless jew hatred either, and I’m not insane. Once again my vast historical knowledge and incisive analysis have won the day. Tadah!
Hey! Stay away from me! I don’t need any medications! Leave me alone jewboy, or I’ll use my incisive analysis on you! “Pandora’s Box has been opened-and the “gathering storm” shall soon be upon us”
Nooooooooooooo!
*coughs* Thank you. Thank you. Please send all ,
on 13 April 2009
Apparently they are not crazy, making untenable claims about the Shoah is the accepted method in extreme right wing circles.
I was in high school in Italy fifty years ago, and a few of my schoolmates had very strong Nazi sympathies. For some reason, denial was then not in fashion. They were quite proud of their elders’ war effort, and were ready to try it again, soon. We argued and I was at a disadvantage then, because I could not accept that the Allies had been as bad. I had to defend the bombing of Hiroshima, I believed Truman, and denied that German prisoners had been massacred.
I am delighted that Nazis are all denialists now. Old Nazis had a much better approach, much smarter than that of modern Nazis, who have the unenviable task of denying the easiest to prove mass murder charges in history.
on 14 April 2009
“They speak but they say nothing.”
I will wait for Mr. Welch. He can at least imitate a learned debate. The others, alas, cannot.
on 14 April 2009
‘RED DECADE’ ONCE AGAIN
The Great Depression of 1929 spawned the “Red Decade”, the 1930’s. From 1929 until 1945, the end of the Second World War, American intellectual circles were infested with whole divisions of intellectual comrades who regarded “scientific socialism” and Soviet Russia as the ideal solutions to all social problems. The current collapse of credit expansion capitalism promises a resurgence of the Red Decade. A few voices in the wind are correctly diagnosing the catastrophe and are calling for the abolition of the Federal Reserve System and a return to the gold standard. But Ron Paul and his followers are whistling in the wind. The political left is rising again. For all these reasons it is wise to return again to the “Red Decade”, the decade of socialism as the solution to all problems.
Few people born post-1960 have any memory of what life was like in the Great Depression. Bread lines were everywhere, the end of capitalism had arrived and the socialist millennium was at hand. Hope lay in one direction-Soviet Russia! Russia was the land of co-operation and brotherhood where every citizen had a stake in the social order. Anti-social greed and dog-eat-dog capitalism had been replaced by a new utopia where all were well fed, secure and devoted in their loyalty to the socialist state. (Of course, Soviet Russia was also the land of gulags, countless millions of corpses and omni-present Jewish commissars, but that is another story.) This was the romance of the “Red Decade”, the title of Eugene Lyons classic history of the same name. The wonders of the workers paradise were everywhere thrilling described in the intellectual journals of the “Red Decade”. Two of the chief offenders were the flagship liberal intellectual journals, the “Nation” and the “New Republic” but there were many others. Communism was romanticized in a manner which remains a wonder to the imagination even today. Joseph Stalin was portrayed as the creator of Soviet “democracy” and as the kind, paternal father to all the Russians. In Russia there was no unemployment. There was plenty everywhere (Ukraine excepted) and working yourself to death building White Sea Canals did wonders for Soviet statistics. This nonsense did not end with World War Two and its aftermath. It got even worse. After Pearl Harbor a pro-Soviet propaganda campaign began in the United States the scale and dimensions of which are still hard to realize. Hollywood glorified the wartime ally with such films as “North Star”, “Song of Russia” and the infamous “Mission To Moscow”. (The latter was based on the book of the same name by ex-ambassador Joseph E. Davies, who defended the Moscow purge trials of 1936 as genuine. The book and the movie whitewashed every crime of the Soviet Union and portrayed Stalinist Russia as a land of milk and honey.) Much of this infatuation has been described by the deceased revisionist historian Dr. James J. Martin in his essay “Hands Across The Volga” published in the Journal of Historical Review”. As a consequence of this absurd pro-Sovietism communist agents proliferated in the wartime Roosevelt administration. They reached positions where they were able to betray highly sensitive information to the Soviet “ally” and influence American policy in a pro-Soviet direction. Among these agents were Harry Dexter White, the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, the Rosenbergs, Robert Oppenheimer, Lauchlin Currie, Philip Jessup, and Judith Coplon. Colonel Bernstein and many, many others. The reader will note that a not inconsiderable number of these names are Jewish. That is not coincidental. Communism had been a Jewish movement from the very beginning. When the crash came in 1929 the heavily Jewish Communist Party and the heavily Jewish New York intelligentsia jumped at the opportunity to announce the death of Henry Ford style capitalism. (Ford had deeply offended Jewry with his newspaper, “The Dearborn Independent”, which regularly featured articles attacking organized Jewry and Jewish criminal intrigue.) Many communist newspapers were printed in Yiddish, the preferred language of the Party because so many communists were first or second generation Jewish émigrés from the Pale of Settlement in Russia. Chief among these newspapers were the “Morning Freiheit”, “Der Hammer”, the Jewish “Forward” of Abraham Cahan, and the various revolutionary parties of New York and their newspapers such as the Bund, Poale-Zion, etc. Invariably these journals were titled “The Worker” (“Die Arbeiter”) plus some surname.
The number of intellectual hacks who promoted the end of capitalism and the rise of the new Soviet dawn were legion. Louis Fischer and Max Lerner wrote regularly for the “Nation” and the “New Republic”. Bruce Bliven, the editor of the latter and Reinhold Niebuhr, along with Rabbi Stephen Wise, were herald trumpets of Marxism. Less radical, but definitely pink, were the Jew literary critic Irving Howe, the father of cultural diversity, Horace Kallen and the fathers of the present day neo-conservatives, Irving Kristol and Max Schactman, both Trotskyite Jews of the 1930’s. In academia pro-Soviet pinkos like John Dewey spread communist ideas. The English Fabian Socialists, Beatrice and Sidney Webb authored a thousand page book of monumental foolishness, “Soviet Russia: A New Civilization?” Of all the absurd propaganda claims of the time this volume, dating from the 1920’s, has to be read to be believed. It perhaps set the all time standard for whitewashing communism. In the respectable media the Pulitzer Prize for whitewashing communism went to the New York Times and its star reporter, Walter Duranty. Duranty denied on the front page of the “Times” the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933 in which 7-10 million peasants were deliberately starved to death to crush Ukrainian nationalism and raise foreign exchange for Soviet Russia. To this day the name Walter Duranty stands for unparalleled intellectual prostitution. In the theatre and the arts pro-Sovietism raged. Lillian Hellmann and her lover Dashiell Hammett were both Stalinists. So was the mystery writer Rex Stout who, unbeknownst to his readers was a communist and rabid anti-German. Many playwrights and later screenwriters of the 1930’s and 1940’s were outright reds. Norman Mailer, Clifford Odets, Fannie Hurst, Marguerite Roberts and others all traveled in the communist underground. The later HUAC investigations into Hollywood uncovered a virtual hornet’s nest of communists and fellow travelers. Of the famous Hollywood Ten Screenwriters six were provably Jewish (Sam Ornitz, Alvah Bessie, Herbert Bieberman, Lester Cole, Albert Maltz and John Howard Lawson). Of the stars later driven out of Hollywood for subversive affiliations a great many were identifiably Jewish. John Garfield of “Body and Soul” fame, Larry Parks, the comic Zero Mostel, who later starred in the 1966 film, “A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum”, Lionel Stander, who later played the Butler on Robert Wagner’s “Hart To Hart” series, the list is exhaustive.
After the end of World War Two the consequences of the outrageous pro-Sovietism of the 1930’s came home to roost. The fall of China to the communists, 1945-1950, is an outstanding example of pro-communist apologetics having consequences in the real world. A gigantic pro-red China lobby greatly influenced American policy against Chiang Kai-Shek and the Chinese Nationalists. A whole slew of communist liars and propagandists, including Edgar Snow, author of “Red Star Over China”, Agnes Smedley, Owen Lattimore and the Institute For Pacific Relations, put out the unvarying line that the Chinese Nationalists were hopelessly corrupt and that the real future of China lay with “progressive” communism. Chiang Kai-Shek was pressured into accepting communists into a coalition government. George Marshall, U.S.Secretary of State cut off all ammunition to the Chinese Nationalist armies just when they had Mao surrounded and on the verge of annihilation. Aid scheduled to be delivered to the anti-communist Chinese armies sat on the San Francisco docks for months, delayed by Harry Bridges and the communist unions. The extensive penetration of the U.S. State and Treasury Departments that launched the investigations of Senator Joseph McCarthy in the early 1950’s came about because of the wartime romance with Soviet Russia. All this came about because of the red reaction to the Great Depression of 1929. It would be idle to suppose that the radical left is any wiser now than it was in the 1930’s. They have learned nothing-and never will learn anything. The danger of a revival of the communist left is compounded by the post-World War Two rise of Zionism and the state of Israel. Many influential members of the communist left have always been closet supporters of Marxism in Palestine. That is not surprising as both Marxism and Zionism arose as competitive but complementary movements among the Jews of Czarist Russia in the late 19th century. The split was whether communism was to be established in Russia or Palestine, that is all. Many liberal Democrats in the U.S. today are ardent supporters of the state of Israel and its criminal policies. One of the more prominent is Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut. The first black president, Barack Obama, has a string of communist associations a mile long. But he too, a creation of Chicago Jewry, is an ardent supporter of the state of Israel. One flag of international Jewry, the hammer and sickle, flies no longer. The other symbol of international Jewry, the blue and white of Zionism, still waves and attracts a considerable number of radicals. Not all communists like Zionism as Jewish nationalism is theoretically incompatible with universal socialist brotherhood but all communists recognize, openly or otherwise, that the ethnic force which created communism, has now moved its operations to a new base.
Such was the “Red Decade” of the 1930’s. Its effects are still with us in many forms. The Hollywood film industry is as communist as ever. The well wishers of bolshevism replay the Second World War on the TV each night as though the Wehrmacht were still storming the gates. The fake “Holocaust”, the mythical extermination of six million Jews in fake “gas chambers”, replays the wailing of the 1930’s as the horrid “persecution” of God’s Chosen People. The workers paradise in Palestine has replaced the workers paradise of the Kremlin as the Golden Calf of the modern age. Otherwise, the “Red Decade” is still with us, waiting to emerge once more.
on 14 April 2009
One more example of my knowledge and erudition, for those of you who care to read it. Even Mr. Welch may enjoy it.
on 14 April 2009
FROM “GAS CHAMBERS” IMMEMORIAL
Back in the 1980’s Joan Peters published a notorious historical fraud, “From Time Immemorial”, in which she tried to prove that Palestine was “Arab free” until the coming of the Zionists. The book deliberately misquoted documents, took documents out of context, invented facts and constructed mythology in the guise of objective history. Just to show that nothing has changed Professor John Zimmerman of the University of Nevada has written the new “From Time Immemorial” otherwise known as “Holocaust Denial: Demographics, Testimonies and Ideologies”. Like Joan Peters, Zimmerman turns facts upside down. One of Zimmerman’s favorite techniques is to grossly distort the actual body disposal rates of the crematoria at the Auschwitz concentration camp. Thus, Zimmerman will quote a Paris crematorium of the 19th century as an example of a supposed rapid disposal of corpses. Unfortunately, he quotes disposal of individual body parts such as hands, fingers, legs, arms and toes as equivalent to the burning of entire bodies. This kind of sleight of hand permeates his narrative. Like Joan Peters and her carefully doctored allegations of Arab migration into mandatory Palestine, Professor Zimmerman conjures numbers as well. Where did all the Jews go? Surely not into the interior of the Soviet Union, east of the Ural Mountains. Where did all the Jewish commissars in Eastern Europe after the war come from? Did they rise miraculously from the non-existent “gas chambers”? Survivor testimonies are amazingly persuasive to Professor Zimmerman. Survivors testified to “gassings” in Germany. Then the “gassings” were moved to Auschwitz. Now the “gassings” were not at Auschwitz but at Treblinka and Sobibor. Survivors cannot get their story straight and neither can Professor Zimmerman.
Professor Zimmerman will not believe heavily documented German records as to the real conditions in the camps. Nor will he explain why these records were carted away to Soviet Russia to prevent embarrassment at the Nuremberg Trial. Zimmerman has no explanation for the damning revisionist exposures of the real nature of the Auschwitz camp. Why would a camp for exterminating Jews have provided them with medical care, brothels, concert halls and a theatre, a library, a swimming pool and other such amenities? Why were many healthy Jewish babies born at a camp devoted to exterminating Jews? It is like asking why Arabs would have moved to Palestine to take advantage of Jewish prosperity when Arabs had already been planting wheat, cotton, and barley for centuries before the Zionists ever arrived. Professor Zimmerman believes that “survivors” who testified to mass steamings and electrocutions were merely mistaken or suffering hallucinations from wartime trauma.
Enough of Professor Zimmerman. He has produced hundreds of pages of heavily documented nonsense. Like Joan Peters who produced footnotes of 14th century Arab experts on 19th century Palestine, Professor Zimmerman has produced a brief for a historical hoax in which all the relevant questions and troublesome facts are simply edited out of the narrative. John Zimmerman has received mandatory kudos from the same people who praised Joan Peters to the skies. But in the end, Professor Zimmerman has merely written a book called “From Gas Chambers Immemorial”. Its scholarly value is exactly the same as that of Miss Peter’s well-known opus.
on 14 April 2009
By erudition, do you mean ability to cut-and-paste irrelevant articles?
OT, tl;dr
on 14 April 2009
“Alas!” Keep your jew hands away from my “knowledge and erudition.” “Alas! “Pandora’s Box has been opened-and the “gathering storm” shall soon be upon us.”
Alaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaassssssssss Adolph helppppp!
on 14 April 2009
THE BEST WAR EVER-OR WAS IT?
“The Best War Ever: America and World War Two” by Michael C.C. Adams, is a useful corrective to many of the “good war” myths cherished by Americans-but only within limits. The book is very good on the realities of combat and the moral indistinguishability of the contending armies. It even makes some unpopular concessions on the greater fighting ability and efficiency of the Wehrmacht-as established by an Israeli military expert, no less. Thus, Martin Van Creveld in “Fighting Power” established that the American army was much more bureaucratic than the German, with too much “top to bottom” mismanagement. The Germans, by contrast, encouraged individual initiative in the field. There was also much more genuine camaraderie in the German army in which the individual Germans (or frequently non-Germans) felt themselves members of a team. This flies in the face of what Americans have been taught to believe about the supposedly “rigid” Germans. But the conclusion is born out by America’s own investigations. According to US Army Colonel Trevor N. Dupuy who conducted a study of the Normandy campaign theWehrmacht outfought the Americans and British, inflicting a 50% higher casualty rate than it sustained. The Germans achieved this despite massive allied numerical and air superiority. The utter terror of the fighting is revealed by the fact that virtually all American troops had to be taken out of the front lines after thirty days of consecutive combat. That was all they could stand. Troops would prove brave in one battle and then crack in the next. The horror was indescribable. Adams quite rightly emphasizes the filth and mangled body parts which littered the battlefield. In the John Wayne Hollywood version of the war every soldier dies with his body parts intact. It wasn’t that way on the battlefield where soldiers burned alive in shattered tanks. Splattered intestines, blown off legs and missing genitals were the gruesome reality of the fighting. Soldiers were admonished by their commanders to “keep their assholes tight” before going into combat. Virtually all soldiers shit-in-their pants during the war because the ghastliness made bodily functions uncontrollable.
World War Two is fondly remembered by many Americans but that is only because America was the only nation whose civilian population escaped the consequences of the war. In all other countries, Russia, Germany, Britain, Japan, India, China and Southeast Asia, civilians suffered terribly. Millions died of starvation, firebombing raids, expulsions at wars end and mass rape. None of this happened in America. In addition, the war was sanitized for Americans by a very strict censorship. Most Americans never saw, and were never allowed to see, what was really going on in Europe (just as they are never allowed to see what is really happening to the Arabs in Palestine now). In addition, most of the Americans inducted into the military during World War Two were not combat troops. Adams establishes that of over two million Americans inducted into the World War Two armies only 365,000 of them, or 15%-20% were actual combat troops at any given time. Thus, most Americans who came home to brag of their exploits had never seen front line action. That made it very easy for them to regard the war as “good”. The actual front line troops, who were rarely interviewed, felt no such way about it. Michael Adams makes much of the segregation of black units during World War Two and the “prejudices” of the time. But he does not mention that black troops broke and ran against the Germans in Italy. Nor does he mention that approximately 50% of all rapes committed by American forces in Europe were committed by blacks. American troops in both Europe and the Pacific routinely murdered prisoners. In the case of the Japanese the Americans probably had some justification because of the horrible Japanese record on the mistreatment of prisoners. The evidence for this was strictly censored during the war and for decades later. On the home front there were massive shortages of goods during the war and a huge black market to compensate. Enlistments to the army dropped off markedly in the weeks after Pearl Harbor. Women did work in the factories during the war but to a much lesser extent than claimed. In fact, contrary to the myth of “Rosie The Riveter” the majority of American women remained in the home during the war. Many women felt guilty about going to work because they conceived that their primary duty was as homemakers and raisers of children, not breadwinners. This legend of women’s lib arising out of World War Two has been promoted by feminists to bolster their agenda. But as Adams shows, most women gave up their jobs when the men came home because they wanted to. The war also led to huge demographic changes, particularly as blacks moved north out of the south to work in the factories. There were numerous race riots and mutinies as a consequence. World War Two also led to the creation of the post-war suburban society.
“The Best War Ever” falls short in its failure to examine objectively, or even to mention, the findings of the World War Two revisionist historians. Thus, if one examines Adams extensive bibliography there are no books listed by Harry Elmer Barnes, Charles Tansill, Charles Beard, George Morgenstern, David Irving, Arthur Butz, Germar Rudolf, Viktor Suvorov or many other historians who have contributed so greatly to overturning the conventional interpretations of the war. In professor Adams defense, he does provide a reasonably fair description of the origins and course of the war in his opening chapters. He fairly describes the mistreatment of Germany by the Treaty of Versailles, Hitler’s territorial annexations in Europe and the progress of the war. He even admits that Adolf Hitler was not insane in any meaningful sense and concedes that both Aryan supremacy and anti-Semitic attitudes were common among both the English and Americans of the day. Professor Adams does not go into the reasons for that anti-semitism, as he does not discuss the well-documented Jewish disproportion in communism or the alleged “contract with Jewry” of David Lloyd George. But at least he admits that anti-Semitism was a condition of the times, not the unique disease of Adolf Hitler. Adams also concedes that Hitler did have some genuine achievements to his credit, improving living standards for Germans and raising them out of the chaos of the Weimar Republic. He does this in the context of explaining why the Germans chose to follow Hitler rather than falling into the logical trap of reasoning backwards from later purported events. “The Holocaust”, the myth of the extermination of six million Jews in purported “gas chambers” is, of course, missing from “The Best War Ever” for reasons of professional survival. The set up at Pearl Harbor is not directly addressed either, although the ominous transfer of the American Pacific fleet from San Diego to Hawaii is mentioned in passing. On one point, Professor Adams is absolutely correct. If we mythologize World War Two, we distort the real lessons of history. If we make World War Two a morality play in which America “saved the world”, then we establish a standard of egocentrism by which we are entitled to attack any nation which supposedly “threatens the world” the same way Hitler and Tojo supposedly “threatened the world”. “The Best War Ever” was published by John Hopkins University Press in 1994, three years after the first Iraq war. That timing may, or may not be, coincidental. But certainly the warnings of the book seem prescient in the aftermath of Iraq War Two, Somalia, Serbia and Afghanistan.
“The Best War Ever” largely ignores the geo-political consequences of the war and concentrates on the domestic impact. Thus, the rise of communism after the war and the resulting Cold War as confirmation of the fears of the pre-war isolationists is omitted from the discussion. The favoritism of the Soviet Union as an “ally” during the war as the precursor to the McCarthy investigations of the 1950’s is ignored, as are the post-war rise of Zionism in the Near East and America as successor-in-interest to the crumbling British Empire. The expansion of communism in the Far East as a consequence of the war and the subsequent wars in Korea and Vietnam as real estate problems deriving from the dismemberment of the French and Dutch colonial empires is likewise not addressed. The abandonment of America’s traditional neutrality and non-intervention in the affairs of Europe is simply taken as a given, “isolationism” being too horrid an ideology to defend. Thus, “The Best War Ever” is not a perfect book. But, as an examination of the war on the domestic front and an honest evaluation of combat behavior on all sides, it has much to recommend it.
“The Best War Ever: America and World War Two”
by Michael C.C. Adams
1994 John Hopkins University Press
THE BEST WAR EVER-OR WAS IT?
“The Best War Ever: America and World War Two” by Michael C.C. Adams, is a useful corrective to many of the “good war” myths cherished by Americans-but only within limits. The book is very good on the realities of combat and the moral indistinguishability of the contending armies. It even makes some unpopular concessions on the greater fighting ability and efficiency of the Wehrmacht-as established by an Israeli military expert, no less. Thus, Martin Van Creveld in “Fighting Power” established that the American army was much more bureaucratic than the German, with too much “top to bottom” mismanagement. The Germans, by contrast, encouraged individual initiative in the field. There was also much more genuine camaraderie in the German army in which the individual Germans (or frequently non-Germans) felt themselves members of a team. This flies in the face of what Americans have been taught to believe about the supposedly “rigid” Germans. But the conclusion is born out by America’s own investigations. According to US Army Colonel Trevor N. Dupuy who conducted a study of the Normandy campaign theWehrmacht outfought the Americans and British, inflicting a 50% higher casualty rate than it sustained. The Germans achieved this despite massive allied numerical and air superiority. The utter terror of the fighting is revealed by the fact that virtually all American troops had to be taken out of the front lines after thirty days of consecutive combat. That was all they could stand. Troops would prove brave in one battle and then crack in the next. The horror was indescribable. Adams quite rightly emphasizes the filth and mangled body parts which littered the battlefield. In the John Wayne Hollywood version of the war every soldier dies with his body parts intact. It wasn’t that way on the battlefield where soldiers burned alive in shattered tanks. Splattered intestines, blown off legs and missing genitals were the gruesome reality of the fighting. Soldiers were admonished by their commanders to “keep their assholes tight” before going into combat. Virtually all soldiers shit-in-their pants during the war because the ghastliness made bodily functions uncontrollable.
World War Two is fondly remembered by many Americans but that is only because America was the only nation whose civilian population escaped the consequences of the war. In all other countries, Russia, Germany, Britain, Japan, India, China and Southeast Asia, civilians suffered terribly. Millions died of starvation, firebombing raids, expulsions at wars end and mass rape. None of this happened in America. In addition, the war was sanitized for Americans by a very strict censorship. Most Americans never saw, and were never allowed to see, what was really going on in Europe (just as they are never allowed to see what is really happening to the Arabs in Palestine now). In addition, most of the Americans inducted into the military during World War Two were not combat troops. Adams establishes that of over two million Americans inducted into the World War Two armies only 365,000 of them, or 15%-20% were actual combat troops at any given time. Thus, most Americans who came home to brag of their exploits had never seen front line action. That made it very easy for them to regard the war as “good”. The actual front line troops, who were rarely interviewed, felt no such way about it. Michael Adams makes much of the segregation of black units during World War Two and the “prejudices” of the time. But he does not mention that black troops broke and ran against the Germans in Italy. Nor does he mention that approximately 50% of all rapes committed by American forces in Europe were committed by blacks. American troops in both Europe and the Pacific routinely murdered prisoners. In the case of the Japanese the Americans probably had some justification because of the horrible Japanese record on the mistreatment of prisoners. The evidence for this was strictly censored during the war and for decades later. On the home front there were massive shortages of goods during the war and a huge black market to compensate. Enlistments to the army dropped off markedly in the weeks after Pearl Harbor. Women did work in the factories during the war but to a much lesser extent than claimed. In fact, contrary to the myth of “Rosie The Riveter” the majority of American women remained in the home during the war. Many women felt guilty about going to work because they conceived that their primary duty was as homemakers and raisers of children, not breadwinners. This legend of women’s lib arising out of World War Two has been promoted by feminists to bolster their agenda. But as Adams shows, most women gave up their jobs when the men came home because they wanted to. The war also led to huge demographic changes, particularly as blacks moved north out of the south to work in the factories. There were numerous race riots and mutinies as a consequence. World War Two also led to the creation of the post-war suburban society.
“The Best War Ever” falls short in its failure to examine objectively, or even to mention, the findings of the World War Two revisionist historians. Thus, if one examines Adams extensive bibliography there are no books listed by Harry Elmer Barnes, Charles Tansill, Charles Beard, George Morgenstern, David Irving, Arthur Butz, Germar Rudolf, Viktor Suvorov or many other historians who have contributed so greatly to overturning the conventional interpretations of the war. In professor Adams defense, he does provide a reasonably fair description of the origins and course of the war in his opening chapters. He fairly describes the mistreatment of Germany by the Treaty of Versailles, Hitler’s territorial annexations in Europe and the progress of the war. He even admits that Adolf Hitler was not insane in any meaningful sense and concedes that both Aryan supremacy and anti-Semitic attitudes were common among both the English and Americans of the day. Professor Adams does not go into the reasons for that anti-semitism, as he does not discuss the well-documented Jewish disproportion in communism or the alleged “contract with Jewry” of David Lloyd George. But at least he admits that anti-Semitism was a condition of the times, not the unique disease of Adolf Hitler. Adams also concedes that Hitler did have some genuine achievements to his credit, improving living standards for Germans and raising them out of the chaos of the Weimar Republic. He does this in the context of explaining why the Germans chose to follow Hitler rather than falling into the logical trap of reasoning backwards from later purported events. “The Holocaust”, the myth of the extermination of six million Jews in purported “gas chambers” is, of course, missing from “The Best War Ever” for reasons of professional survival. The set up at Pearl Harbor is not directly addressed either, although the ominous transfer of the American Pacific fleet from San Diego to Hawaii is mentioned in passing. On one point, Professor Adams is absolutely correct. If we mythologize World War Two, we distort the real lessons of history. If we make World War Two a morality play in which America “saved the world”, then we establish a standard of egocentrism by which we are entitled to attack any nation which supposedly “threatens the world” the same way Hitler and Tojo supposedly “threatened the world”. “The Best War Ever” was published by John Hopkins University Press in 1994, three years after the first Iraq war. That timing may, or may not be, coincidental. But certainly the warnings of the book seem prescient in the aftermath of Iraq War Two, Somalia, Serbia and Afghanistan.
“The Best War Ever” largely ignores the geo-political consequences of the war and concentrates on the domestic impact. Thus, the rise of communism after the war and the resulting Cold War as confirmation of the fears of the pre-war isolationists is omitted from the discussion. The favoritism of the Soviet Union as an “ally” during the war as the precursor to the McCarthy investigations of the 1950’s is ignored, as are the post-war rise of Zionism in the Near East and America as successor-in-interest to the crumbling British Empire. The expansion of communism in the Far East as a consequence of the war and the subsequent wars in Korea and Vietnam as real estate problems deriving from the dismemberment of the French and Dutch colonial empires is likewise not addressed. The abandonment of America’s traditional neutrality and non-intervention in the affairs of Europe is simply taken as a given, “isolationism” being too horrid an ideology to defend. Thus, “The Best War Ever” is not a perfect book. But, as an examination of the war on the domestic front and an honest evaluation of combat behavior on all sides, it has much to recommend it.
“The Best War Ever: America and World War Two”
by Michael C.C. Adams
1994 John Hopkins University Press
on 14 April 2009
Is Amazon.com paying you to post excerpts to move it’s worst selling revisionist history titles? Or is it Stormfront.org?
on 14 April 2009
“I will wait for Mr. Welch. He can at least imitate a learned debate. The others, alas, cannot.”
I decided quite some time ago that it’s much more interesting to laugh and point at you.
By the way, it’s no big accomplishment to call yourself eurdite. Considering that your only confederate is a guy that can barely string enough words together to form a cohesive sentence, I’d say you’ve got a bit more learning to do.
on 14 April 2009
All the essays are mine.
I have plenty of supporters, all of whom are far more articulate than any of you. Some of them are widely published university professors. (There is some intelligence in academia after all.)
on 14 April 2009
Names, please
on 14 April 2009
This is really pathetic by certain few of you, I must admit.
On several occasions I have been called a racist and worse by certain of you (you know who you are) since I have joined this thread. Because of your lack at seeing the real points I have tried to suggest, the disrespect for the position of neutrality with which I have attempted to approach the discussion, because of your apparent lack or ability to address any of the important dissent presented by JT and Hanover, and because of your overall prejudice, bias, ethocentrism, your deafness to what you don’t want to hear, etc.—and let’s go ahead and add slavish deference to popular opinion—it makes me think you perhaps EXPECT an attack in return. Provoke and provoke until your opponent has had enough. Sounds to me like a very familiar tactic in regards to the operation of the great state of Israel.
And then what do you do when the “expert-backed” authority decides you are in the way, or “expendable for the greater good,” the very same justification of government agencies who experiment with radiation on unaware citizens? Here is what you will do: you will put your “just follow what is said” carcass on board the train because that is what you are told to do. If they tell you tomorrow leave your home and get on the train, you will go, as did your grandparents. Or maybe it was the stupid ones that got away?
Let’s state some facts. Eisenhower showed how easy it is to kill people if that’s what you want to do on a budget. Clearly, despite their hatred, and as evidenced by every single survivor, the Nazis must have been idiots. If we are to believe the mythological “census reports” then 6 million Jews were killed. If you look at this fact in a different way, and ask “what nationality had the most killed,” what is your answer then? An Amenian Jew, who claimed him as a casulaty? Israel at that time did not exist. The census reports are moreover extremely unreliable, and there is some evidence that they have been falsified to show greater casualties than can be accounted for. There is no table showing us who died and how. Was it gunfire? Gas? Starvation? Gout? Influenza? Typhus? Old age?
If we bring Nietzsche into it, perhaps some others I won’t mention just yet who had the virtue of being controversial by stating the obvious, you would think 6 million bodies, plus the other multi-millions who “escaped unscathed” (damn my comrades…), should have been able to put two plus two together at some point and mount a pretty good challenge—at least a potent distraction, or REA: “Jewish problem” against the baddies. But wasn’t this one of the folk complaints about Jews at that time? They were in it for their own and their pocketbook, that they have no substance otherwise, no allegiance?
This present conversation about the Holocaust, as I read it, is driven by: side A, which has provided all the proofs for its position one could hope for on an internet board, one which has countered every rebuttal, and argued fairly using sources everyone can see; and side B, the type of “because I say so” monkey morality and heifer holier-than-thou history of the exact mocking nature that turns men toward killing each other. In the absence of argument, or protecting, as they feel, their “heritage” (you clowns full of hate, hypnotized, know God? Now that’s something I would bet against), they resort to namecalling, when even pigeon-holing is, for such a discussion, improper. Rather than try to come to the truth in the matter, we split into factions.
This pattern is noticeable in regards to your treatment of much more so than me, especially to JT, and anyone else who comments here who does not swallow the whole “poor Jews let’s make a movie every single year about our former plight to remind people” of the sad history as told by the many, oh so many “survivors” analogous in attitude to the “poor” plain crash survivors who “did what they had to do” and so ate their compatriots, lived off the flesh of their dearest, in fact continue to cash in on their forefathers’ plight, to survive.
While I don’t know all of what JT stands for, I respect the fact that he doesn’t tell you what he is not, call you what you are not, and that he tries to reason with you. In fact at this point were he to state he was a card-carrying Klansman, it would not change in the least my judgment about what he has said so far. Because he might be wrong on some different issues, doesn’t mean I can’t learn from him about this one. This, whether JT, a hobo, or a billionaire. Maybe everyone here including JT has closed the door, I don’t know for sure. But when you close the door, it is impossible to hear any other possibilities. Better to be uncertain, than be wrong.
Now just a look around the internet will show a lot of evidence for Zionist conspiracy in our present world. 9/11 was obviously a professional demolition, I do not know yet whether it was perpetrated by Israelis, who could then blame it on the Muslims, and get further American support for their personal sworn war against Islam, FOR REASON OF WHICH there is always jihad.
Think about things like Korea, Vietnam, Kissinger and Nixon, El Salvador, the set-up and murder of Saddam Hussein. JFK. Landing on the moon. I ask you scientific specialists again, how many planets do we have? The point is I have read some of these things, am not quite convinced of any of it, including Holohoax. But the evidence is very impressive, I can provide links if anyone has interest. There are also many books one can read, telling all sorts of tales. Do you dare see other viewpoints? Probably not. Blind patriotism, chauvinism, the herd mentality, and cock-surety usually makes one unable to do so.
I personally DO believe it is Israel, not Islam, which is the source of the terrorism the world seeks, and in time I will prove it. Would we really need to bomb several countries to find one man? If you heard on CNN tonight that the Iranians have just sunk an American ship, would you immediately believe it? Certainly you would. You believe 9 out of 10 dentists surveyed…and pie charts. Spout the fact in the morning, and you will notch your belt as being the man possessed of the new Truth. You won;t think about it, question it, probably even read about it. But you will pass it along, even as if you discovered it yourself.
Is it true Kissinger was a homo who liked little boys? Is it true these Zionists have infiltrated the US government, or that more and more Jews become part of the US government every year? That every money line leads to a Jew. that Hollywood is all run by Jews? Is it true that Israeli agents dressed as Muslims and in possession of box-cutters and explosives were arrested dancing in front of the burning World Trade Center…and sent back home with no big fuss even after saying they came to “record the event”? Is it true that the Zionists run the media, not just the Jews-with-changed-names fronts people, but behind the scenes, that they censor some stories and fabricate others? How easy would it be to get the people thinking it’s the scapegoat Arabs, hell we damned Clinton for a blow job and spent millions on it, yet haven’t so much as made a peep about this bank bailout? Is it true that a large portion of this government that runs America began their careers taking it up the ass as part of the ritual that later enables them to be in “the club” and poke little boys and girls? Who trained the people that attacked the Waco commune? Is it really all about moving weaponry? Did we land on the moon? What was so important about Noriega? Why do we hate Chavez?
I don’t know whether they are true or not. I know there is information to be looked at, and some of it very very good.
Almost all my life I have believed this Holocaust and the traditional interpretations of historical events of the character of those I have just mentioned. Now, I begin to merely entertain the notion that what i know about this, like most of what I once thought I knew about the rest, is perhaps also bullshit, and here, for merely pointing out the interesting points made by John Thames, and saying they have not been answered, I am to Mr. Welch a racist.
Mr. Welch? What about “the savages”? Was Churchill referring to the Children of Zion?
Still, people are in jail for expressing an opinion. Luckily, I am not the jailer. But then, I’m not Jewish.
Thames wins, and the Holocaust is to me officially now debatable.
on 14 April 2009
“By the way, it’s no big accomplishment to call yourself eurdite.”
At least I can SPELL erudite, ass.
on 14 April 2009
Thanks to Angelo for his comments.
To Marc:
Albert Lindemann and Kevin MacDonald, to answer yout question.
I will now be abandoning this site for a few weeks to read another valuable reference work from the library loan system. I think I have already made my case, but I shall return when finished with my other project to see if there is anything further that needs to be said.
on 14 April 2009
“While I don’t know all of what JT stands for, I respect the fact that he doesn’t tell you what he is not, call you what you are not, and that he tries to reason with you.”
That’s right. I really am a “circumsized” [sp] (I think he means he thinks I have a gigantic penis) Jew and he wants to put testicles in my mouth. He used all his fancy book larnin’ to write a app that sniff packets for evidence of Jew stink.
“At least I can SPELL erudite, ass.”
Can you tie you shoes too?
on 14 April 2009
But where will we find another modest non-historian of “vast historical knowledge, incisive analysis and overwhelming documentation” to teach us about “a clear exposition of the revisionist position” that “the real Jewish Talmudic tradition is to cheat, swindle and lie at every opportunity.”
And who, along with “millions of other whites who finally know the truth, will hunt you down and nail your kosher ass to a crucifix with your amputated balls stuffed between your circumsized lips.”
But yet, who is “constantly accused of mindless Jew hatred”? *gasp*
“A charge” by the way “thoroughly debunked.”
John Thames, Debunker. Thorough debunker. I’m debunked. Anyone else feeling debunkified?
on 14 April 2009
John Thames, you are amazing…and, relentless! It seems your attackers only energize you! You, are out numbered but not out maneuvered. They demand your source of information…references, etc… that’s not enough it’s incomplete… you give them more… now, you are accussed of ” rambling”, a “windbag”… “We want facts!” They do not acknowledge what you have just written. Over and over the insults and the refusal to respond directly to your challenges. John Thames, you are a champion of your cause! Not one of your antagonists has come close to providing the amount of documentation, of their views, that you have.
I am always curious about something so medieval and Orwellian as a law making it a crime to disagree whether an event took place or not. And, to your opponents I would say… That is the HUGE separation of Holocaust revision from the belief in UFO’s, flat earth or whether the Sun is the center of the universe. In the heart of Europe you can scream… the Earth is flat!!!! and God is dead!!!! I’ve seen Elvis and he is ALIVE!!!! But, you will go to prison if you say …I do not believe that 6 million jews died in gas chambers during WWII… No, sorry, I don’t get it.
What I do get, is that those European governments are afraid of something… Like the Church was afraid of science! I was suspecious of the whole idea of this “Holocaust’ when I found out what a big business it has become. They have even passed a law in my state requiring that it be taught in high school..not even God gets that kind of perk! Man! Somebodies got some pull somewhere!
John Thames, I believe you. I’m no where near your level of expertise on this subject.. not even close. But, you don’t have to be a historian to figure out that the Germans could not have killed that many people (not even counting all the other “undesireables” they are accused of killing) in such a short period of time with such rustic equipment in such a rinky dink facility. I’ve seen the pictures of the barracks and the gas chambers and the crematorium. Come on you gotta be kidding! Does anyone think they could process that many people through what is offered as evidence of the killing facilities? And, why would they waste fuel burning and gassing if all they wanted was a body count. Hell, its cold in Poland in the winter!. ..just take the ones you want off the train put the rejects back on board and take them for a long ride in the country. All that body heat wouldn’t last long in an unheated box car. You could freez’em and process them alot easier and cheaper than all that gassing and burning. Sound crazy? Not any crazier than trying to picture all those people being gassed and burned in those little bitty rooms and ovens. But, the biggest reason I don’t believe in the official story is because after all the photos of clothes, gold teeth, hair, more clothes, eye glasses, shoes, sad faces etc (all of which proves nothing)… Where are the remains? Not the bodies being pushed around with bulldozers, we know about them…we know how they died. I want to see the ashes of the six million. You know… the human ash, the charred bones…Six million people, there must be tons of it… mountains of human ash. Or huge pits filled with human ash and bones. Why show all that other stuff that doesn’t prove anything. Why not just show us the ashes of the dead. They find dinosauer bones buried for millions of years. Can’t they find six million people buried for a little over sixty years. I don’t get that either. Oh well, what do I know. I was one of them that thought we were being bull shitted when we invaded Iraq because they had weapons of mass destruction.
John Thames, you have more education and knowledge in your little finger than Welch, Ron, Lee, Matteo b, Fangbeer, et al. You have served your cause well, they have not served their own. They will never give you an oz. of credit. The angels could come down from heaven and verify everything you say and they would still not believe you. And, so, John Thames, I have read enough and I am leaving this site and wish you (and of course Mr. HanoverFist )… Adios and good luck!
on 14 April 2009
Karl:
Thepoints are well taken.
on 14 April 2009
10 out of 10 sock puppets agree, John’s the bomb.
on 14 April 2009
More documentation for Mr. Welch. (I could not resist.)
http://www.zeek.net/701fear/index.php?page=2
on 14 April 2009
Karl,
I agree with your logic:
If the “HUGE difference between Holocaust denial from belief in UFO’s, flat earth or whether the Sun is the center of the universe” is that in “the heart of europe” holocaust denial is a crime, then in the US, Canada and the rest of the world where it’s not a crime, there is no HUGE difference between holocaust denial and belief in UFOs, a flat earth or whether the Sun is the center of the universe.
Which is why when angry, racists like john thames are free to write that the holocaust was a myth, and evolution is a hoax, they are viewed as people screaming: “the Earth is flat!!!!”
on 14 April 2009
ron mumbled:
“Karl, I agree with your logic:
If the “HUGE difference between Holocaust denial from belief in UFO’s, flat earth or whether the Sun is the center of the universe” is that in “the heart of europe” holocaust denial is a crime, then in the US, Canada and the rest of the world where it’s not a crime, there is no HUGE difference between holocaust denial and belief in UFOs, a flat earth or whether the Sun is the center of the universe.”
Which is why when angry, racists like john thames are free to write that the holocaust was a myth, and evolution is a hoax, they are viewed as people screaming: “the Earth is flat!!!!””
The only thing here that’s flat is your head.
Don’t try to conflate those two things on equal terms.
John Thames’ research has proven that the Holocau$t is naught but abloody hoax, with bullshite laws to force it down our throats.
Evolution vs. creation is its own separate nightmare.
You do believe that the Earth is no longer the center of the universe, don’t you, ronnie-boy?
Karl - thanks. It’s good to have a sane voice among the sub-human garbage trolling these pages.
on 14 April 2009
I didn’t, your buddy did:
“It is quite true that there is a remarkable similarity between the Nazi “gas chamber” hoax and the Darwinian evolution hoax.”
- John Thames 11 April 2009
on 14 April 2009
Mr Thames
In response to my comment that you seem to be calling the shots you claim that your “vast historical knowledge, incisive analysis and overwhelming documentation entitles me to do precisely that” - am I to take it from your comment that you see yourself in control of this debate - the master or words and arguments ?
As far as I can tell, you certainly seem like a master debator who is getting off on the hatred you put on this post but in the end, who will really give a shit what you think ?. It’s fun for a while but it won’t really change anything.
on 14 April 2009
I have never had a problem talking to my enemies. Before the shooting, and afterwards, you have to talk. I have met the modern SS men–yes, they do wear the black uniform again, in the Balkans. I can accept them, they are primitive creatures, and you can’t demand tolerance and reason from them any more than you can expect tolerance of canaries, from your cat. Cats love to kill canaries, SS men love to kill Gypsies and Jews. That’s how they are made.
The weird denialists that have made their appearance on this show I find much less interesting than SS men, they are not feral enough to be interesting.
But what I find really difficult to stomach are the sensible neutral folks who claim not to be Nazis, like Mr. Caiazzo. Calmly and tolerantly they question whether the boys in black, who were filmed taking away the missing children, have any responsibility for their disappearance and murder.
on 14 April 2009
From the outset, the Myth of the Holocaust has had its problems with “the numbers game”. It has not been easy to sell the story of the “extermination” of an entire people, when that people is more numerous, more visible, more prosperous, and more powerful in more countries than at any time during its history. It is even more difficult to sell the story of “survivors of death camps”, who survived, not one year, but stays of four to six years in “death camps”, in which, according to the testimony of the “Survivors”, “everyone was being killed every day”; survival, not merely in one “death camp”, but tours of five or six camps over a period of four to six years. The casualty rate would be higher on a bus tour of the Bronx.
THE HILARIOUS AUSCHWITZ STORY.
On January 17, 1945, when the Germans evacuated Auschwitz, 67,012 prisoners remained (plus those in the camp hospital).
Now instead of killing all 67,012+ prisoners, the Germans left about 7,650 prisoners at Auschwitz to be liberated by the Soviets, and marched the rest to other concentration camps (errrr,.. that should be, death camps).
The great majority of these people survived, becoming “holocaust survivors.”
Amazing isn’t it,… that the evil Nazis who had been “mass-killing millions of Jews” didn’t bother to finish off this last bunch.
Don’t you think that this is a rather strange thing for the Nazis to do, leaving about 70,000 witnesses to “genocide”.
Even stranger, is that the Jewish prisoner, Elie Wiesel states in his book “Night” that when the Germans evacuated Auschwitz, he was given the option of staying at the hospital, with his father registered as a patient, to await the Soviets, or join the evacuation with the “mass-murdering” Nazis.
Guess what? He chose to leave with the “mass-murdering” Nazis, taking his father with him.
Isn’t it funny,… that the Jew Elie Wiesel (whose book describes horrendous Nazi “mass-killings” of Jews at Auschwitz) should choose to go with the very same Nazis that had been “mass-killing” Jews, rather than wait for the Soviets.
“The choice was in our hands. For once we could decide our fate for ourselves. We could both stay in the hospital, where I could, thanks to my doctor, get him (his father) entered as a patient or nurse. Or else we could follow the others. ‘Well, what shall we do, father?’ He was silent. ‘Let’s be evacuated with the others,’ I told him.”
Quote from “Night” by Elie Wiesel.
Another strange thing about Elie Wiesel’s account of life at Auschwitz is that he never, not even once, mentions gas chambers.
In his version of the fiction, the Jews were burnt alive in huge pits, with the fat from the bodies scooped up to make soap.
Now, since human bodies don’t burn, we know that this is a lie, unless you believe that the Germans carved down all the forests of Poland to provide wood for the fires that roasted the 4 million (errrr,… that’s right it is now 1.5 million).
And even then there is the little problem regarding fires in pits,… they tend to go out due to a lack of oxygen,… but why let a few facts get in the way of a good story.
There is another account of happenings at Auschwitz on January 17th, 1945, from the book “Survival in Auschwitz,” by Primo Levi.
Primo Levi said “It was not a question of reasoning: I would probably also have followed the instinct of the flock (the evacuees) if I had not felt so weak: fear (of the unknown/Russians?) is supremely contagious, and its immediate reaction is to make one try to run away (WITH the evacuees and the “mass murdering” Nazis).” Comment in parenthesis added.
So Primo Levi was also given the choice of staying or leaving. His “weakness” caused him to await the Soviets, even though he was fearful of the outcome.
Levi states that 800 others choose to remain in Auschwitz, and 20,000 choose to go (with the “mass-murdering Nazis”).
His numbers do not add up, but clearly, as a prisoner he could only roughly estimate these, and he could only estimate numbers from his particular sub-camp (among many).
on 14 April 2009
When, on October 16, 1943, the Germans held a fun event in Rome, a Jew round-up, they caught 1035 Jews. Among them were 200 children; their train left on October 18, and arrived in Auschwitz on October 22. Sixteen returned to Rome, fifteen men and one woman. According to the defense, the rest went camping in the Urals. The prosecution offered sixteen witnesses, who agreed that all the missing persons had been murdered, by gas or by the diseases that affect hunger-weakened bodies.
The 2000 witnesses who made it back to Thessaloniki told the same story. Those who made it back to Paris and Amsterdam all agreed. The same story was told by political prisoners, Reds or Whites. Liberals and conservatives, priests and rabbis, Poles and Serbs, Italians and Gypsies, all reported similar conditions, in all camps: those who evaded the gas chamber died of hunger or disease.
We do not have many witnesses for the death camps for German soldiers, run by the French and the Americans. It seemed inappropriate for Germans to talk about it. It would have been to the advantage of the Soviets to reveal that the beloved leader of the Free World had ordered that German prisoners be starved and be denied the rations offered by the Red Cross.
Clearly, there were problems with the death camps of WW2: there were survivors. Glad to report that the lesson has been learned, and that we have no surviving witnesses from the death camps in Kosovo, run in 1999 by the UCK (aka KLA) under NATO protection. The families of the detainees, Serbs and Gypsies, were all poor, and could not pay ransom. The decision was thus made to transport the prisoners to Albania, where their organs were harvested for sale in other NATO countries.
on 14 April 2009
Ron,
There will always be a HUGE difference between Holocaust revisionism and flat Earth, UFO’s, etc…. wherever, you are…. because,even though
it is not a crime in the USA or, somewhere else, to believe in the Holocaust..it is still a crime in the heart of Europe. It is not a crime in the heart of Europe to believe in any of this other foolishness. That by itself is aways going to be the difference let alone that there is ample evidence that this Holocaust activity did not occur..
Ron, it is actually your belief that the Holocaust happened (the official version) that is more akin to belief in a flat Earth. Science is on the side of the revisionists. This proposition that six million were gassed and burned has been continuously chipped away since the last German was hanged at Nuremberg. You have the majority, and the blessing of the mainstream public…for now. But, as people become more skeptical and enlightened of the true story they are slowly turning away from the old government propaganda. Just as the Church finally had to give in to the scientific facts so will the governments of Germany, Austria France, and the others. Now, many people don’t believe, without question, whatever is said by politicians or the chattering class on tv…
Ron, I would like to believe that we are both after the truth. Picture in your mind how this unreal activity could have taken place in the rooms where it alleged to have happened… only a child could imagine that those little antiquated ovens would be capable of burning millions… try to picture it. And, again I ask anyone, where is the human remains of this activity? I read where today in a modern crematorium it takes 1.5 - 2 hrs to burn a single body at 1800 - 2000 degrees F… using propane fuel. Approximately 5 to 6 lbs. of charred bones remain. Those remains are then reduced to “ash” by a piece of equipment designed to do the job. That is today… using modern technology! Can you actually imagine all that going on… on such a grand scale in those little ovens and rooms? At 5 lbs per person..2,000,000 victims at Auschwitz, let’s say, that’s 10,000,000 lbs of human debris that has to be disposed of. Why have we never seen a picture of this dump site?
Ron, change my mind. It’s much easier to go with the flow. Why am I wrong?
on 14 April 2009
Funny, I did not get 5 pounds of ashes when my old folks died. The manufacturers of the ovens in Auschwitz claimed the crematoria there could handle 4000 bodies per day. The bodies were burned together, not individually.
The murderer, who was filmed taking the child away, claims innocence on the ground that his knife was not pointy enough to stab deeply enough to cause death. “Look, the bloody glove does not fit me well at all. Obviously, I am innocent.”
on 14 April 2009
hanoverfist,
You’re welcome. I think more people are aware of this business than ever.
on 14 April 2009
Matteo:
We do have quite a few witnesses among the American guards as to what happened to the starving German POW’s. Moreover, excavations (which are immediately shut down by the German government), show that the bodies are still there. No one has yet found the bodies of the mythical “six million”. Your assertions regarding the disposal rates of the crematory ovens are flatly false. Read your fellow Italian, Carlo Mattogno, on the subject. Travis is entirely correct. Had the Germans actually been exterminating the Jews as clained, all the Jews at the Eastern camps deported westward would long since have been killed.
on 15 April 2009
I would suggest, Karl, that one day you visit auschwitz and you will realize - not how difficult - but how easy it would be.
I am not qualified to discuss muffles, thermal barriers and furnace capacity. But even without the specific knowledge, I would suggest that comparing body disposal at the death camps, with the rigorous care of a modern, highly regulated funeral home, is inappropriate. Moreover, the disposal of human remains by the nazis was not limited to ovens.
btw the testimony of expert witnesses at the various trials of holocaust deniers, provided holocaust deniers ample opportunity to put on their best case, and they were consistently, and repeatedly, proven frauds.
on 15 April 2009
re. Matteo, using normal Zionist, twisted logic (Italian, he only wishes):
“But what I find really difficult to stomach are the sensible neutral folks who claim not to be Nazis, like Mr. Caiazzo. Calmly and tolerantly they question whether the boys in black, who were filmed taking away the missing children, have any responsibility for their disappearance and murder.”
WTF are you talking about? If you are going to use me for a poster boy, my God at least be accurate. Don’t make a general claim into a specific one to suit your agenda. Give me your evidence, don’t just spew your allegories about the “boys in black” (are they maybe the Rothschilds bankers…?) and I will consider it. Maybe they were related to the Jews who turned in other Jews to the Nazis in the same way the Jews made big money on stolen African gold, gems, and slaves?
“Calmly and rationally ” let me answer your again unjustified accusation, but first, let me answer and talk of you the way you have of me, to appease the feelings of anger as of late I have been trying to suppress, in fact replace with love. Suppose I were to say that you are “a fag, a cheat. and a lying half-wit clown…and what really gets to me I mean REALLY gets to me is people like you, ‘Matteo’, who calmly and rational refuse to admit what I and my psychobabble bullshit say they are.” Sound like sound logic, Skippy? Welcome to tit for tat, I don’t like it, but I could indeed speak your language…the nonsense, the false accusations, and the false emotion. How does it feel?
Nobody gave my father a dime, or his father, my grandfather, who had to stand in line for the day job that was available that hundreds came to grab, whether it was shoveling shit he and my kin took these jobs because they had to eat and because of the war there was no food. Nobody in my family was a Jew hater in Europe, yet my family and those of our town had to suffer because of this war they weren’t involved in.
Still, today, the whole world suffers because clearly white, perhaps Russian people who associate themselves with the Jews of the Bible, who in all ignorance think themselves from Canaan or somehow deserved of that land a thousand miles from their real home near (probably) the Caspian sea, illegally occupy Palestinian land. Nobody is still crying about millions of dead Indians on both sides of the world. Nobody is crying about Rwanda and the Sudan. Nobody is crying about hundreds of thousands of Japanese, thousands of islanders, still seeing the effects of atomic blasts, and atomic machinery and bombs are turned out routinely by international Jewish companies. Nobody cares that a double standard is at work right now, where some countries are prohibited from doing things other countries are allowed to do. Nobody cares about dead Kurds, or Muslims who were destroyed by the millions, Georgians constantly under oppression from somewhere, or the poverty that still exists in 3/4 of the world. Nobody cares, as I have said, that the USA imprisons more people than Russia did under Stalin, or Germany under Hitler. Read about that child molester prick Kissinger and the Israeli arms dealers, which likely run America, and wake your silly self up to reality, and come out of your fairy tale saga, the story of your ancestors by which you continue to define your probably otherwise meaningless measley life. And then tell me about the owner of the WTC, the Jew, who got billions of dollars, a clean implosion, a fast clean-up of all evidence, and so the quickest Jewish lightening yet, and we are too stupid, our heads in the clouds worrying about how many Jews died in Auschwitz, or who Woody Allen is molesting—oops—dating right now. Keep the people asleep, and distracted, it’s good old Nazi-Jew, or as they say Zionist, psychology. Evidently, it continues to work on those of us more susceptible to hypnosis. The old bait-and-switch? “The enemy of the enemy is my friend”? Tell the people who invented Nazism…hint…it’s a Jew, and the world’s first Zionist.
One thing you should know. I could very easily make you think I too am against the Holocaust and tell you what you want to hear. Just like many who pretend to feel your pain, who don’t know a damned thing about it. I could play you like a cheap harmonica. Fake sympathy, every non-Jew uses it to suckle the fascist state of Israel. Realize this.
As for Bosnia and that mess, notice it all happened after the death of Tito, the longest-reigning dictator in the world. The problem is some people can’t handle freedom. Here is their mantra, and why they fight, whereas before they were beaten down if they ever made a peep…perhaps not a bad strategy, now that i think about it:
“You must do and say and believe as I do. You must run your house as I do mine. You must attend the same church as me and have your children believe what I say. You must be made to feel my pain.”
Not much unlike the REALLY “turns my stomach” attitude of people who say “we are all to blame”…for slavery, for “the Holocaust,” for hatred. We are NOT all to blame. That we are all implicated, by these sorts, is slander, a lie, and definitive of a scapegoat culture. Some words for you to study when you’re not looking at old photos:
Herd mentality
Follower
Slave mentality
Self-deception
Bad Faith
Laziness
Living in the past
Scapegoat Syndrome
Sheep
Parrot
Faith
on 15 April 2009
In Carlo Mattogno’s work at http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndcrema.html, we find, at paragraph 5.4., Observations on the coke consumption of the triple and eight-muffle ovens, that, in a letter sent on June 28, 1943 by, the Chief of the Auschwitz Central Construction Office, to SS-Brigadeführer Kammler, the Chief of the Economic-Administrative Main Office Amtsgruppe C, the following 24-hour capacities of the crematoria of Auschwitz and Birkenau were given
• old crematorium I: 340 persons
• crematorium IV: 768 persons
• crematorium II: 1,440 persons
• crematorium V: 768 persons
• crematorium III: 1,440 persons
Total: 4,756 persons
It is difficult to believe that SS-Sturmbannführer Bischoff was sabotaging the camp administration by providing false information.
on 15 April 2009
And if the numbers are correct…this doesn’t say HOW they died. it is common to burn disease victims, for example.
on 15 April 2009
I know that the “boys in black”, the SS soldiers, had orders, no choices, and were liable to execution for insubordination had they objected to any orders. There were no press or congressmen to write to.
Author Gunter Grass was ordered into the SS. The SS were often murdered when they surrendered, to either Russians or Americans. So no one will hear me rail against them.
It’s their supporters that I cannot accept: by their denial, they become perverted apologists of child murder.
on 15 April 2009
Matteo:
You Talmudic Genius.
Why don’t you try calculating the amount of coke needed to burn diseased bodies before jumping to conclusions?
on 15 April 2009
Matteo quotes very selectively from Mattogno.
He ignores that Mattogno demonstrates that the actual consumption of coke at the camp was consistent with the 100,000 or so deaths from disease, and that if the claimed exterminations by “gassing” actually took place, then the consumption of coke would have drastically increased. He also ignores that the brick interior walls would have had to be replaced five times over and that the German construction documents show no evidence of that.
Did you think that we could not read what the link actually said, Matteo?
on 15 April 2009
No, we are not required to find the ovens resurfacing bills, we are not supposed to present coke or firewood receipts.
You are supposed to show us evidence of what your boys did with the 1015 that you kidnapped in Rome on October 16, 1943 and who did not come back. Kidnapping children is something that gets you in trouble. People don’t like child murderers–or their friends or shills.
on 15 April 2009
Ron,
Read Matteo’s link (second to last post)… It’s too funny! Your own fellow believer is offering us all documentation proving why this mass burning did not take place. Read this detailed information provided by one of your own! And, for a good laugh scroll down to 11.1 and 11.2 and read the statement made by Filip Muller a ‘professional witness for the prosecuction’… I think that such nonsense speaks for itself. This is why you have to ask yourself…If it defies belief…How can I believe it?
on 15 April 2009
Mr. Thames wrote, on April 2nd, “The crematory ovens at the camp had a disposal rate entirely consistent with the actual death rates from disease and typhus.” The suggestion was that the ovens could not handle much larger numbers of bodies. We proved that wrong. Now the Nazi sympathizers want us to deliver firewood receipts.
A problem with that: if you kidnap a child in Los Angeles, the state does not have to provide the receipts for your shovel purchase or you gas and highway tolls. The state only needs to give evidence that you took the child.
Your party is charged with kidnapping and murdering 200 Roman children. We have given the evidence that those 200 children were kidnapped by your gang in October 1943. To avoid hanging, give us one piece of evidence that the children were in good health when your gang run away in January 1945.
on 15 April 2009
Matteo, like his compatriots, specializes in asinine comparisons. The issue here is not whether the Germans kidnapped Jews and sent them to camps, we know that they did. The issue is whether the Germans killed six million of them as part of an extermination program. As to Mattogno, Matteo simply misquotes what he actually wrote-as anyone can tell by going to the link and actually reading it. (I did.)
Also, like a lawyer (or like a Jew, which is the same thing), Matteo insists that disappearance equals death/extermination. It is the same old fallacy. As the dog returns to its vomit, Matteo returns to his stupidity. No one has to prove that the two hundred Jewish children were still alive; it is Matteo who has to prove that the Germans killed them. Matteo, being basically stupid, refuses to consider that in a post-war Europe marked by massive population shifts, that all kinds of things might have happened to them. They could have been gulaged by the Soviets if the Germans deported them to the Eastern front, they could have been adopted by Frenchmen and chosen not to return to Italy, they (if they were Jewish) could have been rerouted by the Zionists to Palestine, some of them may have gotten on a boat to America, we simply do not know. Matteo wants to believe (because it suits him), that the Germans liquidated them. Maybe, maybe not.
All kinds of people disappear during wars. Some of them died, others migrated elsewhere. Matteo cannot come up with six million bodies; nor can he prove that the Germans were using Zyklon B and crematory ovens for anything other than the purpose indicated by the camp records-for delousing and disease control purposes. Thus, he yaps endlessly about “disappearances”.
on 15 April 2009
The children of Gypsies and Jews, boarded trucks under guard, and did not return. .
In the case of Bosnia and Croatia, we also have the testimony of the Italians, who would not tolerate an extermination policy and gave protection to the targeted minorities, which in Bosnia and Croatia included the Serbs.
The children of said three sets of deportees had no reason to be adopted, unless their mothers had been murdered as well. However, here is no evidence that they were liberated by the Allies at all. They just were not visible in the camps, upon liberation.
The survivors of each transport witnessed the children being selected for liquidation, together with those seen unfit for heavy work. The denialists who defend the child murderers deserve as much respect as your average child killer.
on 15 April 2009
“The suggestion was that the ovens could not handle much larger numbers of bodies. We proved that wrong.”
NO.
You did NOT.
Since I’m certain that you don’t personally own or run a crematorium, I am requesting that you post this damning information source from which you are referring.
A post with NOTHING IN IT will do.
on 15 April 2009
Matteo, you just cannot figure out that the issue of six million supposedly murdered Jews does not rest on what did, or did not, happen to a few Italian Jews. It takes a lot more than that to account for “six million” dead. Nor can you extrapolate and conclude that even if the Germans did kill some Jews unfit for work, that therefore every missing Jew was murdered. In short, your entire frame of reference is distorted.
As to child murderers, why don’t you tell it to your brethren in Israel? They have done a pretty good job of it in Gaza, haven’t they? Ditto with Ukrainian famine child murderers of long ago.
on 15 April 2009
I like Avigdor Lieberman and Joseph Stalin as much as I like Heinrich Himmler.
For thousands of years, bodies have been cremated. There is no need for a pit or an oven, as long as you have enough wood. It is more efficient to do it in a brick oven, but any old steel container will do. In the woods of Poland there is plenty of wood, and the labor was free: so the disposal of the bodies was no problem. The ashes can be poured on fields as fertilizer.
National Socialism is an ideology appealing to primitive patriots and to fools. The neo-Nazis figured out their constituency would accept any simplistic conspiracy story. So they run up the pole the “small capacity defective oven” flag, and, sure enough, all skinheads saluted.
The neo-Nazis here say that the ovens were too small. But Sturmbannfuhrer Bischoff wrote they were good enough for 4,000 bodies per day. Now they demand firewood receipts and oven repair tickets: “No tickee, no body.”
It’s a red herring to get us to argue oven technology and make us forget that this is a kidnap murder investigation: half a million children were kidnapped. The kidnappers say that the children were all left behind, safe and sound, in Poland’s woods.
on 15 April 2009
Matteo, why do you bother? These pathetic neo-nazis will invent any story and the evidence to support it. Sure they’ll try to back it up with long articles, self-congratulatory doppelgaengers, racist screeds (we’re all lying, hooked-nosed Jews, after all.), shitty blogs, ties to “academics”, but at the end of the day, they’re still arguing that two plus two is five, and theyre fully convinced of that.
on 16 April 2009
Really Matteo, these are very bitter racists who allow their hatred to cloud common sense. They don’t even realize how they appear:
“I am constantly accused of mindless Jew hatred, a charge I thoroughly debunked.” - john thames 4 April 2009.
“But if the day ever comes for “Payback” you pink, circumsized piece of greasy pork, I, and millions of other whites who finally know the truth, will hunt you down and nail your kosher ass to a crucifix with your amputated balls stuffed between your circumsized lips. You deserve it, and so do millions of others of your satanic tribe.” - john thames 11 April 2009
Duh. I could go on, but you see the point.
on 16 April 2009
Being questioned by CIA in solitary will drive people insane, and so can being in a death camp.
If an apparently rational engineer writes a technical paper explaining that there were no gas chambers, I had to consider the possibility that some survivors made stuff up and it got credence, by repetition. So i had to read it. I don’t want to get caught repeating some crazed camp victim’s story.
I am glad I checked it out, and find out that Mattogno cannot prove that our “professional witnesses” lied.
I am not trying to convert any Nazis, but if you do not challenge Nazi fabrications, they will be repeated and believed. Lies can become fashionable. If enough people believe them, they become history.
on 16 April 2009
Matteo:
Remember that poor little Jewish boy with his hands raised standing before a big, bad German stormtrooper in a Polish town? Why, he has been practicing medicine in New York for several decades now. And no, Matteo, burning bodies does not destroy the bones.
on 16 April 2009
If you lay some logs on the ground and set them on fire, you place bodies of animals on top of burning logs, and they burn quite well. The water evaporates, the fat burns, and a few small bones will be left. A small hammer mill will rapidly turn them into powder, and you take that to the fields and plow it under.
Try this method next time you have the chance.
Any farmer will be delighted if you bring him a truckload of bone meal and wood ashes, the leftovers of 1000 Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, undesirables, and political dissidents. That farmer will have an excellent crop next year, thanks to you and your Neue Ordnung–fur die ganze Welt–the New World Order.
on 16 April 2009
Hey, look! JT made it onto Youtube!:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFCSWS469fc
on 16 April 2009
And his little schnauzer hanover:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-c-xc24C8g
on 16 April 2009
Matteo,
He’s the score. John’s arguing from an obviously biased position. He’s made his motives abundantly clear, and like the phantom pariah that he rails against, there is no depth of deceit to which he dare not plunge. The total sum of John’s argument is supported through willful ignorance and intentional malice.
You will not see movement on his position until that bias is cleared. If that ever happens he just might be able to take into consideration the evidence that is dissonant with his prejudice. Until then though, I think it’s best to point out that he’s got a testicle in mouth fetish, and that he fantasizes about circumcised penises.
on 16 April 2009
Now I am being confronted with Youtube cartoons as the ultimate defense. The utter futility of the other side’s arguments, I suppose.
Matteo:
Your attempts to confuse issues become ever more preposterous. I thought the Germans were conducting a super secret extermination program. Now I am being told that they killed millions, ground them into dust with their super, high speed crematoria and concealed their crime by turning over the fertilizer to the Polish farmers?
Fangbeer:
You horses ass. You do not know the facts on any issue. As for bias, have you looked in a mirror lately?
on 16 April 2009
See, when you make ridiculous arguments, and post personal insults and homoerotic fantasies, you are reduced to that level. Bonus points for citing works of fiction
on 16 April 2009
Sorry, not my situation. Pardon me, I am Italian and Catholic.
I am not trying to alter views or persuade my enemies. They are enemies of my family, and we do not want our enemies to be calm or rational.
If Hitler had been calm and rational, he would have placed the Wehrmacht under Rommel, would have shoved the Brits out of Suez, Iraq, and Iran, would have freed India, and won the war.
on 16 April 2009
P.S. I was answering Fangbeer
on 16 April 2009
Matteo:
If you think that all kinds of Jews did not lie at Nuremberg, I suggest you do a little research. Did not even Jean-Claude Pressac admit as much? What happened to all those hoary tales of human lamp shades, human soap, steam death chambers and mass electrocutions? Lots and lots of Jews claimed that their relatives were all murdered - only to have those same relatives miraculously “survive” decades later. Go read Jews at the Zundel trials in Canada testify about how they could tell the nationality of the Jews being cremated by the color of the smoke exiting up the chimney - you know, blue for Hungarians, pink for Pollocks, etc. Read Butz’s account of how a German defendant was on trial at the NMT for murdering a Jew and then pointed out the supposedly deceased defendant sitting in the audience, listening to the testimony.
Your tribe told one hell of a lot of lies at Nuremberg. And you still have not explained why the German camp records support what the revisionists say - not what you say.
on 16 April 2009
It is nice to know that Matteo is a Catholic.
Those who are sufficiently irrational to believe in the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost can easily believe in physically impossible “gas chambers” and magic crematoria with an unprecedented disposal rate as well. Some Catholics, like the purged Father Abrahamo Florianowicz (whatever the spelling), are more rational. It must be the Jewish genes which subvert the Catholic mysticism with sub rosa rationality.
on 16 April 2009
“You do not know the facts on any issue.”
1. I know that your argument extends from a forgone conclusion. That’s fact number one,
2. I know that evidence to support the reality that the Germans attempted ethnic cleansing through the elimination of the “Jewish problem” is vast, and three fold.
A.) Documentary.
The Nazis were a highly bureaucratic party. They had documents that documented the documents that document documents. Regardless of intentional German destruction of some of these documents, and regardless the accusations that there exist documents were falsified after the fact, there still exists an abundance of authentic record to clearly define the events that took place. These documents outline the cruel treatment of, capture of, movement of, experimentation on, and extermination of Jews, as well as document policy and opinion of the period.
Beginning with the writings of Hitler himself, continuing on through the T4 program, and on into the war itself, there is more than enough documented evidence to prove beyond doubt the intent and actions of the Nazi party.
B.) Testimonial.
For John’s theory to be true an astonishing abundance of witness testimony must be cast aside. This testimony runs the gambit from liberated prisoners, Nazi personnel, local civilians, liberating forces, Nazi party members, and Allied leaders. In place of this testimony that supports the Holocaust narrative, John and his ilk offer up the testimony of a scant few.
C.} Physical.
Mountains of human remains.
Mountains of stolen artifacts, shoes, clothes, hair.
The machinery of the destruction of human life.
In conclusion. John thinks a lot about circumcised penises.
And he’s wrong about the Holocaust.
on 16 April 2009
At last Fangbeer attempts a reasoned argument. It fails as we will shortly see.
It is indeed true that the Nazis were a highly bureaucratic organization. They did indeed produce an abundance of documentation for several well documented policies. There is abundant documented evidence for several provable policies.
(1) There is an abundance of evidence for an “ethnic cleansing” progam. Numerous German documents exist for a program to expel the Jews from all German controlled territories. That includes the plans to deport the Jews to Madagascar and later to the occupied territories in the east. Moreover, known German actions were consistent with those plans.
(2) There is abundant documentary evidence for a German plan to expropriate the Jews of their property and to confiscate their assets. Operation Reinhardt was one such plan; there were others.
(3) There is abundant documentary evidence for the use of Jews as labor at German camps - and for the use of Zyklon B to control typhus epidemics. There is also evidence that hundreds of thousands of Jews perished from these epidemics - and that the Germans built crematory ovens to sanitarily dispose of diseased corpses.
(4) There is evidence that approximately one to two million Jews perished of all causes during the war, including many shot for security reasons in Russia.
(5) There is absolutely no evidence that the Germans attempted to murder the Jews as a race - or that anything like “six million’ of them were killed.
Contrary to Fangbeer, piles of shoes, clothing and other personal property prove nothing more than dispossession. His more basic point, and the one that psychologically speaking, makes it impossible for most people to think past the hoax, is the obvious one: “All those people could not have been lying!” Sorry, but they were.
I could refer the interested readers back to my original post for the reasons. But, since people are lazy, I shall do it once again. The allies had big reasons for going along with the hoax. It helped divert attention from their own crimes, such as the aerial bombing of civilians, Operation Keelhaul and the mass murdering of the prisoner by Dwight David Eisenhower. Fear of Jewish financial power was also a major motivation.
As to the Jews, their motivation is easy to understand. By creating a semi-plausible story of their extermination, they made themselves the martyrs of the world. Henceforth, they could no longer be criticized or opposed because of : “Never again!” There is no doubt that this has been the reality of the world ever since the end of WW2. The Jews could certainly lie on such a scale. Their Talmudic scriptures enjoin them to lie on principle when dealing with non-Jews. In a matter of such importance to the race as a whole, no Jew would hesitate to do his duty.
The testimomies at the various war crime trials have to be put in context. It is obvious that Fangbeer and the others who debate me have not read Arthur Butz’s book, “The Hoax of the Twentieth Century”. Were they to do so, they would no longer have to debate me. Nuremberg was a kangaroo court committed, a prioiri, to the fiction that the Germans had murdered six million Jews. The only hope for acquital at such a Stalinist proceeding was to concede the reality of the non-existent extermination but point the finger at someone else as the responsible party. This is why the defendats went along with the charade.
Thus, the claim that “all those people could not be lying” does not stand up. As to the implications of all that lying for the true nature of the world in which he is living, that is too much for dear ignorant Fangbeer to come to terms with.
on 16 April 2009
Mr. Thames appears to propose a 2 million settlement with most Jews dying of typhus, which would be genocide anyway. If the conditions in which the prisoners were held caused such casualties over the course of three years, genocide it was, gas or no gas. Did the British and American POW’s housed next door to civilian camps die of typhus at that rate? No, their food rations were sufficient.
We must treat the issue as a kidnapping. The victims were taken away and did not return. The death rate was more than 90%, similar to the death rates in French and American camps for German POW’s. The death rate of children and old folks was closer to 100%. That’s genocide.
on 16 April 2009
“Henceforth, they [jews] could no longer be criticized or opposed because of : “Never again!” There is no doubt that this has been the reality of the world ever since the end of WW2.”
Another bafoonish revisionism theory that keeps get roughed up by facts.
on 16 April 2009
re.:
“We must treat the issue as a kidnapping. The victims were taken away and did not return. The death rate was more than 90%, similar to the death rates in French and American camps for German POW’s. The death rate of children and old folks was closer to 100%. That’s genocide.”
If that is true, why then wouldn’t the French, Americans, Brits, oh and maybe even the Poles be accused of genocide?
Idiot logic, that’s what is presented here by the people against Santomauro and the others who merely want to be able to discuss the possibility that the death toll was not as high, nor achieved in the manner, as we have been told. That the “official” history has changed over the years, that there were some things we have not been taught, or taught erroneously by Zionist textbooks, for example the Jewish genocides of others, or the actions of Poland against Germany, or that the Japanese tried for over a month to achieve surrender but instead got not one bomb, but two, and the surprising prominence way beyond their numbers, of Zionists in high places, including the American government, should be cause enough for concern.
That this is the only subject considered taboo for historians, and where “you are an asshole” in response to reasoned comments is entertained as legitimate, should be another.
Realize the double standard with everything involving Zionism and the Holocaust in academia. We can question everything, in fact are taught by every sage of every land in every time to do this very thing. That doing this questioning, about anything involving the Holocaust and Zion, is cause for insult, ostracism, and in some places, a prison term, is in fact the only issue of concern to me.
That some people are using this fact to boost their “white power” agenda is troubling on many counts. Not merely because of the ignorance of such a stance, but also because it does not allow sincere historians a chance to figure things out clearly.
So let’s ask one question more, as following this thread is becoming tiresome and following a distinct pattern of the sort just mentioned. Being as we have changed our positions, in my lifetime, regarding, oh, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, the age of Egypt’s 3rd Dynasty, our assessment of Genghis Khan, the color of Cleopatra, the number of planets, even something very scientific and technical, and one would think indisputable, such as the half-life of carbon, the speed of light, the status of Andromeda…WHY IS IT that we cannot look into and question the traditional view of the Holocaust?
This is my question.
on 16 April 2009
Maybe because distorting facts to fit a pre-judged, twisted agenda of hate in order to:
“hunt you down and nail your kosher ass to a crucifix with your amputated balls stuffed between your circumsized lips. You deserve it, and so do millions of others of your satanic tribe”
is not a considered a serious academic enterprise.
on 16 April 2009
Matteo:
The death rate in the German camps was nowhere near 90%. This is easily refuted by the German death books of the camps. Stop making assertions contrary to fact. Moreover, it has been demonstrated, again and again, that many of the supposedly exterminated Jews did return and their destinations are fairly well known. If you wish to discuss a subject, try to know a little something about what you are talkiing about.
The terrible conditions in many of the German camps at wars end were the result of overcrowding caused by the mass evacuatuations of the very much still alive Jews in the eastern camps. The prisoners generally suffered from no such overcrowding because there far fewer transfers of prisoners westward. Try to understand the logistical realities, Matteo. Moreover, the allies were pretty much responsible for the conditions because of the bombing raids and the transportaion disruption. Who, then, really bears the responsibility?
Angelo:
I am a white suoremacist, but hardly an unitelligent one. That is another discussion for another day.
on 16 April 2009
Where, o where, is the learned Mr. Welch? He has been ever so silent since I ravaged him with my last incisive comments.
on 16 April 2009
‘You simply have to read the description of Debating the Holocaust: A New Look At Both Sides by Thomas Dalton, PhD’
Not if you want to make a balanced assessment; perhaps you should read the book? If Dalton is an anti-semite then he would surely have denied even a massacre. Clearly the Nazis committed a very large number of crimes against humanity. However, trying to work out the exact number of Concentration Camp deaths is obviously a complex business. Some historians have argued that the final total was higher than six million; others say it is less. Over the past few decades historians have made an upwards revision of the number of Soviet casualties in the Second World War. To suggest that the Six Million figure is carved in stone makes you sound like a ranting zionist.
on 16 April 2009
Being a white supremacist stems from the fact that you are unintelligent. You argue from a forgone conclusion, and pound out “evidence” that fits with your story in an attempt to justify it. It stems from the fact that you are a racist, and a bigot, and you invent these lofty tales to justify your own insecurities.
You are no better than the shaven-headed hooligan with swastikas carved into his flesh who smashes the windows of synagogues.
on 16 April 2009
Also, to assit you in your inevitable battery of insults, I am an athiest, born to Catholic parents who did not belive in male genital mutilation.
on 16 April 2009
Marc:
The lack of intelligence and the preconceived notions are all on your side.
on 16 April 2009
The whole premise of the Jewish Holocaust defies simple logic: Why would Germany, fighting a war on two fronts…with fuel scarce…short of all resources…ship millions of Jews by railroad…hundreds and thousands of miles…to camps specially built just to hold them…feed them…clothe them…tattoo them in order to keep track of them….
Just to KILL them?!?!
It doesn’t even begin to make sense. If the Germans had wanted to kill the Jews, they would have done it the way the Russian Jews murdered 20 to 80 million Russian Christians earlier in the century…with a bullet to the base of the skull, wherever they were found.
In fact, the WWII Jewish Holocaust did not really take shape until fully fabricated by Jews during the late 1950s. That is why, in the memoirs of so many WWII leaders and generals, including Eisenhower, Churchill and De Gaulle, as recently pointed out by Professor Richard Lynn, “one will find no mention either of Nazi ‘gas chambers,’ a ‘genocide’ of the Jews, or of ’six million’ Jewish victims of the war.”
International Red Cross documents clearly show that fewer than 300,000 Jews died during WWII in all German concentration camps combined.
on 16 April 2009
Matteo,
Since you are a Catholic Christian, I got some Bible verses for you to take a look at. It’s what JESUS said about the Jews.
http://sanityisdead.blogspot.com/2009/04/bible-tells-us-who-bad-guys-are.html
By the way, Hitler was a Catholic Christian also.
“My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice… And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.” ~Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922
“Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.” ~Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
on 16 April 2009
If you look at photos of Auschwitz and the “ovens”, you will see that only 2 people could have been cremated at one time in each oven. There were three (3) ovens, but 2 bodies could be stacked end to end allowing for the creamating of 6 people at the same time. This is the MAXIMUM output of this apparatus. There are no more ovens, mass graves or any sign of ashes NOWHERE near consistent of 4 million people being killed. Time and space would fail me to explain and link all of these stories together that will show that the holocaust was largely exaggerated.
But lets use simple logic and a calculator for this exercise. The gas chamber is a “reconstruction” and the guides there fully admit it. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GGIK_enUS281US281&q=auschwitz+gas+chamber+reconstructed
Initially, the crematorium contained two ovens which each had two openings, called muffles or retorts. The ovens were deep enough to hold two bodies, placed end to end. A third oven was installed at the end of 1941. Krema I was in operation until July 1943.
So, the Nazis were allegedly burning 6 people at a time according to the website. It takes about 2-3 hours for a body to be cremated. http://www.icfa.org/cremation.htm#Cremation3
Keep in mind this is by today’s standards, and not 65 years ago. So I will give the Nazis the benefit of the doubt and say 2 hours for burning 6 people because the ovens could stack 2 bodies end to end and there were 3 ovens (Just tall and wide enough for one person to fit). You must have a little down-time in there somewhere to clean out the ashes and things like that, but lets assume maximum burning capacity.
So, 6 people every 2 hours = 12 times a day, 6 people were burned. 12 X 6 = 72 people every 24 hours.
365 days a year X 72 people a day = 26,280 people a year.
So, the Nazis would have had to be killing and burning people for a VERY LONG TIME. Lets just say that half of the alleged 4 million were gassed. 2 million and only burning 26,280 a year would have taken 76.103500 years.
Maybe I am just the logical A-hole who doubts anything someone is trying a little too hard to sell me, but the math don’t lie. I have looked at this for a VERY long time and each time I come to the same conclusion: SOMEBODY was tired of being kicked out of every country they have been in and wanted to set themselves up to be eternal victims.
At the Nuremburg trials, NOT ONE SINGLE witness or picture of a Gas Chamber. All I want is one. Of all the aerial photos taken of the camps, not a single one shows them burning people outside. So, where are all the mass graves???? They don’t exist. Check out the Red Cross’ numbers as to the actual victims.
Maybe I am crazy, but I think the engineering minded, highly efficient Germans had more sense that to build the “Gas Chamber” next to the flaming ovens in the Crematorium. I would think that would make for a bad accident or something. But that’s just my simple, country folk logic.
http://www.scrapbookpages.com/AuschwitzScrapbook/Tour/Auschwitz1/Auschwitz08B.html
on 16 April 2009
Marc spewed:
“Bonus points for citing works of fiction”
This would also refer to any certifications with your name on them…you are obviously a tape recorder with an anus.
The only think John Thames gets wrong with the Holocau$t is how it should be spelled. And that’s a personal issue. He wants to be gentlemanly about it; I have no such compunctions.
It’s a bloody LIE. We don’t have to prove it didn’t happen…you asshats have to prove it DID HAPPEN.
And so far…you haven’t. You refer to scientifically implausible occurrences; EVERY holocau$t memoir has been proven to be outright LIES; the only thing that has kept the outright fabrication going are “laws”.
TRUTH NEEDS NO LAWS TO ESTABLISH IT AS FACT.
on 16 April 2009
About that magic number of 6 million, 4 million claimed dead at Auschwitz…….
4 million back then….
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/E_Pictures/Auschwitz_plaque_4mil.jpg
WHOOPS!!!! Looks like it got “Revised”!! Now it’s down to 1.5 million.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Auschwitz-Birkenau_memorial.JPG
When the “Death Camp” itself has to lower their official numbers, you know SOMEONE was bullshittin’. LOL!!!
You would think Jews could do simple math being they dominate the financial industry, but lets try some of that Jewish math:
6 million minus 2.5 million = 6 million!
http://isurvived.org/Pictures_iSurvived-4/HOLO-plaque_TiguMures-RO.GIF
“Death Camps”? It is even more difficult to sell the story of “survivors of death camps”, who survived, not one year, but stays of four to six years in “death camps”, in which, according to the testimony of the “Survivors”, “everyone was being killed every day”; survival, not merely in one “death camp”, but tours of five or six camps over a period of four to six years.
on 16 April 2009
Oh, one more thing.
Here is a photo of the “Ovens” at Auschwitz. Note the guy standing next to it for a reference. Now you can understand how they could only fit one person and not stack them 2 deep.
3 ovens, 2 people end to end in each one……
http://www.darrellpeck.com/travel/1998-east-europe/images/098-oven.jpg
on 16 April 2009
Travis…EXCELLENT. That’s the way to nail these tools.
2 plus 2 equals 4.
That’s it, pal.
Now, put THAT in your magic oven and cook it.
on 16 April 2009
Why would Germany, fighting a war on two fronts…with fuel scarce…short of all resources…ship millions of Jews by railroad…hundreds and thousands of miles…to camps specially built just to hold them…feed them…clothe them…tattoo them in order to keep track of them.
To answer that you would need to have a logical reason why the Germans instigated the war to begin with. Why was it important to ship the Jews at all?
But your question also raises an issue that has already been addressed. That is, the ability of the camps to clothe them, feed them, and house them. When pressed on the math of the matter, John couldn’t answer the hold them feed them clothe them question. Records indicate that the Germans did not have the facilities to feed, clothe, and house the number of people shipped around the continent. German records show that Auschwitz logged over 400k prisoners. German records also show that far more than 400k people were shipped to Auschwitz. In fact from just from April to November of 1944 more than 500k people were shipped there.
Auschwitz had 28 2 story blocks that were stuffed with 1200 prisoners each. Maybe you can show me the math that proves how that worked?
John offered a rather weak explanation. His contention was that the majority of the 400k that were logged as prisoners, and those who were on the train records who were not recorded as Auschwitz prisoners were moved further west. To what other place that did have the capacity.. he does not say, nor does he provide any evidence that the people he claims arrived at places in the west, were the same people who left from places in the east. He simply shrugs his shoulders and assumes the records were destroyed.
on 16 April 2009
I would not accuse the Brits of genocide, they treated their POW’s correctly. That was the choice of French and American generals, but that was massacre, not genocide, the intent was not to wipe out the German nation, the intent was revenge. Germans out of uniform were properly treated.
The Nazis kidnapped millions, and they disappeared. The neo-Nazis tell us they hid in the Urals, and then went to Israel. They were in such a rush to get to Israel that they did not come back to reclaim their houses. Such are the apologias we can expect from the lunatic son of the hanged serial killer. I am sorry his dad got hanged, I am sure the other kids put him down and all, but it’s still an idiotic apologia.
1035 left Rome on October 18, 1945. Sixteeen returned. 49,000 left Thessaloniki in 1943. 2000 returned. Similar figures are encountered when you examine deportations city by city. Add it up. 10% survival rate would be optimistic.
on 17 April 2009
re. Fangbeer’s:
“To answer that you would need to have a logical reason why the Germans instigated the war to begin with. Why was it important to ship the Jews at all?”
There are reasons, and this is part of the troubling standard history of the 2nd world war. Jews lived in Germany with no problem before the war, some were there during it. The problems started when Poland began taking advantage at the borders and throwing Jews out left and right, most of which wound up in Germany. For a nation already beat down from the first world war, this gave them a real reason to hate. One could argue, I think, that Poland asked for the invasion. Why haven’t we “educated” folk heard about that? The way we have been told the story, you would think Hitler pointed to a map and said “who should we blitz first?” In fact, there were many, many reasons.
You can also compare the actions of the British, the French, and the Americans, all who violated wartime treaties and their avowed neutrality. All these nations, furthermore, committed atrocious crimes against the Germans.
I understand today we have expanded, not quite as much as I expect it to expand in the coming years, the scope of “Hate Crime” statutes. Inevitably, this will lead to free speech infringements.
Which brings me John Thames. JT, I am curious, living where I currently live white supremacists are common and I have spoken to several. They have not yet been able to convince me, though, that the color is the key, or the race. What did it for you? Bell’s curve, which is science? Miss Black America Beauty Pageant? Black Music Awards, both things, by the way, I consider racist? Black Entertainment television?
I am just curious, you seem like an awfully bright fellow, I am not trying to be facetious but serious. I am just curious how, aside from the Zionist Push we have been discussing, you have come to the decision that the worst white man is better than the best black, Hispanic, Jew, etc. This would seem to go against my personal experience.
Here is what else is troubling me. As an advocate for certain causes myself, for example Marijuana Reform. I am struck by the fact that almost every time somebody in my town gets busted (we are in fact waiting for a simple possession charge to protest), there are OTHER issues. Bad license, unlicensed guns, meth, robberies, drunkenness, etc. all involved. It is difficult to get people to change their minds, when damn near every incident makes smokers look bad. I am sure you get the analogy, that here we are trying to read the correct history, and the main exponent of revision is a self-proclaimed white supremacist. I understand many of your points and probably reasons. I just don’t see how this follows.
Maybe this has relevance here, feel free to email me if you would rather answer that way, I am curious as to your rationale on this other issue.
on 17 April 2009
“Jews lived in Germany with no problem before the war, some were there during it. The problems started when Poland began taking advantage at the borders and throwing Jews out left and right, most of which wound up in Germany.”
What’s going on here? Where did these moderate well-meaning earnest guys read these stories? Persecution of Jews started in 1933. In 1938 the Nazis got so carried away that they killed a few non-Jews by mistake.
On the other hand, Mr. Caiazzo is right, the war was provoked by Polish intransigence and by atrocities against the conquered Germans. And of course, Germans and Austrians had been tricked into an armistice in 1918; when the terms were revealed, the undefeated German army was in no position to resist. Germany was disarmed and starving.
on 17 April 2009
Polish intransigence? Nazi greed, plain and simple, staging attacks on their own borders.
@hanover:
Is that the best you’ve got? Get off your tuchas and give me a better tirade. I demand it, and if I don’t get it, I’ll send a band of Zionists and Freemasons in the banking conspiracy after you.
on 17 April 2009
“3 ovens, 2 people end to end in each one……”
3 ovens with 2 muffles. Each muffle was deep enough for 2 bodies to a muffle end to end. 25 minutes before a new body can be introduced. That’s what “double stacked” means by the way. You run the oven until another body can be fit in, not until the first body is completely cremated. And this is in Auschwitz 1. 1941. That changed though didn’t it?
“In the summer of 1942 the Auschwitz Construction Agency, known as the Bauleitung, started to build four new crematoria in the Birkenau area of the camp, also known as Auschwitz II. These four crematoria housed an additional 46 ovens. Kremas II and III each had five triple muffle furnaces (15 ovens in each) while Kremas IV and V each had a single eight muffle furnace (eight ovens in each). Like the six ovens in the Auschwitz main camp, the 46 new ovens were built by the firm of Topf and Sons and used coke as fuel.”
Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp (Bloomington:1994), 157-182
That brings the total to 52 ovens. This construction began at a time when the camp only held 32,000 people. The camp never held more than 92,000 registered prisoners.
Why so many ovens?
Why with so many ovens, did they still need to conduct open air burnings at Auschwitz?
on 17 April 2009
Marc, trust me on this, if I say something nice about Htler, like he was good with dogs, or he tried a reasonable settlement with the Polish Colonels, it is likely to be true. I would not lie for the Nazis.
So Bloomington wrote on Auschwitz? A lying Jew, no doubt. Probably a Blumenthal. Then let me trundle out once again SS-Sturmbannführer Bischoff. On June 28, 1943, the good SS engineer reported total capacity of his ovens at 4,756 Jews per day. http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndcrema.html.
on 17 April 2009
First, a reply to Angelo:
I do not claim that every white is superior to every non-white. I know better. What I do argue is that whites, on the whole, are more capable than other peoples. How do I know this? Simply the historical record. Blacks, whenever white rule is removed, immediately relapse into the jungle. The pattern is consistent - and the reason is self evident. Other peoples, such as the Chinese, are extremely capable and hard working, but lack the originality and inventiveness of whites. They are very good imitators and fast learners, like the Japanese, and are not to be underestimated. Ultimately, the case for racial segregation rests on preserving the unique capacities of each particular population, not on the superiority of one population to another. If you had a race horse, you would not mate it with a plow horse. The resulting offspring would be useless as either.
Now as to those idiots Matteo and Fangbeer who are always trying to confuse issues. It is transparently obvious that neither of these two do-do heads have ever read any of the relevant revisionist research. Thinking they “know” something about it, they endlessly quote selected statistics and incomplete analyses of crematoria capacity to pose their “magic questions”. Where did they go? (Already asked and answered a thousand times.) What about this transport? What about that transport? Answer: We do not have all the records from the closing stages of the war. We do know that Jews not registered in the camp were shipped furher east into the occupied territories, not “gassed” at Auschwitz or anywhere else. We also know that very much alive Jews in the eastern camps were evacuated westward with the Gernman retreat as the war came to an end.
If Fangbeer really wants to read statistics and delve deeply into the variables (a subject much too involved for a bulletin board discussion, read “The Dissolution of Eastern European Jewry” and then write a twenty page analysis (probably beyond Fangbeer’s capacity) disagreeing with it.
on 17 April 2009
Since I am constantly peppered with the rhetorical question of: where did the Jews go, if they were not exterminated, I have decided to quote the testimony of some contemporary observors who saw, on the spot, exactly where they were going. Here are the quotations:
“Very large numbers of Jews, almost amounting to a second exodus, have been migrating from Eastern Europe to the American zones in Germany and Austria with the intention, in the majority of cases, of finally making their way to Palestine. It is clear that it is a highly organized movement, with ample funds and great influence behind it, but the Sub-Committee were unable to obtain any evidence who are the real instigators.”
H.M. Stationery Office, No. 190, November 5, 1946.
“As New York Jews during the first world war financed Trotsky, so in the second world war did New York Jews direct UNRRA supplies in vast quantities into the areas over which communism had been extended. These supplies served two purposes: they helped to buttress the economies of the countries behind the Iron Curtain and so enable the new regimes to weather the difficult period of transition, and they fed the vast migration of Jews from Eastern Europe to Palestine. The meticulous organisation of this trek, involving the complicity of almost every European government as well as the United States administration and army, was so secret that the British public knew nothing about it until one day long after it had begun General Sir Frederick Morgan blurted out the truth. Here, every disinterested student of affairs must agree, is proof positive of the existence of a supranational body exercising hidden power on a world scale.”
A.K. Chesterton: “Truth,” London, July 30, 1948.
“The second driving force is Communist Russia, without whose active collaboration the present trek could never have fructified, since most of the human beings involved in it set out under Russian facilities. It is much more than just winking on the part of the Soviet authorities. There is good reason to believe that anti-Jewish incidents are organised in the Great Russian sphere so as to put fear into the Jews and condition them into readiness to depart. But the number of Jews who trek, taken beside the vastly greater number that remain, is sufficient evidence that a desire to get rid of the Jews (who mount in the Soviet hierarchy) is not at the bottom of Russia’s behaviour. Russia wishes to make things as difficult as possible for Britain in Asia Minor (later for America if it steps in) and sees to it that plenty of young Jewish Communists, militarily trained, are among the trekkers. At the same time Russia is preparing to back the Arabs, and her ultimate aim is a local Arab-Jewish settlement under Communist auspices and protection.
Ferdinand Tuohy in “The Middle East and the Jewish Trek under the Dollar and Red Star.”
“The Sphere”, August 24, 1946.
on 17 April 2009
Since Matteo keeps trying to confuse the issue with his non-knowledge of crematoria disposal capacity, I shall once again lay out the simple facts he ignores. The German records are abundantly clear that the crematory ovens were built in the spring and early summer of 1943 in response to a typhus epidemic of summer 1942 that shut the camp down for six months. The obvious intent was to sanitarily dispose of diseased bodies, not to “gas” anyone. Thus, Catholic altar boy Matteo would have us believe that these ovens were later converted to a homicidal purpose and that they were used to kill huge numbers of Jews nowhere reflected in the death books.
The Holy Gost blesses those believe in him. “Credo quia absurdum.”
on 17 April 2009
Matteo thinks that the entire issue of crematory oven disposal capacity can be determined by quoting a single document. Gee, if that were the case, then why are entire books being written on the subject? This must be “Engineering In One Easy Lesson”
from the Gospel of the Holy Gas Chamber, no less..
on 17 April 2009
Books are written to prove that the earth was created in 4004 B.C. Young Earth theorists can be found, “reputable” nice people with Dr. appended to their name.
In this case, people write books to produce specious “glove does not fit” arguments. The objective is to create visions of dark forces at work and to bring confused angry misfits to their party.
“The kidnapper, who was videotaped leading the child away, argues that he could not possibly be the strangler, since he suffers from painful arthritis in his right hand. Moreover, he loves children, a fact confirmed by his mother.”
on 17 April 2009
That brings the total to 52 ovens. This construction began at a time when the camp only held 32,000 people. The camp never held more than 92,000 registered prisoners.
Why so many ovens?
Why with so many ovens, did they still need to conduct open air burnings at Auschwitz?
================================================
Ok, I am going to need to see a few good links proving these 52 ovens existed.
Everyone knows and the guides at Auschwitz admit the gas chambers are a RECONSTRUCTION. LOL!! Riiiight……..
There were no open air burnings at Auschwitz. There are no remains remotely close to 1.5 million (or 4 million depending on which lie you believe)
I gave YOU links proving my point, now instead of posting drivel and bullshit…….Give me some hard proof or STFU
on 17 April 2009
Tourists, thirty million of them, have filed through ‘Krema 1’ at Auschwitz, with its piteous piles of shoes, etc of the dead. This was reconstructed after the war in 1946, a fact revealed 1992 by Dr. Franciszek Piper, the Senior Curator and Director of Archives of the Auschwitz State Museum. The historic remains from the camp are such things as shower-unit huts, a swimming pool and a morgue. There was a camp orchestra, and quite a collection of pictures from the camp art-classes, although these cannot be shown in Germany or Poland, on account of laws prohibiting the doubting of the Holocaust.
The ‘gas chambers’ at Auschwitz had water pipes in their ceilings, indicating that they were designed as shower units. They generally lacked tight-seal doors, which would have been essential, even though these were easy to install – the Leuchter report cited the absence of such seals as one reason why the alleged ‘gas chambers’ would never have functioned.
Read the Red Cross report.
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2735
Around 500,000 prisoners were registered in the labour-camps of Auschwitz in Poland, of which some 130,000 died.
Bodies were there disposed of by individual cremation, and the records for coke fuel consumption over the period February 1942 – October 1943 for the cremation ovens indicate that around five thousand bodies were then burnt. That accords with the number of registered, deceased inmates, with those who had died from natural causes, who had to be cremated rather than buried because of the great typhoid epidemics. (This is the reason the Jews had their HAIR CUT OFF. For the prevention of spreading lice and Typhus to Russia where many of them were shipped)
This demonstrates that no mass-incineration of bodies took place. Josef Kramer, a supervisor at the Auschwitz camp, gave a statement after the war which is recommended by Professor Butz as probably genuine: it had 350-500 deaths per week happening over May-November 1944, all from natural causes, a very high figure because sick prisoners were sent there, and the dead were all cremated. He believed the camp held up to 100,000 prisoners, mainly Poles and Prussians.
Not only is there no trace of ‘Third Reich’ documentation for what is alleged, but no photographs exist showing anything resembling such a group-gassing procedure. Do you believe that Jews both male and female stripped then marched into the gas chambers, then were hauled out in piles? If so, are you willing to believe that neither the very-thorough Germans nor the clever Jews wanted or were able to get a single picture of this ultimate horror? Go to Google and search – you’ll find rows of emaciated bodies, dead of typhus, will that do? I don’t think so.
on 17 April 2009
It is becoming apparent that there may never be agreement about what happened not even one century ago.
I think then what we ought to do is learn from the experience from the common facts. Let us say one Jew, to keep it fair, a resident of Persia, was killed is all. One man only, killed, or even ostracized or jailed because of:
1. His race
2. His religion
3. His beliefs
4. The color of his skin
5. His political views
6. His nation of origin
7. His language
8. What he says
…this, in my opinion, would be a case of profound injustice. Where there is no justice, as my Georgian friend says, there can be no peace.
What we can learn is that we should be on our highest guard, today, more let me say AWARE OF, the very same sorts of violations of essential, inalienable human rights which exist right now, TODAY. Look at how you people hate each other over an internet conversation. The Jews stay pro-Jew and the Nazis stay pro-Nazi. What the hell gets changed this way?
The solution is, hey brother, if you want to be a Nazi, be a Nazi. If you want to be a Jew, be a Jew, narrow yourself however the hell you like. AS A SOCIETY we must allow this, as the herd always needs a herd, the sheep always a flock, hence our religions and the newest religion science. What we must NOT allow are the persecution, arrest, or murder of people who do no physical wrong, no tort, upon anyone else.
You can’t put a man in prison, or kill him, for eating or drinking or smoking this or that, for being white yellow green or blue, for being atheist theist Buddhist pagan. You cannot persecute for beliefs or amount of jewelry or makeup or loudness of voice.
Once case only, of persecution on such grounds, is allowing the existence of injustice, and setting a precedent for future crap along the same lines. Wake up from your slumbers, my friends. The very things about Holocaust, true or not, which so rile everyone, continue in principle this very day. That we allow it to continue, and sidetrack ourselves with all this wise-acring and self-proofs perhaps does point to an impending doom for us.
In short we ain’t learnt shit, buddies, by the Holocaust. We still don’t get the message.
Just remember life is short. Whether we agree with Hobbes and make is also “nasty and brutish”, this is a construct of our own design.
on 17 April 2009
“It is becoming apparent that there may never be agreement about what happened not even one century ago.”
There are two sides.
On one side the relatives of the kidnapped child, and their friends.
On the other side the mother of the accused killer, who says that her son loves children, and that he may have taken little Jimmy to the candy store, whence he was removed by green aliens.
on 17 April 2009
“Ok, I am going to need to see a few good links proving these 52 ovens existed. ”
Seriously? You’re going to try and claim that there were only 6 ovens at Auschwitz? What would constitute a “good link?” Paid invoices from Topf for the purchase, construction, and maintenance of the ovens? We got em. Photographic evidence of the ovens? We got it. Witness testimony from people who operated the ovens? We’ve got that too.
Hell, if your going to deny them, you have to disregard your own revisionist documents which discuss the other crematoriums at length.
“There were no open air burnings at Auschwitz.”
Bodies were burned in pits behind Krema 5. There is photographic evidence of this, as well as witness testimony of this. Again, if this is something you are going to deny, no amount of “good link” is going to sway your opinion on the matter.
“I gave YOU links proving my point”
What you did was post a picture of an oven, and misrepresent that photograph to mean something it did not. That was not the only oven at Auschwitz, it was not the only type of oven at Auschwitz, it was not the only method through which bodies were disposed of at Auschwitz. Therefor your conclusion that Auschwitz did not have the capacity to dispose of the claim number of bodies is completely unsupported by your reference material.
Similarly you posted evidence that a plaque at a memorial was revised, but you did not post evidence that the number the plaque contained was ever considered as part of the 6m tally. If I were to go to Auschwitz and change the number on the plaque to 8 million would that in any way invalidate your argument? I hardly doubt you would accept that.
on 17 April 2009
Matteo:
Drop the kidnapped child analogy. It is the “logic” of a simple minded idiot - and it has been refuted over and over again. Let us not continue beating a dead horse. The “kidnapped” were all over the place at wars end -and trotting off to Palestine in huge numbers. Read the posts, dummy.
on 17 April 2009
Fangbeer:
You eternally prevaricating SOB.
You have no arguments on anything. Again and again, it has been demonstrated that the crematoria at Auschwitz and the other camps were built in response to a typhus epidemic to sanitarily dispose of bodies. There is no evidence that they were ever used for anything else. That is the bottom line.
A while back you were making a big to-do about numbers. Now you say that numbers do not matter at Auschwitz placques.Why don’t you stop leaking out of both sides of your asshole “brain”?
on 17 April 2009
Indeed, numbers on a plaque mean little, since every regime likes to exaggerate its war casualties–or to minimize them, depending on the occasion.
What cannot be exaggerated are the deportations figures for every city in Europe. Those are obtained from documents created by local collaborationist police authorities and from local Nazi documents. When those kidnap victims do not return, we recognize that they have either been murdered or have been kidnapped by aliens.
on 17 April 2009
“Again and again, it has been demonstrated that the crematoria at Auschwitz and the other camps were built in response to a typhus epidemic”
It has not been demonstrated. In fact, the invoices show that the ovens were ordered for the expansion of the camp at a time when the camp only held 32,000 inmates. These ovens were not ordered in response to an epidemic. They were already in place.
Besides, you were previously touting the stellar medical care these prisoners were receiving in the camp. What in the heck were they doing dying from typhus when untreated cases only result in a 20% fatality rate?
on 17 April 2009
20% when patients are fed. When they are weakened by previous starvation, they die at an improved rate.
on 17 April 2009
“A while back you were making a big to-do about numbers.”
Your whole argument is about numbers. You don’t deny that Jews were murdered. You simply contest how many.
“Now you say that numbers do not matter at Auschwitz placques”
I said no such thing. I said state your evidence that the number on the plaque was considered in the total tally of 6 million.
on 17 April 2009
“The “kidnapped” were all over the place at wars end -and trotting off to Palestine in huge numbers. Read the posts, dummy.”
While your at it, please also post your evidence that the people who were held in captivity were the same people who were “trotting off to Palestine in (ambiguously) huge numbers.
Don’t have that?
Ohh it’s because the documents are missing. Gotcha.
It’s pretty humorous to me that the documents that don’t exist are more compelling then the ones that do.
on 17 April 2009
Fagg-Beer:
Where are your links proving this!?!? Give me something to look at, not just more bullshit from you and nothing to back it up with. I see simple logic is beyond your realm of thought. If the OFFICIAL # of 4 million got revised down to 1.5 million, don’t you think that the overall # of 6 million should drop also? Its not a hard math problem. ONCE AGAIN, 6 million minus 2.5 million = 6 million. It’s not up to me to provide the proof, the proof is on the MORONS who said 4 million then changed it to 1.5 million and STILL shout about 6 million dead!! Show me the math equation on this one, I am dying to see that one.
I am also dying to see photographic evidence of bodies burning in open pits in Krema I. PHOTOS PLEASE!!!
Matteo: Numbers on plaques mean little? Awesome, tell them to take it down altogether and tell the Jews to STFU about 6 million if numbers mean so little. BTW, if you caught your wife cheating on you 20 times but she insisted that is was HONESTLY the only times she ever cheated….Despite a lot of guys in town bragging that they banged your wife, and they had photographic evidence of this, plus her panties at their house……
How many times would she have to get caught to make you think “Well, maybe she cheated more than 20 times”?
A LIE is a LIE, no matter who tells it.
I also see you ignored my question about what Jesus had to say about the Jews……
on 17 April 2009
Bodies were burned in pits behind Krema 5. There is photographic evidence of this, as well as witness testimony of this. Again, if this is something you are going to deny, no amount of “good link” is going to sway your opinion on the matter.
===========================================
A picture of several pics of this event would help to change my mind. I like evidence, not bullshit drivel. Show me the pics please. I am not so close minded as to see a photo of something and STILL deny it happened. I am curious, thats all. I gave you evidence of my findings, backed up by links.
Now you say you have PROOF this event happened, so lets see it! Don’t worry about what I will think or say, just prove your point or STFU. Its quite simple.
on 17 April 2009
Fangbeer:
You dialectical, lying cocksucker.
Since Auschwitz was purportedly the main killing center, how could the numbers at Auschwitz not have been included in the total number of Jews supposedly murdered? What sort of nonsense is this? If you doubt that the Jews in the camps were not among those trotting off to Palestine at wars end, I will have quite a bit more to say about that later with more documented posts. For now, I will merely point out that Bergen-Belsen camp became one of the main launching points for the “Exodus” after the war under the Zionist, Joseph Rosensaft.
Your brain is as small as your asshole is expandable, Fangbeer. And no, I am not having any “homoerotic fantasies”. I am only calling your turd brain what it really is.
on 17 April 2009
Fangbeer:
The crematory ovens were in fact built in response to the typhus epidemic of 1942. No one, repeat, no one denies this. Even anti-revisionist authors like Pressac and others, admit this. If you are willing to deny a fact that all sides to this debate regard as firmly established, you may as well stick your face in a pile of Talmudic excrement right now.
We have had enough of you.
on 17 April 2009
Ok turds, Germany did not instigate WWII. Uhhhh…..that would be the Jews. I know facts suck, but here it is. Hitler issued his own money!!
http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/business/currency/news.php?q=1217011692
Naturally, the Jews didn’t like that……..so Judea (Jews) declare war on Germany in 1933
http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/jdecwar.html
on 17 April 2009
Oh…I do think that the party is over, doops.
The Germans have been maligned for decades…Frederick Toben has once again been screwed by “laws” that protect the real scumbags of this story; John Demjanjuk must still worry about triple jeopardy because he fed some dogs.
Abraham Lincoln offered greenbacks; he was MURDERED.
Adolph Hitler offered currency without debt; he was DEMONIZED.
JFK issued EO 11110; he was MURDERED.
The ovens were NOT used as a mode of extermination; the gas chambers are an out-and-out HOAX; every Holocau$t memoir has been proven a LIE.
So…having established all that…I’m gonna throw you idiots a bone.
The “conventional wisdom” is that the world was “saved” from the “evils” of the Third Reich…so, since we Goyim weren’t privy to what it was we were saved from…why don’t you, in your infinite “wisdom” [stupidity?], tell us just what would have happened if the Germans had won WWII?
Besides all of us “sprechen die Deustch”?
on 17 April 2009
We wouldn’t have discovered what a moron you are.
on 17 April 2009
“Ok turds, Germany did not instigate WWII. Uhhhh…..that would be the Jews”
That’s gotta be the most hilarious position I think anyone here has taken up to this point.
You’re saying that the Jews decided to boycott German goods, and that was justification for the Germans to invade Poland, round up all the Jews and throw them in concentration camps….to….force them to buy German goods? That’s a riot.
“The crematory ovens were in fact built in response to the typhus epidemic of 1942. No one, repeat, no one denies this. ”
Zimmerman denies this, so that’s pretty much as far as I have to go to prove this statement false.
His evidence shows that an order for 5 triple muff furnaces (15 ovens) was placed to Topf in October of 1941. This would raise the camp’s capacity to 21 ovens 6 months before the typhus outbreak that you’re talking about. Himmler came to visit in March of 1942 and ordered the construction of Auschwitz 2. The ovens were shipped and installed during that construction in the summer of 1942. The typhus outbreak peaked in August. It’s easy to see that your timing is all off.
Beyond that Zimmerman shows that the outbreak wasn’t so bad among the registered prisoners. Maybe that’s because they were the slave workforce for IG Farbin.
Dr. Tadeusz Paczula, a former Auschwitz inmate, was in the camp from 1940. He also kept the death registries for registered inmates. He later testified that for the two years following the summer of 1942, about 130,000 names were entered into the death registries. [31]
Nevertheless, the nearly 69,000 death certificates available afford researchers the opportunity to see exactly what was killing registered prisoners. It is now known on the basis of these certificates that very few prisoners died from typhus. [32] They show that only 2060 of the 68,864 deaths were from typhus. While typhus can be lethal, it need not necessarily be so. Lucie Adelsberger, a Jewish prisoner and camp doctor, got typhus, was quarantined, and resumed her duties after recovery. [33] Similarly, Ella Lingens Reiner, a German doctor, who was also a prisoner, contracted typhus and survived. [34] One of the early Auschwitz memoirs, written in 1947, recounts an episode with camp doctor Josef Mengele, later to become known as the “Angel of Death” for his medical experiments. Mengele was disturbed about the typhus epidemic. The former prisoner wrote: “Alas, typhus epidemics did rage in the camp, but at this time we had comparatively few victims. The same day he [Mengele] sent us a large quantity of serum and directed mass vaccinations.” [35] Petro Mirchuk, a Ukranian prisoner, wrote that a delousing in August 1942, the worst month of the epidemic, “eliminated the epidemic and the billions of fleas and lice ceased to exist.” [36]
But this just brings us right back to the issue that John keeps avoiding. Either the records are correct and the Germans treated the Typhus outbreak and his explanation for the ovens vanishes, or, the records are incorrect and he can’t use them to cite as a credible reference for the actual number of people who died there.
So which is it? Are they correct? Because if they are, there’s a little matter of the number of people that records show ARRIVED at Auschwitz without being registered.
on 17 April 2009
THE NEW EUROPE WITH THE SAME OLD INFLUENCE
Mark Levene’s “Jews, War and the New Europe” is a masterful study of the diplomacy of Lucien Wolf in the World War One and post-World War One era. The study is really a study of several related themes, using Wolf as the focus. Those themes are the belief of the Foreign Office that Jewish Zionism could be used as a counterweight to Jewish Bolshevism which was threatening to take Russia out of the war on the Entente side, the opposition of the assimilated Jews to the implied dual loyalty of Zionism, the conflicting but co-ordinated efforts at Paris to ensure Jewish minority rights in Eastern Europe and “fantasies” about Jewish international power that these activities implied. Lucien Wolf was obviously chosen as the key figure for the study because he was the one man who personified the struggle against the Zionists, who vehemently denied publicly the Jewish-Bolshevik charge (while privately admitting it) and who ultimately were responsible for the final shape of the minorities treaties as they eventually emerged.
Lucien Wolfe was the son of a Jewish revolutionary of the 1848 upheaval in Bohemia (like Supreme Justice Louis Brandeis) and spent most of his pre-politics career as a journalist for leading publications. It was his journalism which led him into politics. As a member of the Conjoint Committee of the Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Anglo-Jewish Association, Wolf was forever trying to influence the Foreign Office and its die-hard anti-semites with their unshakeable faith in an international Jewish conspiracy. Lucien Wolf’s chief opponent in his struggle was the Zionist from Russia, Chaim Weizmann. Weizmann, as Levene notes, was always trying to sway British officialdom with the idea that the only antidote to Jewish Marxism in Russia was to lure them with the promise of a Jewish state in Palestine. Wolf correctly noted that this maneuver was unlikely to work (in the event it did not) but somewhat less than honestly tried to deny that the Jewish-Bolshevik charge was in any sense legitimate. A particularly revealing quotation from his private papers reveals this. Responding to the Russian Jews Baron Gunzberg and Maxim Vinaver, who wanted to write a manifesto dissociating Russian Jews with bolshevism, Wolf replied:
“If we were to publish a Manifesto in the sense proposed we should only provoke a counter manifesto from Jews in favour of Bolshevism or any rate some form of revolutionary socialism. We should then have it on permanent record that there was a strong tendency in this direction in the Jewish community. Hitherto we have been able, to some extent, to obscure this fact.”
(Wolf, Paris Diary, 26 June 1919, fo. 408.)
Here we have an amazing admission of what anti-semites have long charged –that Jews were deeply involved in communism and that organized Jewry throughout the world has long labored to conceal this fact – a cover up that continues to this day. Mark Levene comments as follows:
“…as Wolf himself astutely noted, to bring the issue into the open would have been to allow ‘all the unhappy facts about Jewish participation in Bolshevism to be raked over afresh and exaggerated.’ Since before the Bolshevik seizure of power in November 1917, right-wing papers in Britain, including the “Morning Post” and “The Times”, had been eager to note the prominence of Jews in leading Bolshevik positions in Russia and in the abortive revolutions in Central Europe at the end of the war. The message was clear; the attack on “Western civilization’ was Jewish-led, and synonymous with Jews generally…Assuming that Jews were Bolsheviks and Bolsheviks Jews, the conspiracy theory must have seemed quite logical to those already mentally predisposed in that direction.” (p.246.)
As has been noted by many authors, Lucien Wolf was the man most responsible for the “minorities treaties” at Paris. It should be noted at outset that the victorious Entente powers were not all that enthusiastic about the concept. They were preparing to dismember defeated Germany and Austria-Hungary and to place millions of Germans, Austrians and Hungarians under the control of foreign nationalities. To support minority rights as a concept then, might well provide a tool for resurgent German irredentism. (As indeed it did, under Adolf Hitler.) Why, then, did the Entente go along with “minority rights”? Basically, to please the very Jews that the English had wooed so assiduously because of the prevalent belief in Jewish power to influence world events. That there was indeed, a basis for this belief is supplied by Mr. Levine himself. He writes:
“The conspicuousness in Paris of Jews in positions of seemingly great authority and influence lent credence to this belief. In the Italian delegation there was Baron Sonnino, in the French, Louis Klotz, the minister of finance; in the British, Edwin Montagu. The interpreter to the Big Four was another Jew, Professor Paul Mantoux. At the top of the list, however, were the American Jews. It will be remembered how during the war, the British considered the Zionist sympathies of leading Jewish Americans such as Judge Brandeis, Felix Frankfurter, and Louis Epstein to be of such considerable importance as to merit the formulation of a pro-Zionist declaration… Now in Paris there were not only Wolf’s American opposite numbers, Marshall, Mack and Cyrus Adler, but also Jews actually in the American delegation – including Henry Morgenthau, the financier, and Oscar Strauss, the chairman of the US Commission ‘for the Enforcement of Peace’. It was surely no accident that many of the new states seeking recognition, notably weaker ones, like Lithuania and the Ukraine, sought to maximize their appeal and accessibility to these people and hence to the conference itself by including Jews in their own delegations ranks. It explains moreover, suggests Shmuel Ettinger, why they went to such lengths to give constitutional and administrative expression to the Jewish national councils which had developed spontaneously within their boundaries.” (pp.238-239)
Wolf was confronted with many adversaries at Paris. One of the most formidable was the Committee of Jewish Delegations, the purely Zionist organization claiming to represent all the Jews of Eastern Europe. These Zionists were adamant that a Jewish “international nation” existed and clamored for its admission to the League of Nations. Thus, in the Paris sessions of April 5 and 6, 1919 Levene writes:
“Rabbi Thon of Cracow, Menachem Ussishkin, Leo Motzkin, and others were all uncompromising in their demands, by which together amounted to a national Jewish parliament elected by the Jewish communities of each state, representation of each in a World Jewish Congress, and admission of the Jewish nation to the League of Nations.” (p.223.)
Wolf opposed these demands as too extreme and as tending to support the charges of the anti-semites. Lucien Wolf had also to contend with certain of the delegates of the American Jewish Congress, who tended to side with the eastern Zionists. These conflicts came to a heads in the Polish minority treaty debate. Wolf, working with the Englishman, James Headly-Morham, was able to work out a compromise whereby the Jews would be able to observe their Saturday Sabbath but trading on Christian Sunday would be prohibited. Yiddish, as a language of instruction would be allowed in the primary schools but in the secondary schools Polish would remain the language of instruction. Wolf failed in some respects, however. The minorities treaties would guarantee the rights of Jews already citizens in Poland but would not apply to Jews who had fled, who had been expelled or were refugees from the war. Moreover, there was no mechanism for enforcement by the League, a problem that would pre0ccupy Wolf for years afterward.
Lucien Wolf had for years been an opponent of Zionism. He had for a brief time flirted with the idea as a measure of expediency during the war but remained one of its most bitter opponents when the debate over Lord Balfour’s declaration was in progress in the summer of 1917. Indeed, he had been responsible for the publication of a letter in May 1917 in the “London Times” laying out the Jewish objections to Zionism, a letter which led to severe repercussions within Jewish ranks and the consequent dissolution of the Conjoint Committee of the Board of Deputies and the Anglo-Jewish Association. Wolf led the battle against the Zionists but largely prevailed with his agenda over the minorities treaties.
Mark Levene is at great pains to pretend that the immense power that Jews were exerting at the Paris Peace Conference was the product of a unique combination of historical circumstances allied to “fantasies” of Jewish influence in the world. This whitewash ignores provable facts. Although it is extraneous to the thesis of his volume it is a known fact that “powerless” Jews English and German Jews got the British Empire to attack the Dutch of South Africa to gain access to the gold and diamonds of that country. By 1947 “powerless” Zionist Jewry was ramming through partition of Palestine resolutions in the General Assembly of the United Nations by staging strong-arm tactics. Today, “powerless” Jews are bogging the United States down in a pointless war in Iraq for Israel’s sole benefit. It should be obvious, then, that the power exercised by Jewry at the time of the First World War was not based solely on particular circumstances, as Mark Levene pretends, but was part of a continuum of power that was already evolving and that has evolved considerably since. “War, Jews and the New Europe: The Diplomacy of Lucien Wolf, 1914-1919” is a highly researched volume written with a definite apologetic slant. The reader may or may not accept the slant but the information contained within its pages shall allow him to formulate his own conclusions.
“War, Jew and the New Europe
The Diplomacy of Lucien Wolf
1914-1919
Mark Levene
Published for the
Littman Library
By
Oxford University Press
on 17 April 2009
ron…”We wouldn’t have discovered what a moron you are.”
How can you get that out with your tongue on fang’s bunghole, asshat?
Once again…NO ANSWER.
bungbeer…rephrasing the question to suit your needs doesn’t work when the original state of the question is plain for all to see.
Admit it…the Germans were maligned, murdered and ripped off of monies…and why is it that the records are exclusive and can’t possibly be both correct and incorrect; after all, the jews acted as BOTH COMMUNISTS and BOLSHEVIKS, right?
Whites have been forbidden to enjoy being proud to be so.
on 17 April 2009
Fangbeer keeps lying through his asshole.
First, as to the cause of death. Does Fangbeer perhaps know that typhus causes all kinds of health problems, such as heart attacks when the body can no longer stand the stress of constant shaking? Does it occur to him that most of these heart attacks and other causes of death were the direct product of the disease? Next, Fangbeer quotes Doctor Mengele on how mass vacinations reduced deaths from typhus. Well now, Fangbeer, you eternal bullshit artist, why would the Germans have inoculated and put back to work inmates they were simultaneously “gassing” and exterminating? For a guy who accuses others of talking outr of both sides of their mouths, you are doing a wonderful job of it yourself, you lying little cocksucker.
And, oh yes, Fangbeer. Does it occur to you that maybe a typhus edpidemic would require an increase in crematoria capacity to deal with the increased number of bodies? We all know how you hate “cut and paste”, Fangbeer. Why don’t you do everybody a favor by cutting and pasting the Mattogno -Zimmerman complete debates available on line? Then everyone can see what an innovative, lying SOB you really are.
You are really going to love it when I start posting quotes from post WW2 British officials on how Jews were using former German camps as launching points for their trek to Palestine. I thought the Germans exterminated them. Where did they come from, Fangbeer, you professional prevaricator?
on 17 April 2009
Is stormfront.org offering half-price memberships or something?
Between John having his speculation rebutted and replying with an article from a 90 year old comic book, and Hanover whining about how the Jew is keeping the Whiteman down, I’m surprised the rest of the merry gnng hasn’t shown up, David Duke in tow.
That’s better, Han. Bonus points for theories on a Jewish conspiracy, redundancy, and homoerotic fantasy. Don’t worry, you’ll be sped up into Valhalla when the Racial Holy War starts. Just remember to stay out of the cities, and buy land in the Northwest, along with lots of beans and guns.
on 17 April 2009
Since I tire of Fangbeer and his endless twist the facts pseudo-science, I here provide the relevant researc studies for those who want to know the facts. Rest assured that Mr,. Anal Brain shall never read nor understand them.
http://www.vho.org/store/USA/bresult.php?AUTHOR=Mattogno
on 17 April 2009
Because Germar Rudolf and Carlo Mattongo are such unbiased, reputable historians…
on 18 April 2009
Fagg-Beer,
I am getting a little tired of BEGGING you to provide me with proof of things you promised you had proof of 10 posts ago. Try doing that and proving me wrong before jumping subjects, ok?
Try and keep up, retard. Just because your IQ level is on par with Forrest Gump, it does not mean that the rest of us are on your level.
Take your ADD meds, and find those photos for me, ok? Lets see if you can do that, then we will move on to bigger things like telling you there is no Easter bunny and Santa Claus really dont exist.
Thank you
on 18 April 2009
Photos. That’s the only way to document history. Right?
Do you need them in a pop up book?
I’ll get working on that right away.
Oh wait. Here they are.
http://www.holocaust-history.org/see-no-evil/
on 18 April 2009
The latest bullshit story!!
Illinois opens $45 million dollar Holocaust museum
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-holocaust-museum-openingapr16,0,846662.story
LMFAO!! Apparently, its still 6 million!!!!
http://www.topix.net/forum/source/chicago-tribune/TFQB7LO4DH1PTHSJJ/p5#lastPost
on 18 April 2009
The only people who can understand aerial photos are professionals. For me, the evidence is in the fact that ten millions political opponents of Hitler’s New Order, as well as Serbs, Gypsies, Poles, Jews, and Russian POW’s, were sent to camps run by the Germans and their allies, where 90% perished. We know they perished because their friends and relatives witnessed it.
The story that they went to Israel is as realistic as the story that German POW’s in Russia did not return because they married pretty Russian girls. No, they did not return because they were killed in Stalin’s Gulag. Stalin did not need gas chambers, starvation did the trick.
on 18 April 2009
Matteo, unlike his compatriots, is only half stupid. He understands Stalin’s Russia but refuses to understand Hitler’s Germany. No Matteo, 90% of ten million did not perish in Hitler’s camps. You get your facts from the TV set.
Contrary to your assertions, a great many of the non-exterminated Jews did wind up in Israel after the war. You obviously disregarded the documented statements I posted about Jewish population movements out of Europe after the war because they conflict with what you want to believe.
I shall shortly post more such evidence, “Believe It Or Not”.
on 18 April 2009
“Of course, there had been organized Zionist propaganda in all the camps, organised by the inmates and organised by the representatives of the American Joint Distribution Committee and the Jewish Agency or by members of the British Jewish Brigade or by sympathetic UNRRA officials. The delegations which had met Crum and Leggett (members of the Ango-American Committee) in the American zone all made the same speeches and carried banners with the same slogans. In the British zone a central Jewish committee, which was indubitably Zionist, had been established with its headquarters at Belsen, and managed all the educational and group activities of the Jews.”
Richard Crossman
“Palestine Mission”, p. 87
From the American magazine, “Nesweek”, September 8, 1947:
“There’s nothing haphazard about the flow of Jewish D.P.’s across Europe and to Palestine. Actually, there’s a secret and highly efficient short-wave radio network enabling Jewish Zionist leaders on both sides of the Atlantic to co-ordinate legal and illegal movements of Jews throughout Europe, sailings of refugee ships and activities of the Palestine underground. Powerful secret transmitters in New York, Bremerhaven and Tel Aviv operate 24 hours a day broadcasting instructions and reports to smaller stations in London and Frankfurt. The Frankfurt station, believed to be in the nearby D.P. camp Zeilsheim, is the key relaying point for two mobile transmitters which roam the Russian and U.S. zones of Germany. Incidentally, these are former U.S. Signal Corps mobile units liquidated in Paris for 125 dollars. The network usually operates in code, but sometimes uses Russian language voice-transmissions in Germany.”
Do you still think, Matteo, that claims of a vast Jewish “Exodus” to Palestine after the war are a fantasy? There will be more posts on this subject. They might be termed “lost and found”.
on 18 April 2009
To all my critics:
It has now been abundantly documented that there was, in fact, a vast transfer of very much alive Jews out of Europe at wars end to Palestine. This transfer took place with the knowledge and cooperation of: :
(1) Jews in New york City with the Jewish commissars of Russia and Eastern Europe
(2) the UNRRA ( the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration);
(3) the assistance of the American and British military authorities;
(4) the collaboration of the Jew infested western democratic governments;
(5) the collaboration of the Zionists with the other groups.
(6) all this was done behind a screen of media suppression
All of this requires a transcontinental power to which all the other groups are subordinate and acting in collaboration. Care to explain it, shit-heads?
.
)
on 18 April 2009
Of course there was an effort to bring the survivors of the camps to Israel, directed at Jewish survivors. It worked on Jews who were afraid of going home to places where they had suffered discrimination and pogroms, mainly in Eastern Europe. It did not work for Jews in places where they were well accepted and were well integrated in the different nations, such as Italy, Czechoslovakia, Holland, or Yugoslavia.
Those survivors went back home, and found that very few friends and relatives had returned, a discovery shared by non-Jewish prisoners. Ten million entered the camps, less than 10% walked out. In comparison, 97% of British and American POW’s in German hands, came out of their camps alive.
on 18 April 2009
Travis
I think you may be a little off beam in you knowledge of history.
For example, you assert :
“By the way, Hitler was a Catholic Christian also.”
Maybe by birth but ha hated christians, as noted by Goebels:
“The Führer is deeply religious, but deeply anti-Christian. He regards Christianity as a symptom of decay.”
Hitler favoured Islam as it was more war- like (Mohammed was a warrior who chopped off heads)
on 18 April 2009
Ha ha ha ha ha ha
Karl Moutox wrote:
“John Thames, you are amazing…and, relentless! ”
I suspect John Thales is Karl Moutox. The old “sock puppet trick”. Surely there cannot be two such similar crazy loons……
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
on 18 April 2009
“I will now be abandoning this site for a few weeks to read another valuable reference work from the library loan system.”
-john thames 14 April
Does this guy have any credibility left?
on 18 April 2009
John Thales
I am just catching up on your genius argument:
1. You auggest that Winston Churchill was wrong about the holocaust because he was paid by the jews. What is your evidence for this? He actually recieved decoded Enigma transmissions that was the first confirmation that the holocaust was under way in Russia.
2. You said that Simon Wiesenthal was the best evidence to contadict Winston Churchill. I accept Simon Wiesenthal as a reliable witness. He also confirms that the holocaust happened.
(I thought you were meant to be a holocaust denier, not a holocaust confirmer?)
3. The Nazis themselves have confessed to attempting to exterminate the jews. The initial figure of six million was the tetimony of the official Nazi Party historian. Also Hoess the camp camandant at Auschwitz has testified to the use of gas chambers.
So this is your “brilliant” argument? An unsubstantiated claim that Churchill was paid by the jews, the introduction of a witness who contradicts your claim. And still not one good piece of evidence……What a prize genius you are………..
Oh and the use of sock puppets to congratulate yourself, is a little bit embarrassing…….even for you.
on 18 April 2009
Matteo:
“As the dog returns to his vomit, the fool (you) returns to his folly. ”
You simply ignore every purely factual statement that interferes with what you want to believe. All the statements adduced speak of a vast flood of refugees, not a trickle of survivors. This fact would make you very suspicious of the entire story, if you could think (you can’t). Your assertions that only 10% of the internees in the German camps returned or survived is flatly false. Are you picking the number out of thin air Matteo?
The German prisoners in Stalin’s gulags did not return because they perished. The Jews in the German camps not merely survived for the most part, they were everywhere at wars end and were running to all points on the globe (already thoroughly documented). You seem not to realize that you have undermined your own argument, Matteo, by conceding that the Jews had good reasons for moving around when the war ended.
The real problem here is psychological. You do not want to face the implications of the hoax. There is a Jewish power in the world capable of deception on an international scale. Rather than deal with the fact, you prefer to stick your head up your ass and go on beieving. Take comfort in your religion, Matteo. God loves fools; that is why he made so many of them.
on 18 April 2009
Lee:
You are a fucking idiot who badly needs an education. I do not have the time to give it to you.
(1) Simon Wiesenthal admitted back in 1974-5 that there were no extermination camps in the Reich proper. It is in the jornal, “Books and Bookmen”. I have already answered this argument; I will not repeat myself again.
(2) It has been documented by both David Irving and professor Michael Cohen in his book, “Churchill and the Jews”, that Winston was in the pay of Jewish financial interests. One such was the group known as “The Focus” (or the Anti-Nazi League”), headed by Sir Bernard Whaley-Cohen, head of British Shell. Again, this has already been answered. Are you too much of a dim wit to read previous posts, Lee?
(3) You continue to argue facts not in dispute. It is already known that the Germans executed large numbers of Jews in Russia, for reasons already elaborated. Go back and read it. It might give you something useful to do.
on 18 April 2009
Ron:
You pious piece of media induced stupidity:
Has it occured to you that I can do two things at once? ( I wrote the review of “War, Jews and the New Europe” while taking you shit-for-brains apart on the computer.)
on 18 April 2009
http://www.faem.com/david/commu-5.htm
A verg good analysis of the Jewish revolutionary mentality.
on 18 April 2009
Still trolling here, Mr Thames? Well that doesn’t surprise me. After all, one of the features of the internet is that it provides the likes of you with an alternative to a life. It is also far easier for pseudo-scholars like yourself to propagate your crap online than it is to go through the hard work and effort of proper, archive-based research, and the submission of accurately and extensively researched articles and monographs, the findings of which are peer-reviewed and independently verified by qualified scholars. No wonder the far right hates academia.
Incidentally, I was able to find some stark material amongst the ENIGMA decrypts held at the National Archives in Kew. This includes a telegram dated 15th January 1943 detailing the results of ‘Operation Reinhard’, listing the numbers of those exterminated in Belzec, Majdanek, Sobibor and Treblinka by 31st December 1942 - 1,274,166 people, in case you were wondering.
This - and other findings - will be the subject of a detailed post I’ll submit to the Counterknowledge editors. It will be yet another reminder of the reason why the ‘deniers’ are losing the battle for history - because their critics are the ones who have the weight of evidence (archival, testimonial etc) on their side. I hope it makes you choke on your fritos.
In the meantime, enjoy your weekend - which I suspect will be spent entirely behind a keyboard.
on 18 April 2009
John Thales
1. I think the book you are referring to says “His (Churchills )sponging induced grotesque fantasies that he was in the pay of “International Jewry” ”
So the book you quote as evidence says you are a fantasist. You are providing only evidence (as if any were needed) that you are a fantasist.
2. Simon Wiesenthal did say that there were no extermination camps for jews in Germany, they were all outside of Germany (i.e Aushcwitz). The German camps were used to exterminate political prisoners and the elderly. The German camps had only small gas chambers, that were the prototypes for Auschwitz.
I am glad we can agree Simon Wiesenthal is a reliable witness, he confirms the holocaust took place. You cannot take his word on one topic and ignore it on another. That is the art of debate, that you need to learn
3. You seem to be confused on what you are arguing. The figure of six million jews exterminated that I quoted came from the testimony of the official Nazi historian. Unless I am mistaken you are disputing the six million figure?
Also, the testimony of Hoess, the Auschwitz comandant confirmed the use of gas chambers. Unless I am mistaken you are disputing the existence of the gas chambers?
Care to contradict these witnesses? With good evidence?
You have not provided one credible shred of evidence to deny the Holocaust. You have only provided evidence that you are a confused fantacist.
on 18 April 2009
John Thales
By the way. Quick piece of advice. When you try and find some real evidence, make sure it backs up your claims rather than contradicts them….
Oh yeah. And dont log on as somebody else i.e. “Karl Metoux” and write about yourself:
“John Thames, you are amazing…and, relentless! It seems your attackers only energize you! You, are out numbered but not out maneuvered. They demand your source of information…references, etc… that’s not enough it’s incomplete… you give them more”
on 18 April 2009
Your credibility has nothing to do with multi-tasking, but everything to with what you say being untrustworthy - see my earlier excerpts of your quotes.
on 18 April 2009
John also does not address Hoess, the kommandant at Auschwitz, nor does he address Himmler who brags about the amount of Jews killed.
Also, I have seen no evidence of mythical Jewish settlements in Siberia, nor movement to Israel on the scale that he mentions. The whole “They went on holiday” canard is weak
Also, what was the Fuehrer, kind and benevolent in his disposition, doing rounding up German and Polish Jews? Certainly not to deport them, or they’d be gone
I will not take any post seriously that is filled with insults, or is compiled with newspaper articles that predate 1940
on 18 April 2009
Marc and Lee:
I have nothing to do with Karl Mantoux, whoever he may be.
Now, either learn something about the subject you presume to discuss or shut the fuck up. The Holocaust is not to be proved by what some witness “said” in a kangaroo court. As to the rest of it, it has already been demolished a thousand times over.
on 18 April 2009
Lee,
I dont have pics of Hitler in a church. I can only go by what he said. I posted that earlier.
He said more times than I care to remember that he was a Christian doing the Lords work.
on 19 April 2009
About 1955 I went to hear the lecture of Piero Caleffi, an anti-Nazi organizer. The Gestapo found an article he had written for an illegal publication and he was sent to Mauthausen. He wrote a book, “Si fa presto a dire fame.”
One of the Kapos, convicted German criminals, who run the individual barracks, accused him of being a Jew. He was able to prove otherwise–survival would have been much more difficult if he had been circumcised. That camp specialized in “labor death”, in which the enemies of the Reich were worked to death with an 800 calorie diet
Anyway, as he was being tortured, Piero Caleffi saw on the belt buckle a drop of blood of his. It had an inscription,”Gott mit Uns”, “God’s on our side.”
on 19 April 2009
Matteo:
While you are at it, why don’t you tell us about handless Belgian babies, human soap and lamp shades and crucified Canadians, too? There have been so many tall tales about Nazi and German brytality I marvel at your credulity.
on 19 April 2009
Let us try this one, guys.
Remember the Jewish expulsions of Europe during the Middle Ages and Renaissance? No one claims that because the Jews were expelled that they were murdered. It is also known where they went. The Jews expelled from Spain went to the Ottoman empire and the Spanish Netherlands. The Jews expelled from the other European countries went to new countries. No suggestion that they were the victims of an extermination program were made, then or since. The National Socialist deportations began before the war and continued during the war. Many hundreds of thousands were killed or shot in Russia. But, despite the harsh war time conditions, all we have is a deportation policy, exactling of the kind sanctioned by the Catholic Church and monarchs of Europe for centuries.
Now, specifically for Matteo. Many children disappear each year in the United States, never to be heard from again. Can we therefore conclude, Matteo, that they were ritually murdered by Jews for their blood? No? Then please do not tell me that because many Jews disappeared into the Soviet Union ahead of the German advance or trekked to Palestine and the Americas after the war that therefore they were all murdered.
on 19 April 2009
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v10/v10p195_Nordling.html
Gentlemen:
Here we have a very good demographic/statistical study by the renowned Swedish demographer, Carl O. Nordling, which should give a pretty good overall view, based on a representative statistical sampling, of what really happened to Europe’s Jews during WW2. It is not overly long, it is exceedingly wel-reasoned and documented and (please note) Nordling does not challenge the myth of the “gas chambers”. Read it carefully and give it considerable thought. You will see that it is all consistent with what I have been telling you.
I do not anticipate that the lame brains like Marc and Lee will be impressed but maybe the semi-rational Matteo will, at long last, begin to grasp the point.
on 19 April 2009
Can’t answer my question so your just going to settle to making a few petty insults, and some claims that the Nazis weren’t brutal?
IHR? Come on. That would be like me using Krasnaya Gazeta for figures on Nazi atrocities.
Are your favourite titles from Historical Review Press on backorder or something? What about your 90 year old newspaper articles that explain the hidden Zionist human pipeline? What about the supressed information that only Zundel, Germar Rudolf and Carlo Mattongo really know?
on 19 April 2009
Funny, I thought that the record tells us that the arrival of the Crusaders in town often resulted in the extermination of the local Jews. Same deal in Jerusalem.
I don’t know, you neo-Nazis seem so much softer than the pro-Nazi kids of my days. You make an effort to be kind and thoughtful and generous towards the Jews.
This is not personal, of course, but my barbaric school mates might call you Nazi softies, or even Nazi wimps.
on 19 April 2009
Once again “They speak but say nothing.”
on 19 April 2009
The Anglo-Saxons are the direct, genetic descendants of the twelve tribes of Israel. The Assyrians had deported Beth-Omri (the House of King Omri, king of the 10 northern tribes) to the plains of Media, just south of the Caucasus Mountains (Modern day Georgia). These deportations occurred between 745-715 B.C. These people became known as Scythians and Saccae before and during their migrations north through the Caucasus. Hence: Beth-Omri = Beth-Sak (House of Isaac) = the Caucasians = the Anglo-Saxons. “In Isaac shall thy seed be called.” — Gen. 21:12. Note that the Jews are not now, nor were they ever, known by the name of Isaac. Before these deportations, around 1500 B.C., large contingents of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin had already migrated from Egypt to Britain and Ireland before the Exodus. These two tribes of the House of Judah were merged back into the House of Isaac by the Saxon King, William the Conqueror. Completely separate and distinct are the Jews, who are composed of two distinct groups: the Ashkenazim and the Sephardim. The Sephardim are the older branch who are descended from the mixed marriages of Judahites and Edomites from about 150 B.C to 70 A.D.
These people were not dispersed until Jerusalem was destroyed by the Roman army under General Titus. It is to these people that Jesus said, “Ye are not of my sheep.” — John 10:26. The Sephardim are a mixed stock, including black African and many other racial admixtures, as the Jews themselves admit. As is evidenced in John 8:31-44, as well as in Matt. 23:35, where Yahshua accused them of the bloodshed of Abel: “That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel.” This can only mean that they are the descendants of Cain, who slew Abel. The Sephardim, therefore, have no claim to the Davidic inheritance because they are the children of the forbidden mixed marriages. They are not pure Israelites.
We trace their origins back to Cain, whose father was the Serpent in the Garden. Their families and tribes, such as the Canaanites, Edomites, Hittites, and Amelekites, have historically been the enemies of true Israel, as they are today. The Khazar Jews (the Ashkenazim) are of primarily Turko/Mongolian descent. The Khazar tribes never claimed to be Shemites. Rather, they claimed descent from Japheth, Shem’s brother. The twelve tribes were all Shemites because their father, Jacob/Israel was a Shemite. The Ashkenazi people, who comprise 90-95% of the Jewish people today, never were and are not now Shemites at all. They are Japhethites, Turks and Mongols. They converted to the religion of Judaism around 800 A.D. and did not have one drop of Shemitic blood in their veins! These facts make it very clear that the Modern Jew has absolutely no biblical claim to the land of Palestine. Both groups are impostors who wish to steal the inheritance of True Israel.
on 19 April 2009
Aww, Johnny Boy ran out of material so he’s back to WikiQuote. Still no answer to my question…
on 19 April 2009
@Travis. Now you’re using a storybook about man’s imaginary friend to prove that one group of people is better than another, and this somehow means that the Holocaust didn’t happen?
on 19 April 2009
I do not intend to open another thread here by arguing whether whites are really descended from the ancient Israelites. ( I rather doubt it.) I intend to keep arguing that six million Jews did not die in “gas chambers” or by any other means.
on 19 April 2009
Marc:
You stupid asshole. What question? What do I have to say about witnesses and their testimonies at Nuremberg? Go back and read what I have already posted on the topic. I see no reason to repeat myself to a born stupid fuck.
on 19 April 2009
Travis
“I dont have pics of Hitler in a church. I can only go by what he said. I posted that earlier.”
I don’t know how to break this to you, but politicians lie. Hitler hated Christians such as yourself
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler’s_religious_beliefs
In 1941, a secret report compiled by Protestants stated that children in Germany were being brought up minus a Christian education.
Priests were also arrested and taken to concentration camps.
Since you have been “fooled”, I guess that makes you officially a “fool”?
Also even John Thames disputes your racial theories. Ans he says he is very clever…..though yet to demonstrate it.
on 19 April 2009
John “Mantoux” Thales
“Here we have a very good demographic/statistical study by the renowned Swedish demographer, Carl O. Nordling”
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha……..
Is this, after all your drivel, the best “evidence” you can come up with?
Care to tell us where the “renowned Swedish Demographer” studied to gain his qualifications, what peer reviewed papers he has published and which chairs he held?
I think he is actually a Swedish architecht by profession.
Come on this is pathetic even by your standards. Surely you must have something better than this?
on 19 April 2009
re. Welch’s “fresh evidence”:
Incidentally, I was able to find some stark material amongst the ENIGMA decrypts held at the National Archives in Kew. This includes a telegram dated 15th January 1943 detailing the results of ‘Operation Reinhard’, listing the numbers of those exterminated in Belzec, Majdanek, Sobibor and Treblinka by 31st December 1942 - 1,274,166 people, in case you were wondering.”
My internet search of the archives finds no such document, although I am sure Mr. Welch wouldn’t make something like this up. Furthermore most Enigma decrypts could be performed in a matter of hours once the were decoded in Poland. I would like to see this document.
“Operation Reinhard” was a key element for the prosecution at Nuremberg, and relied on the testimony of the certain shady characters reporting “verbal orders” from detached perspectives. Here for example is one piece of “very incriminating evidence”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hoefletelegram.jpg
Here is the supposed “translation”; knowing a bit of German, I find this not quite accurate, but here it is. How does our interpreter make the leading assumption based on the materials he provides?
“Telegram from deputy commander of Aktion Reinhard, listing number of arrivals in the extermination camps. Translation:
Letter and 14 day report year-end report
Camp i.d. to 31.12.1942 1942 total
L ? Lublin 12761 24733
B ? Belzec 0 434508
S ? Sobibor 515 101370
T ? Treblinka 10335 713555 (*)
total: 23611 1274166
(*) note - the original reads 71355, but this is probably a typo as 713555 gives the correct total”
Why the note, the extra digit? What else could be a typo? Why would this be evidence of anything more than incarceration? My bet, Mr. Welch, is your document is more of the same.
Here, another example of the type of “most damning incriminating evidence” used at Nuremberg as evidence of “holocaust”, a speech by Himmler. I am going to intersperse, in brackets, comments, because clearly, if you read German, you understand that this speech is not about Nazis exterminating Jews; it is about addressing the issue about certain Nazi Germans who were executed by other Nazi Germans for either taking “commandeered” possessions of Jews for themselves, or who otherwise abused their Jewish prisoners, did not follow the established protocol. He is addressing the rumors that the SS was robbing people, and showing by the firing squad execution of said Germans that this act was justified:
Himmler:
“I also want to refer here very frankly to a very difficult matter. We can now very openly talk about this among ourselves, and yet we will never discuss this publicly….”
[In other words, we should have no reason to, yet we act like we are embarrassed to discuss the situation publicly.]
“Just as we did not hesitate on June 30, 1934, to perform our duty as ordered and put comrades who had failed up against the wall and execute them, we also never spoke about it, nor will we ever speak about it. Let us thank God that we had within us enough self-evident fortitude never to discuss it among us, and we never talked about it. Every one of us was horrified, and yet every one clearly understood that we would do it next time, when the order is given and when it becomes necessary.”
[In other words, as we, the state, have executed good Aryan traitors because of their actions, and should not feel guilty about killing anyone that is a threat to the order of the state.]
“I am now referring to the evacuation of the Jews, to the extermination of the Jewish people.”
[This is better read "evacuation and elimination..."]
“This is something that is easily said: ‘The Jewish people will be exterminated’, says every Party member, ‘this is very obvious, it is in our program — elimination of the Jews, extermination, a small matter’….”
[So, Himmler is analogizing the treatment of the renegade party members with that of the "Jewish problem", and now citing the COMMON THINKING that this is what they are trying to do. That he is arguing against this very presumption is to me clear by what follows:
" And then they turn up, the upstanding 80 million Germans, and each one has his decent Jew. They say the others are all pigs, but this particular one is a splendid Jew."
[Clearly he is noting that although most of these "herd Germans" agree that Jews are a problem, they all nevertheless know good Jews, whom they wish to exempt from arrest, confiscation of merchandise, and so on.]
“But none has observed it, endured it. Most of you here know what it means when 100 corpses lie next to each other, when there are 500 or when there are 1,000. To have endured this and at the same time to have remained a decent person — with exceptions due to human weaknesses — has made us tough, and is a glorious chapter that has not and will not be spoken of.”
[Where is the glory? In the killing? It seems to me no, the glory is in having to suffer, in the same way when they had to kill their own, when they had to kill the traitorous Jews. Am I missing something here? Evidence of killing Jews plotting against Germany is no different than every British or American strike in the Middle East; they consider these adversaries enemies of the State. In wartime, I don't find this so far fetched an idea.]
“Because we know how difficult it would be for us if we will had Jews as secret saboteurs, agitators and rabble rousers in every city, what with the bombings, with the burden and with the hardships of the war.”
[In other words, being at War (notice NOT with Jews per se), we can't have domestic terrorists.]
“If the Jews were still part of the German nation, we would most likely arrive now at the state we were at in 1916/17…We have taken away the riches that they had, and I have given a strict order, which Obergruppenführer Pohl has carried out, we have delivered these riches completely to the Reich, to the State.”
[This flies directly in the face of the Zionist interpretation that these goods were commandeered for personal gain. In what follows, the ORDER for soldiers to remit ALL possessions of exiled Jews to the State is being explained...]
“A number of SS men have offended against this order. There are not very many, and they will be dead men - WITHOUT MERCY! We have the moral right, we had the duty to our people to do it, to kill this people who wanted to kill us. But we do not have the right to enrich ourselves with even one fur, with one Mark, with one cigarette, with one watch, with anything. That we do not have. Because at the end of this, we don’t want, because we exterminated the bacillus, to become sick and die from the same bacillus.”
[A clear order, upon penalty of death, to turn these confiscated (drug war, anyone?) goods over to the State...where is the killing of Jews in concentration camps attested to here?]
“I will never see it happen, that even one bit of putrefaction comes in contact with us, or takes root in us. On the contrary, where it might try to take root, we will burn it out together. But altogether we can say: We have carried out this most difficult task for the love of our people. And we have taken on no defect within us, in our soul, or in our character.”
As clear as rain is it that this speech was made to justify the taking of Jewish possessions, the confiscation of what were deemed to be contraband.
These sorts of speeches, being given as evidence of mass gassings in concentration camps is no evidence at all.
http://www.ilord.com/bp-decrypts.html
We have taken nothing from them for ourselves. A few, who have offended against this, will be [judged] in accordance with an order, that I gave at the beginning: He who takes even one Mark of this is a dead man.
on 19 April 2009
Lee:
You adolscent dick brain.
Instead of addressing the substance of the argument, you instead quibble about qualifications. That is because obviously you cannot rebut the substance of the argument. I believe I went into great detail about the “qualifications” of the academic historians of World War One who all got it completely wrong.
Why don’t you do us all a favor and drink beer at the ball game. You are too much of an imbecile to have opinions on anything substantive.
on 19 April 2009
Angelo’s criticisms are very well taken. Try reading them, Lee.
on 19 April 2009
As a “character witness”, I would like to call attention to something very peculiar in the article in Wikipedia on Himmler. it is this blatant attempt to question Himmler’s sexuality:
“Himmler was pursuing a chaste lifestyle when he became interested in a young girl who was the daughter of a store owner. In his diary, he compares his initial encounter with her as like finding himself a sister. Later he experienced rejection when he let her know his true feelings. His difficulties with women persisted throughout his life. His feelings towards women are laid bare in a diary excerpt:
[The excerpt]:
“A proper man loves a woman on three levels: as a dear child who is to be chided, perhaps even punished on account of her unreasonableness, and who is protected and taken care of because one loves her. Then as wife and as a loyal, understanding comrade who fights through life with one, who stands faithfully at one’s side without hemming in or chaining the man and his spirit. And as a goddess whose feet one must kiss, who gives one strength through her feminine wisdom and childlike, pure sanctity that does not weaken in the hardest struggles and in the ideal hours gives one heavenly peace.[11]”
That cited source 11 is Breitman, Richard (2004). Himmler and the Final Solution: The Architect of Genocide.
Now I wish to say first that what he has said about “how a proper man loves a woman” is absolutely one of the most brilliant things I have ever read, at once poetic, mystical, accurate by experience, and immensely intriguing philosophically. I thank this discussion’s course for allowing me to read it.
The question here, is, what justifies this slander to Himmler, here? Again, interspersed with my brackets:
“Himmler was pursuing a chaste lifestyle …”
[Really? How old was he, 14? Justification?]
“…when he became interested in a young girl who was the daughter of a store owner….”
[Woe be unto him who have interest in a shop owner's daughter...]
“…In his diary, he compares his initial encounter with her as like finding himself a sister…. ”
[Insinuating bastards. And so, what then?]
“…Later he experienced rejection when he let her know his true feelings…”
[Woe also be unto him who gets rejected by a woman...on the other hand, like the Irish say, hurray for the man who took a chance...]
“…His difficulties with women persisted throughout his life….”
[What? What is the proof? Unbelievable that this is "scholarship"!]
“…His feelings towards women are laid bare in a diary excerpt…”
An excerpt so meaty, juicy, tasty, I think we could all deserve a little more of it. Again:
“A proper man loves a woman on three levels: as a dear child who is to be chided, perhaps even punished on account of her unreasonableness, and who is protected and taken care of because one loves her. Then as wife and as a loyal, understanding comrade who fights through life with one, who stands faithfully at one’s side without hemming in or chaining the man and his spirit. And as a goddess whose feet one must kiss, who gives one strength through her feminine wisdom and childlike, pure sanctity that does not weaken in the hardest struggles and in the ideal hours gives one heavenly peace.”
on 19 April 2009
Well, I’ll guess settling for a few elementarry school arguments will have to suffice ofr an answer, tacitly meaning you can’t answer the question.
You know, calling someone a dickbrain doesn’t exactly further ypur arguments, and only makes people take you less seriously. Posting your homoerotic fantasies has a similar effect..
on 19 April 2009
Welcome back, Mr. Welch:
I note that you had nothing to say about my documented demonstration of the truthfulness of your profession. No comment on the WW1 lies or all the now discredited war responsibility theories blaming it all on the “Wicked Kaiser”. Ditto with that “final word” on Pearl Harbor by Roberta Wohlstetter, that profoundly truthful and “peer reviewed” Ivory Tower quack. As for all your brazen lies about the Balfour Declaration and the British Mandate, that has also provoked a deathly silence from you. You provably lied through your teeth about the real Jewish involvement in communism, as even a few of your fellow believers conceded.
As to the supposed executions at Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinks, Maidanek etc., I note that you have nothing to say about Carlo Mattogno’s heavily documented studies based on the actual records of all these camps. (Not an academicallly, “peer reviewed” author, obviously.) Instead you prefer Stalinist war crimes trial evidence, Nuremberg concoctions and the politically motivated “testimonies of “survivors” at kangaroo courts. You are a true scholar, Mr. Welch. Unlike David Irving, who goes constantly to the archives, you prefer to quote reputable academics who copy each other in what Mr. Irving correctly refers to as “inter historian incest”.
You constantly accuse me of failing at getting published in academic journals. You assume that I have ever wanted to be published in such journals. I do not. They have a very small readership. I prefer internet outreach. As to going to the archives personally, I have done quite a bit of it. I have in my possession a document that I obtained directly from the National Archives entitled “The Power and Aims of International Jewry”, all 100 plus pages of it. It was prepared as a position paper of the American State Department in June 1919 - and it contains unimpeachable evidence of Jewish involvement in communism, plus a very interesting analsis of the “Protocols”. The analysis consists of comparing passages in the “Protocols” with documented similar or identical statements by Jewish leaders and authors. It stops short of endorsing the “Protocols” as genuine but the comparative analysis makes for thought provoking reading.
You are no scholar, Mr. Welch. You are a petty bourgeois prostitute of “political correctness”. You parrot the academic party line as the price of a paycheck. As to your credentials, anyone who reads my book reviews and essays knows that I have a depth of historical understanding far in excess of your efforts. Your degree is straight out of a garbage can, Mr. Welch. That is what academic training in these United States really amounts to anymore.
on 19 April 2009
Yes, I must admit that Nazi scholarship appearing here is quite impressive. These Nazi scholars have cleared up any suspicion I might have had about the crusades, or about the reason for bringing the children to work camp, along with the parents: Of course, our Adolph wanted to avoid breaking up families.
Sure, Auschwitz was no picnic, but with art classes and a brothel, how bad could it have been? One thing remains to be cleared up: the professionals there, were they terminated when they became worn out, or when SS and Kapos saw some more attractive new ladies getting off the train from Budapest? Termination, I hear, was “with extreme prejudice.”
In regard to the Jewish origins of the Brits, I must say that the matter is still under adjudication, since Mr. Travis has competitors. There are a bunch of Blacks in Brooklyn, who dress up in funny clothes and holler at Whities passing by that it’s they who are the Real Jews. Indeed, they have offered evidence, equally serious as that of Mr. Travis, that they are the Lost Tribes of Israel indeed.
on 20 April 2009
I will not bother to espouse the British-Israel nonsense, as that has no factual support whatever. As to Martteo’s feeble efforts at satire, he should spend more time researching actual camp records, rather than merely supposing that the war time propaganda which he has been spoon fed is true..
As to Matteo’s lack of knowledge, I think I will post my “Adolf Hitler: Philo-Semite” essay to raise his eyebrows. You truly do not know the half of it, Matteo. And, oh yes, my scholarship is superb.
on 20 April 2009
ADOLF HITLER: PHILO-SEMITE
It is a truism of history that Adolf Hitler was the most evil of all anti-semites. It is a message of history so firmly established by the post-World War Two era that no one doubts it. And yet, as Hitler’s youthful collaborator and later antagonist, Reinhold Hanisch noted, if Hitler was an anti-semite, it came only much later in life-and may even have been an act necessitated by politics. When Hitler went to Vienna in 1909 to become an artist, he stayed at the Ratzner men’s hotel. There he quickly became friends with two Jews, Siegfried Loffner and Joseph Neumann. Neumann, a trained copper polisher, frequently engaged Hitler in long conversations on Theodore Herzl’s Zionism. (Herzl was a Viennese Jewish journalist.) Hitler was favorably impressed by Jewish racial solidarity and remarked that it was a pity that Germans were not equally race conscious. It would appear, then, that Hitler used Zionism as a model for his later National Socialist movement. In 1913 young Hitler made a third Jewish acquaintance at the hotel, Rudolf Redlich from Moravia. When Hitler had a falling out with Reinhold Hanisch, it was the Jew, Siegfried Loffner, who reported Hanisch to the police as having defrauded Hitler. Hitler is known to have been on very good terms with many Viennese Jewish families in this period, attending music concerts in their homes. More importantly, it was Viennese Jews who provided the bulk of Hitler’s income during this important early period. It was the Jewish art dealers Morgenstern, Altenberg and Landsberger who sold Hitler’s paintings to rich Viennese Jews, like the lawyer Dr. Joseph Feingold. According to Hitler’s later testimony, without Morgenstern, his financial angel, Hitler would have been in dire straits during this period. Hitler was not noted by anyone to have had an anti-Jewish bias at the very time in his life when he was most closely associating with Jews, both personally and financially.
Hitler’s anti-semitism surfaced only in the aftermath of Germany’s defeat in the First World War. Before going any further, it is necessary to note that Hitler’s newly found anti-semitism was a product of its era. And it did have factual support. Jews were deeply involved in communist revolutions in Germany, Hungary and Russia. These facts were noted by Winston Churchill in England and the State Department in America, as well. Jews from foreign countries bought up German businesses and real estate while ordinary Germans were devastated by the post-war inflation. This is what caused Hitler’s anti-semitism, not his personal relations with Jews which had always been good. When Hitler came to power, he was the moderating force among the more radical National Socialists. Hitler promulgated the Nuremberg race laws in 1935 but he made numerous exceptions for the so-called mischlinge, or products of mixed Jewish-gentile marriages. Numerous Jews of partial gentile descent were made “honorary Aryans” and allowed to serve in the Wehrmacht. More than this, there were many high Nazi officials of part-Jewish descent. Herman Goering had a half-brother who was a half-Jew, Albert Goering. Reinhard Heydrich, of Czechoslovakian fame, reputedly had a Jewish actor father. The Fuhrer’s favorite photographer was the part-Jew Heinrich Hoffman. In the arts Adolf Hitler proved himself particularly indulgent. He allowed favored Jews to participate in German cultural life while ruthlessly purging the majority. Thus, while Erich Leinsdorf and Eric Korngold were fleeing to Hollywood, Franz Lehar was allowed to remain wed to Lizzie Leon, daughter of the Viennnese Jewish librettist, Victor Leon. Hitler sponsored the career of the part-Jewish soprano Margarete Slezak at the Berlin opera. (The part-Jewish Austrian tenor, Leo Slezak, was a huge admirer of Hitler’s policies.) Hitler even had a regular visitor at the Berghoff, a Jewish mother and her child.
Adolf Hitler, as a mature statesman, was hardly a friend of the Jews. He may not have murdered six million of them in non-existent “gas chambers” but he did deprive them of their influence and power. His policies were based on political factors and not on personal animosities. Those who look for the “secret” of Adolf Hitler’s anti-Jewish outlook in personality disorders deceive themselves. Hitler’s record shows quite clearly that he interacted very intimately with Jews on a personal level. His policies arose from the organized Jewish political malignancies which have plagued the world for centuries.
And, if you do not believe it, Matteo, read the German historian, Bridgette Haman on the same points or consult Frederic Spotts book, “Hitler and the Power of Aesthetics’, from which the above information is taken.
on 20 April 2009
THE MORAL LIE BEHIND THE HISTORICAL LIE
If you deny the crimes of Joseph Stalin you will not be prosecuted and sent to jail. If you deny the crimes of Mao Tse-Tung, you will not be prosecuted and sent to jail. If you deny the massacres of Genghiz Khan, you will not be prosecuted and sent to jail. But if you deny the “gassing” of six million Jews by Adolf Hitler, then you will be prosecuted and sent to jail. Why? The answer is not hard to find. Denying the crimes of the aforementioned offends those who no longer exist or who are politically impotent. Denying the Holocaust offends the power which runs the world. Offending communists or races of ancient times bothers no one. But offending the international people who run everything is a quite different matter. The issue is not historical truth. Historical truth is turned upside down on a thousand subjects every day. It is par for the course. The issue really is: Exposing a holy lie which would prove the existence of a Jewish international conspiracy. Some will object to the word “conspiracy”. Very well. Let us say instead that there is a Jewish international force capable of enormous deception in the achievement of its ends. To some minds, that constitutes a difference without a distinction. To other minds, it is a more palatable way of stating an unpleasant truth. The reader may take his pick.
It is a sad fact that no one cares about the truth. But it is a fact. What people care about is not offending those who have the power. Without the terrible power Jews wield denial of the Holocaust would present a problem to no one. Denying the Holocaust has its counterpart in other unmentionable subjects. Good examples are not discussing the Jewish role in communism or not conceding that the state of Israel has a “right to exist”. Holocaust Denial is not merely about establishing what really happened to the Jews during World War Two, it is about challenging the right of the Jews to impose their dogmas on the rest of the population. The case of Bishop Richard Williamson is instructive. Bishop Williamson has committed no crime. He has merely expressed an opinion displeasing to Jewish power. Worse, he has brought public attention to an issue that Jews wish to have concealed from the public at all costs. And that is the crime. The question of what happened to the Jews of Europe during World War Two is not important in itself. It is only important as a guide to the enormous unhealthy power that Jews wield in the world. The real lesson of the Holocaust is: because Jews were supposedly exterminated during World War Two, therefore Jews are an eternally innocent people. They are never to be criticized, stood up to or forced to back down. That is the moral lie hiding behind the historical lie of the “gas chambers”. That is why the Holocaust Hoax must be destroyed.
Just to reinforce the message of this ever more timely essay, Dr. Frederick Toben in Australia has just been sentenced by an Australian court for “threatening” the Jewish community by exposing their holy hoax on line. As I point out in my essay, if you deny anybody eslse’s atrocities you do so with legal impunity. But if you deny the holy hoax of the unholy people, you are crushed by the full weight of the law. Why?
Because to expose the Holocaust Hoax is, by clear implication, to convict the entire Jewish people of:
PROVEN INTERNATIONAL CONSPIRACY
on 20 April 2009
Since learned Matteo is always inquiring : “Where did those kidnapped Jews go?”, I would suggest that he consult pp.226-240 of Arthue Butz’s book “The Hoax of the Twentieth Century” from ChapterSeven, “The Final Solution”. I will not quote Dr. Butz in toto, as that would take far too long. Rather, I will quote his conclusions on p.237. Matteo can read the reasoning leading up to the conclusion and judge for himself its accuracy.
“…If we assume that at the end of the war there were about three million uprooted Jews whose situations had to be disposed of somehow by the Allies, then it is possible that one-half million emigrated to the U.S., one-half million went to Palestine, one million were absorbed by the Soviet Union, 750,000 settled in Eastern Europe excluding the Soviet Union, and 250,000 settled in Western Europe. On the other hand, the correct figures, including those offered here as data, may very well be somewhat different. The treatment presented here is guaranteed to be valid in a general way, but statistical accuracy cannot be guaranteed.”
Revisionist research is very, very good Matteo. Of course, if you actually did read it and realized that it was correct, that really would rock your universe. Better, by far, to stick with tried and true fiction.
Bless the Resurrection of the “Gas Chambers”
Happy Easter
on 20 April 2009
To the educated Dumb Ass
Mr. Welch:
Please do not stay away too long, kind sir. You are precisely the prototype for the academic prostitute recognized by Harry Barnes many decades ago. You have degrees galore but no research abilities outside the approved channels. Your credentials are those of a “Good War” quack; your wisdom consists of the adage “We had to do it” (get involved in WW2 against that demon, Adolf Hitler). Beyond that you are a rubber stamped, assembly line intellectual hack.
on 20 April 2009
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=55
Pay particular attention to the investigations of Dr. Charles Larson.
on 20 April 2009
C:\Documents and Settings\Bill\My Documents\Historical Enemies the Jews behind Communism - Vanguard News Network Forum.mht
A little summation of the evidence for Jewish control behind communism for the benefit of the slipprty Mr. Welch
on 20 April 2009
http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=55319
on 20 April 2009
‘I note that you had nothing to say about my documented demonstration of the truthfulness of your profession. No comment on the WW1 lies or all the now discredited war responsibility theories blaming it all on the “Wicked Kaiser”. Ditto with that “final word” on Pearl Harbor by Roberta Wohlstetter, that profoundly truthful and “peer reviewed” Ivory Tower quack. As for all your brazen lies about the Balfour Declaration and the British Mandate, that has also provoked a deathly silence from you. You provably lied through your teeth about the real Jewish involvement in communism, as even a few of your fellow believers conceded.’
There is nothing more to be said about a pack of fantasies which even the lowliest GCSE student can see through. I expect you probably think the Protocols are real as well.
‘As to the supposed executions at Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinks, Maidanek etc., I note that you have nothing to say about Carlo Mattogno’s heavily documented studies based on the actual records of all these camps. (Not an academicallly, “peer reviewed” author, obviously.)’
Of course not. Perish the thought that he - and the rest of the deniers - will ever let any properly qualified historians who are familiar with the archival evidence take a peek at their work. Could be a bit embarrassing for them.
‘Instead you prefer Stalinist war crimes trial evidence, Nuremberg concoctions and the politically motivated “testimonies of “survivors” at kangaroo courts.’
I prefer the archival evidence, the testimony of war criminals (Eichmann and his pals are a bit of an elephant in the room, aren’t they?), and also the testimony of the witnesses themselves (including AK men like Nowak and Pilecki - people who were politically pretty far from being Stalinists) to the concoctions of grave robbers like Leuchter and Toben.
‘You are a true scholar, Mr. Welch. Unlike David Irving, who goes constantly to the archives, you prefer to quote reputable academics who copy each other in what Mr. Irving correctly refers to as “inter historian incest”.’
Actually, Mr Thames, my forthcoming post on the ENIGMA/ULTRA decrypts was based on a visit to the UK National Archives in Kew, London. In other words, they’ll be based on SS radio traffic during the Holocaust itself.
As for Irving’s own reputation as a researcher, Richard Evans (a genuine specialist on German history) skewered him nicely in ‘Telling Lies about Hitler’.
‘You constantly accuse me of failing at getting published in academic journals. You assume that I have ever wanted to be published in such journals. I do not. They have a very small readership. I prefer internet outreach.’
And what makes you think anyone actually reads your work or takes it seriously? After all, you seem to be spending a suspicious amount of time over the past few weeks trying to peddle your wares on a website set up to combat the lies and distortions disseminated by people like you - be they Holocaust deniers, 9/11 conspiracy theorists or medical quacks. That’s more or less an admission that no one is coming to read your crap, except fellow neo-Nazi scum and assorted morons like hANOVER fIST (another author of an unread and onloved blog).
As for your ‘reasons’ for not seeking to publish your studies academically, these are a figleaf for moral cowardice. You know full well that if you try and get your work published you’ll be torn to shreds by scholars who actually know what they’re talking about, and you’ll be made to look a complete fool. The internet has no editors, unfortunately, which means that it’s ideal for deniers who lack the balls to subject their ‘work’ to detailed scrutiny, and who prefer screams of censorship and bias to the hard, unvarnished truth that they are systematically telling lies about the past. Without the world-wide web, you’d all be reduced to pimping yourselves at the odd conference in Tehran.
‘As to going to the archives personally, I have done quite a bit of it. I have in my possession a document that I obtained directly from the National Archives entitled “The Power and Aims of International Jewry”, all 100 plus pages of it. It was prepared as a position paper of the American State Department in June 1919 - and it contains unimpeachable evidence of Jewish involvement in communism, plus a very interesting analsis of the “Protocols”. The analysis consists of comparing passages in the “Protocols” with documented similar or identical statements by Jewish leaders and authors. It stops short of endorsing the “Protocols” as genuine but the comparative analysis makes for thought provoking reading.’
‘The Power and Aims of international Jewry’ - hmmm. Now how come the only references I can see to that are on delightful websites like Stormfront? What’s the betting that you got this ‘document’ from one of these sites, rather than from College Park? Tell you what, why don’t you give me the class mark (I assume it would be RG59, followed by the shelf and file numbers), and I’ll contact the NARA people and ask them if they could send me a copy?
As for your comments on the ‘Protocols’, I don’t know what to say about anyone who still believes in an act of Okhrana fakery, except that this seems to be proof that in some states siblings are stil allowed to marry each other, and you are the end result.
‘You are no scholar, Mr. Welch. You are a petty bourgeois prostitute of “political correctness”. You parrot the academic party line as the price of a paycheck. As to your credentials, anyone who reads my book reviews and essays knows that I have a depth of historical understanding far in excess of your efforts.’
Whatever. Just remember that I’m the one who gets published, teaches students to post-graduate level, and has the respect of his peers. You’re the one reduced to spending his entire life online.
‘Your degree is straight out of a garbage can, Mr. Welch. That is what academic training in these United States really amounts to anymore’.
I’m a Brit, and I got my degree from UK-based institutions. Here’s a newsflash for you, you little turd - not everyone who speaks English is American.
on 20 April 2009
and it time for the pope
on 20 April 2009
re. Welch’s comments to JT:
“Of course not. Perish the thought that he - and the rest of the deniers - will ever let any properly qualified historians who are familiar with the archival evidence take a peek at their work. Could be a bit embarrassing for them.”
For whom?
Anyway I for one get your meaning, and this meaning is part of the problem. Explain to the good folks outside of academia, if you dare open your mynah-bird mouth on the subject, what “peer reviewed” means. Hell, it wasn’t until Huxley (TH) died, even later than that, for science at least, that you had to kiss the ass of the Fab Five known as the “British Royal Society” before they would even answer your letter of query. Are you telling me a peasant would have been heard? No, his idea would have been stolen, re-worded, and re-delivered, by sitting academes and passed off as their own. No need to cite such Churchellian savages.
As someone who had to play that game, and who knows how it works—and knowing that you, being where you are, should also be honest about it, and not use it as a weapon against your adversary, after all we wouldn’t want to see where those degrees “came from”, or “in what position” we graduated—you know “merit” has little to nothing to do with who gets published, reviewed, accepted, or even heard.
“Peer review” may be analogized by the process of jury selection, these days. The standing professoressas, read the lawyers, get to pick and choose which “peer” will be hearing the trial, he or she most conducive to allowing those lawyers to win the case; it has got to do with whether the paper/theory/research supports the agenda, if it provides a honing stone for the particular axe the conference is grinding. And of course there is always that one we let in for the sake of diversity, someone to laugh at during the crumpets and ale, this last the real reason anyone even attends. They all are otherwise quite stuffed and satisfied with their present knowledge.
That is, theoretically. So I have written papers FOR these conferences and journals, in the past, with the express notion of knowing what they want, framing my piece around that, and hoping to the dickens I could squeeze, better to say SNEAK a line or two of unpopular, or even “different” thought in. I would get accepted this way. So in theory, you play the game, you get heard.
But you must also know, full well, that academic journals almost exclusively will only hear sitting or retired professors. That is unless they bow as they do occasionally, very occasionally, and so not only recognize but confer the “honorary” degree, and so only then hear someone not of their training.
The academic pursuit of history, like science, is a closed circle. I have sat through, heard, thousands of lectures on paddywhack -yin/yang mumbo jumbo, getting for my troubles, usually, profound boredom, loss of time, and frustration of reaping my rewards of insignificant, useless theses. Shall we take a gander at some recent dissertation topics in these fields…let alone delivered papers, or published articles?
Finally, let me say this. The most success I had, and continue to have in my literary pursuits, derives not from the quality of what i do, in any case. It comes from the people I know. I have given papers where I could have written about the smell of Swiss cheese and its metaphysical implications, and been accepted, because I was friends, or better good acquaintance with someone else. You won’t admit it, you Brotherhood of Bullshit, but this, indeed, is what decides the fate of scholarship…and so what is printed, heard…and considered “fact”.
With book-writing, the situation is hardly any better.
on 20 April 2009
This is what peer-review involves.
(1) You write an article or a monograph on a given subject. If you are a historian, you make sure it’s based on extensive archival research.
(2) If it is an article, you submit it to an academic journal within that field. The editor takes your piece, removes your name from the manuscript, and hands it over to two or three fellow scholars who have expertise within that particular area of study. The reviewers’ identities are not disclosed to the author.
(3) If this is a monograph, the author has usually been in touch with an editor prior to submission of a first draft. The editor will hand the manuscript on to at least two other academic specialists for review.
(4) The reviewers can approve publication or decline. If they do the latter, they have to do so on the grounds of serious concerns about the author’s methodology. So for a historian, the key complaints are (a) that the author’s research is too superficial and he/she hasn’t consulted enough source material (primary and secondary), (b) that material has been lifted or quoted out of context so that it is a distortion of the original evidence, and (c) that the author’s research methodology is deliberately unsound, insofar as he or she has ignored the vast amounts of evidence which disprove his or her arguments.
This is the reason why Holocaust deniers cannot get published, and why they had to set up their own spurious ‘journal’ in order to get into print. But then I suspect you know that already, don’t you?
on 20 April 2009
LEE:
You are a moron. Hitler was a Catholic Christian. You know how I know that? Because that is what he fucking said!!
“My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice… And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.” ~Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922
“Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.” ~Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
Have fun genius
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/quotes_hitler.html
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGIK_enUS276US279&q=adolph+hitler+was+a+christian
on 20 April 2009
“You are a moron. Hitler was a Catholic Christian”
I’m sorry, you’re argument is that Hitler was a Catholic Christian therefore there was no Holocaust?
Did you read a picture book that proved that to you?
I’m curious, did anything provable happen prior to..oh say..the early 1800’s?
on 20 April 2009
1.) Who is that country that constantly invades their neighbors and kills thousands of them in genocide?
2.) Who is the country that the U.N. named as the top destination for human trafficing (Kidnapping women and kids for prostitution)?
3.) Who is the country that bombs an unarmed people killing women and over 400+ children with white phosphorus bombs?
4.) Who is the country that has purposely attacked a U.S. Navy ship and gotten away with it?
5.) Who is the country that has violated or ignored 68 U.N. sanctions (the most ever)?
6.) Who is the country that constantly spies on America and gets caught with no consequences?
7.) Who is the country in the Middle East that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty?
8.) Who is the country in the Middle East that has CONFIRMED Nuclear weapons?
9.) Who is the country that CONSTANTLY lies about it’s past?
One guess.
Thanks to the poster - http://sanityisdead.blogspot.com/2009/04/israel-how-do-i-loathe-thee.html - we can’t all be anti-semites, doops.
on 20 April 2009
The Holocaust didn’t happen because Israel has nuclear weapons?
Man. Your right. How could I have missed such impeccable logic?
on 20 April 2009
.) Who is that country that constantly invades their neighbors and kills thousands of them in genocide? Sudan, formerly iraq etc
2.) Who is the country that the U.N. named as the top destination for human trafficing (Kidnapping women and kids for prostitution)? Not Israel.
3.) Who is the country that bombs an unarmed people killing women and over 400+ children with white phosphorus bombs? Unarmed *cough*
4.) Who is the country that has purposely attacked a U.S. Navy ship and gotten away with it? Meaning wasn’t found at fault.
5.) Who is the country that has violated or ignored 68 U.N. sanctions (the most ever)? but no art. vii sanctions
6.) Who is the country that constantly spies on America and gets caught with no consequences? China and Russia just ask pollard
7.) Who is the country in the Middle East that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty? Almost all.
8.) Who is the country in the Middle East that has CONFIRMED Nuclear weapons? none
9.) Who is the country that CONSTANTLY lies about it’s past?
on 20 April 2009
‘4.) Who (sic) is the country that has purposely attacked a U.S. Navy ship and gotten away with it?’
Iraq with the ‘USS Stark’, 17th May 1987.
‘6.) Who is the country that constantly spies on America and gets caught with no consequences?’
That should read ‘which is’ - can someone teach this little twat grammar?
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1994_rpt/ssci_ames.htm
http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/special/0308/index.htm
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/LAW/law.and.politics/09/26/freeh.lee/ (obviously Lee was innocent, but clearly the Chinese had penetrated the US nuclear programme).
‘.) Who is the country in the Middle East that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty?’
For the region Middle East/South Asia I count two more - India and Pakistan. Funnily enough, Mr fIST can’t get worked up about these cases.
on 20 April 2009
‘8.) Who is the country in the Middle East that has CONFIRMED Nuclear weapons?’
Iraq got close in 1990. The Libyans had a covert programme until 2003, and Mr fIST has clearly missed out on recent news stories on Iran and Syria. Clearly they don’t have CNN in Bellevue.
‘9.) Who is the country that CONSTANTLY lies about it’s past?’
Erm, let me guess. Is it the Turks and their denial of the Armenian genocide of 1915?
on 20 April 2009
Mr. Welch:
Here are the archival reference numbers for “The Power and Aims of International Jewry”. “NACP, RG165, MID 245-1 (1). Kindly write to the National Archives in Adelphi, Maryland for more information or you may consult pp. 70-73 of “The Jewish Threat: AntiSemitic Politics of the U.S. Army” for excerpts and a discussion. I have a certified copy of the document with a cover letter from the National Archives attesting to its authenticity. You might even show it to your students as part of an “antisemitic fantasies” study group. If you are sufficiently clever about the way you present the material ( you must, of course, never concede that there might be something to what it says) you might even hold onto your job. )
Now, as to “peer review” and all that happy horseshit. I think Angelo nailed it with perfect accuracy when he called the whole thing “The Brotherhood of Bullshit”. I have, in fact, submitted my essays to proper academic authority for such review. For instance, I send them to professor Albert Lindemann of the University of California, Santa Barbara who thinks very highly of them. Professor Lindemann is the renowned author of “Esau’s Tears: The Rise of the Jews and Modern AntiSemitism”. You migtht read the book. It would expand your “knowledge” considerably. Professor Kevin MacDonald of California Long Beach University does what I do, he quotes extensively from what Jewish scholars write in their own reference volumes. He provokes shrieks of outrage from pious types like you.
I laugh with amusement at your allegations about “distortions” in revisionist writings. Surely there are mistakes in some of these works, particularly the earlier ones (See for example, Richard Harwood’s early effort, “did Six Million Really Die?”) Those mistakes have been acknowledged and revised by revisionist scholars. However, the real distortions are in the claims of the Holocaust historians. Go read how Raul Hilberg was devastated by competent revisionist cross-examination at the first trial of Ernst Zundel in Canada. That should give you some idea of who is really “distorting” facts. The claims by Richard Evans about David Irving are sheer nonsense. The number of “distortions” that professor Evans was able to come up with do not even amount to a triviality in the context of a life time of writing.
As always, you remain utterly silent about the criticisms of your profession I previously raised. Too much egg on the face, I presume. Those who can do nothing useful in life become university lecturers and professors, where they all adopt the same approved point of view and quibble endlessly among the footnotes while ducking the real issues. I would rather be a historian without the degree, like Lord MacCauly and Edward Gibbon. That way I can write fearlessly, without the obligation to please the ADL or give Lord Rothschild the kosher blow job.
on 20 April 2009
Mr. Welch:
Here is one of my expert historical essays for your “peer review”. I believe it can pass the test. I will, at the outset, concede two very minor errors. The famous quotation from Vladimir Jabotinsky does not come from “The Iron Wall”. It comes from a similar essay that he wrote about the same time in the early 1920’s. As to the Peel Partition scheme of 1937, the Arabs rejected it unconditionally. The Jews were split, formally rejecting it, while letting it be known behind the scenes that they might accept it. Other than that, it can stand as written.
http://www.codoh.com/zionweb/zionfraud.html
on 20 April 2009
Are we discussing the Shoah or whether the West should support Israeli angels?
on 20 April 2009
Welcome back, Welchy!
You sputtered: “Actually, Mr Thames, my forthcoming post on the ENIGMA/ULTRA decrypts was based on a visit to the UK National Archives in Kew, London. In other words, they’ll be based on SS radio traffic during the Holocaust itself.
As for Irving’s own reputation as a researcher, Richard Evans (a genuine specialist on German history) skewered him nicely in ‘Telling Lies about Hitler’.
‘You constantly accuse me of failing at getting published in academic journals. You assume that I have ever wanted to be published in such journals. I do not. They have a very small readership. I prefer internet outreach.’
And what makes you think anyone actually reads your work or takes it seriously? After all, you seem to be spending a suspicious amount of time over the past few weeks trying to peddle your wares on a website set up to combat the lies and distortions disseminated by people like you - be they Holocaust deniers, 9/11 conspiracy theorists or medical quacks. That’s more or less an admission that no one is coming to read your crap, except fellow neo-Nazi scum and assorted morons like hANOVER fIST (another author of an unread and onloved blog).”
Wishful thinking won’t help you on this one. I’ve plenty of readers…not all of them want to post anything…they are just glad to have a kindred voice out there.
I have The Code Book. Bring on your ENIGMA decrypts; I’ll offer you a fair chance to bring something of value to this discussion.
As for “peer review”, John Thames explains why it isn’t necessary; I’ll explain why it isn’t practical: when the aim is to stifle the truth, as in the studies of DNA proving that “Israelis” and Palestinians differ no at all, interests behind the scenes encouraged those in receipt of those “peer-reviewed” journals to RIP OUT THE PAGES CONTAINING THAT INFORMATION.
So…peer review isn’t the be-all, end-all you advocate, is it?
on 20 April 2009
…against devilish Muslims?
on 20 April 2009
There is too much emphasis on the gas chamber camps, at the expense of the “death through labor” camps, where one can avoid the trap of technical arguments over Zyclon B. In the death camps the prisoners were selected for gassing upon arrival: not so pleasant, but pretty fast. In camps like Mauthausen, the prisoners were killed by heavy work with starvation level rations. Those camps were liberated by Americans and Brits, so that the magic trick of the prisoners disappearing into the steppes of Russia cannot be used.
The evidence is overwhelming that there was a program of “death thorough labor.” After liberation, the prisoners continued to die off, well into the summer. The prisoners were pleasantly thin, something that could not be ascribed to food supply problems, since the Red Cross had food to deliver and was refused.
Red Cross food deliveries were refused again by the U.S. and French government upon surrender, and hundreds of thousands of German soldiers experienced death thorough exposure and starvation.
on 20 April 2009
John Thames, Travis and Angelo (not to mention myself) come with cogent information, and yet, all we get in return is silly dickering with our postings.
As of yet, you tools have NOT REFUTED:
There were no gas chambers;
There is no way of proving that six million were killed under an extermination agenda.
on 20 April 2009
Matteo:
Were that the case, then how do you explain the documented order by Himmler to “reduce the death rate in the camps at all costs”?
I note that you have nothing to say about the posting from Butz about where the Jews really went. You have been aasking for that for a long time. Now that you have the answer -silence.
on 20 April 2009
“The charges which I have found to be substantially true include the charges that Irving has for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence; that for the same reasons he has portrayed Hitler in an unwarrantedly favourable light, principally in relation to his attitude towards and responsibility for the treatment of the Jews; that he is an active Holocaust denier; that he is anti-semitic and racist and that he associates with right wing extremists who promote neo-Nazism.”
-Justice Gray, David Irving v. Penguin Books Ltd and Deborah Lipstadt, British High Court 2000.
Nice source material you have there hanover
on 20 April 2009
Himmler’s odd order? We cannot explain the contradictory behavior of psychopaths
on 20 April 2009
Ron…you posted the quote, which included thus:”that for the same reasons he has portrayed Hitler in an unwarrantedly favourable light”
He was a vegetarian, too, you know…have I slighted vegetarians with this knowledge?
Stop being stupidly obtuse…Lipstadt is hardly an unimpeachable source.
on 20 April 2009
Matteo:
You stupid shit. Rather than face the plain fact that Himmler’s order is inconsistent with an extermination program, you spout nonsense about the odd behaviour of psychopaths.
Ron:
You dumb ass. You quote the opinion of a judicial whore who has been in the pocket of the Jews his entire life. You might as well quote the judges in Joseph Stalin’s purge trials. But did not even your judicial whore have to admit that “the evidence for gas chambers was not so strong as he had supposed”?
on 20 April 2009
I don’t see anything obtuse in the quote - its speaks to holocaust deniers and their sources.
You’re not slighting anyone unless you, like Irving and other hitler loving frauds (JT and his “sources” comes to mind) “persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence”
on 20 April 2009
How about the appellate court that upheld the judge’s decision, jew whores too I suppose?
on 20 April 2009
JT,
Your lack of credibility - already a joke - is exposed once again. This is what the judge’s conclusion was:
“[I]t is my conclusion that no objective, fair-minded historian would have serious cause to doubt that there were gas chambers at Auschwitz and that they were operated on a substantial scale to kill hundreds of thousands of Jews.”
Oy! You mashugana - you make me laugh. Now go copy and paste a long article from some other obscure discredited source would ya?
on 20 April 2009
ps hanover you seem like a bright young aryan, I hear you even got a 91 on an exam once!
On this holocaust rememberance day you should take a moment to reevaluate your comments, and maybe even meet some jews down at the local JCC and make some new friends.
on 20 April 2009
Already have ‘em, pal…you shouldn’t presume to know too much about me…I guarantee you, you’ve no idea at all.
Yeah…today is Holocau$t Remembrance Day…and it’s also the 10th anniversary of the Columbine Pharmaceutical Murders.
on 20 April 2009
Again and again, the other side resorts to rigged jurisprudence to provide the “evidence” so obviously lacking.
on 20 April 2009
Ron is very impressed by courts and their rulings.
He should try reading the decisions of the US Supreme Court on the meaning of the Constitution. That should disabuse him of any faith in the integrity of the courts and their interpretations. Their rulings on supposed “gas chambers” are equally reliable.
on 20 April 2009
“try reading the decisions of the US Supreme Court on the meaning of the Constitution.” He muttered angrily.
Brilliant!
on 21 April 2009
Actually, Ron, it makes more sense than anything you have yet posted.
Since you obviously need something useful to do, why don’t you try refuting Butz on where the Jews went after the war?
on 21 April 2009
Ron:
If you think that Judge Grey was going to rule in favor of David Irving, you probably think that the Catholic Church was going to rule in favor of Galilleo Galillee. Buy a brain, please.
on 21 April 2009
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/b/
Reading material for the pseudo-scholarly Mr. Welch. He cannot distinguish between real evidence and the concoctions of the Jewish-Marxist judge, Jan Sehn.
on 21 April 2009
http://www.codoh.info/viewpoints/vprwgraf.html
More essential reading material for historical dumb ass, Mr. Welch, on Belzec.
on 21 April 2009
John, do you check under your bed for Jews before you go to sleep?
Also, if this really is a conspiracy, I want in. Could you tell me how, so I can profit from it and keep white supremacists down?
on 21 April 2009
Genius Welch has just discovered the “Hofhle” telegram, which is nothing more than a recording of hundreds of thousands of Jews deported to certain Polish camps before being shipped further east. It provides no evidence of mass murder whatever. Try harder, Mr. Welch.
Dear Marc:
I have better for you. I will simply post what the US State Department had to say about the “Protocols” back in 1919 (you know how I love old material) and then you can compare their anti-semitic fantasies with mine. Now won’t that be fun?
on 21 April 2009
You must have posted that 5 times. It wasn’t relevant then and isn’t now. It really doesn’t matter what a few racists said about a work of fiction, according to a newspaper 90 years ago.
Back to Irving. Irving sues a publisher for libelling him by calling hima holocaust denier. It is found that he is a holocaust denier, and he loses his suit. I don’t see any bias there. It would be like Al Gore suing someone for calling him an environmenatlist. Also, it’s amusing that you put token amounts of vulgarity in your posts. Don’t flatter yourself, no one is going to sue some internet racist for libel.
If you really want to try and disprove this fact (a fruitless effort), go ahead and do so, but don’t use ancient newspaper articles or the “works” of: David Irving, David Duke, Carlo Mattongo, Germar Rudolf, Thomas Dalton, Michael Santomauro, Carl Nordling, Arthur Butz or your own “firsthand research” . That might lend you a veneer of credibility.
on 21 April 2009
THE STATE DEPARTMENT ON THE PROTOCOLS
One of the most enduring claims of the anti-anti-semites is that the Protocols of Zion are a forgery. This claim is repeated endlessly so that the real point is obscured – the still unexplained predictive validity of the document. This point was noted by two State Department analysts in their August 1919 document “The Power and Aims of International Jewry”. The document does not propose to either prove or disprove the authenticity of the Protocols. Rather, it proposes a far more cogent approach. The analysts seek to compare the sentiments of the Protocols with documented statements of Jewish leaders like Theodore Herzl, Harry Sacher and others to determine whether points of similarity can be found between these statements and the alleged plan of the Protocols. The reader is then invited to form his own conclusions. The obvious intent of this methodology is to show that the Jews do in fact endorse the program of the Protocols in the real world. That is the real point, not the essentially irrelevant question of who wrote them. On p.6 of their study the authors write:
“…it is impossible to read far in the Protocols and in the public writings of Hess, Herzl and other Jewish leaders without being impressed with the constant reiteration of certain fundamental principles and ideals. Among the more important of these around which the forces of Jewry are now rallying are the following:
1. The Jews are a nation held together by their common enemies. (Note 3.)
2. With the Jews Nationality and Religion are inseparable and co-extensive.
3. All groups of Jews from the extreme radicals (Poale-Zionists) to the most conservative, are united in this National Religious Movement.
4. Once a Jew, always a Jew.
5. The teachings of the Talmud still exercise a profound influence on Jewish life.
6. Judaism and Socialism are expressions of the same movement.
7. The Jews consider themselves the original exponents of internationalism and the League of Nations.
Note 2: The coming of a world war is predicted which the Jews are secretly to promote. The creation of the chaos of Bolshevism is described as to be worked out by Jews all over the world as a step toward Jewish world domination. For a fuller discussion of these and similar illustrations see Appendix B.
Note 3: See Herzl’s “Jewish State” page 4 and Dr. Solomon Prett of the United Synagogue of America.
(New York Times June 17, 1919, page 3.)
Note 4:: For a full discussion of these principles with citations from Moses Hess, Theodore Herzl, Bernard Lazare, H. Sacher and the lectures now being distributed by the Zionist Organization in America, see Appendix C.
In any event the Protocols are of suggestive value in the study of present-day International Jewry. They indicate possible or probable fields of Jewish activities, aims and methods, and as such, without relying on them at all as evidence in themselves, we have used them as a point of departure for some phases of our study.”
on 21 April 2009
Marc:
You have an incurable problem - you were born stupid. There is no cure for it unfortunately. You are completely incapable of seeing that all the evidence is against the claim that six million Jews were killed. Instead, you take a propaganda legend as a “fact” -and then reverse the burden of proof. You are also too stupid to understand that a post-war political order shall not allow any court to overturn its founding legend.
I know not whether you are a college student, a garbage collector or a 60 year old fool. It makes no difference. The truth is getting out. You can either catch up with it -or get left behind like the terminal jerk you are.
By the way, looking at old documents and correlating the past with the present is what historians do. You cannot correlate anything - least of all the connection between your brain and the mental diarrhea it shoots out your leaking asshole. If I ever teach a course called “Stupid Fuck 101″, you will undoubtedly be the award winning student. ( Mr. Welch could give you a run for your money, however.)
on 21 April 2009
How many times are you going to paste that article? You can paste a source. I’m so impressed.
Don’t be so uppity to think that I take anything you say seriously. This is an excercise in mental masturbation for you and your fellow deniers. You have thouroughly convinced yourself that you’re engaging in intellectual discourse. Ignore facts, eyewitnesses, and the perpetrators themselves. Insist that there’s a conspiracy. Frankly, it is laugable.
Prodding at you and watching you flip out is amusing, in fact. You lash out like a child throwing a temper tantrum.
on 21 April 2009
Marc:
I don’t lose any sleep over anything you write.
You would not know a fact or a reasoned argument if you tripped over one. I find Welch far more entertaining. He at least imagines himself to be educated. You are the jerk known as the man in the street.
on 21 April 2009
Mr Thames, as I have already told you, I am not an American citizen. So comments like ‘I can write fearlessly, without the obligation to please the ADL’ really reveal only your (1) pathetic racist obsessions and (2) your insular view of the world. Obviously these are typical characteristics of far right losers like yourself (along with overweening self-importance, delusions of adequacy and - judging by hANOVER fIST’s claim to be able to decrypt ENIGMA single-handed - a certain amount of megalomania).
I’m glad you’re in touch with Professor MacDonald. It sounds like you do need someone with a doctorate in Psychology to correspond with. And judging by Prof Lindemann’s output, I doubt he’d have as much patience with a raving anti-Semite as you claim he would.
Your comments on peer review represent a classic case of sour grapes. Like Hitler yourself, you’d far rather blame sinister influences and professional censorship for your abject failure than your own inadequacies. In any case, as I said, people like me do the teaching, and you and hANOVER fIST do the screeching. It’s the natural order of things.
Your RG165 reference is incomplete. You need a shelf, box and file number to follow (e.g. RG59/250/5-7/2788). I have the feeling that despite your boasts, you got this online - in the same way that you provide selective quotes from books just to claim that you’ve read them. No one falls for these tricks anymore.
Incidentally, I did more than ‘discover’ the Hofle telegram in the British National Archives. I also got enough on other aspects of Nazi/SS activities in Eastern Europe to discredit your claims about Einsatzgruppen activities being purely the consequence of anti-Partisan warfare, of their being no mass killings of Jewish civilians, and of their being no systematic attempt at genocide. All I need is another week or so of work, and I can show anyone who reads this site (and there’ll be more here than on yours - which is why you have spent so much time here) what a lying scumbag you are.
Of course, with normal people I shouldn’t have to argue this. They can see that the evidence is on our side, rather than yours (Zundel discrediting Hilberg? In your dreams, sunshine). And they can also see that your response to all this proof is to shut your eyes, clap your hands around your ears, and squeal ‘Not listening! Not listening!’.
I know that exceptional intelligence and reasoning is not encouraged amongst Nazis, but that does leave you at a bit of a disadvantage when it comes to arguing with real historians. You’re left very much as you are now, repeating ad nauseam the same discredited ‘facts’, and shrieking abuse at anyone who has the nerve to contradict you. And at the end of the day, all you are - and will ever be - is just a turd with a modem, reduced to hawking your lies online.
Have fun.
on 21 April 2009
Pardon me, and if the Einsatzgruppen good work had been purely the consequence of anti-Partisan warfare, would that have justified it? Was the Warsaw Ghetto operation worse than Marzabotto, Lidice, or Sabra and Shatila?
on 21 April 2009
No ‘matteo’, I would not argue that proposition at all. What I am saying is that Mr Thames is pretending that the deliberate mass murder of Polish (1939) and Soviet Jews (1941-1942) by the Einsatzgruppen was not - as Mr Thames deceitfully claims - part of a brutal counter-insurgency campaign against Communist partisans. It was genocide against unarmed civilians.
This is not to minimise the atrocities you mention, or Oradour-sur-Glane, the Vercours, Zamosc, Warsaw 1944, and other similar war crimes committed by the Nazi state.
Oh, and Mr Thames, the spelling is ‘Macaulay’. Your ignorance shines through not only with your spelling, but with your fatuous comparison with two great historians who wrote before history developed as an academic, university-taught discipline during the 19th century. And there’s three other minor differences as well - both of them could write, both did their research properly, and both continue to be read long after their deaths. Neither of the three do - or will - apply to you.
on 21 April 2009
Yes, you are right, there is an unfortunate tendency to call any massacre of Mi Lai size, “genocide”. The label, of course, makes little difference to the victims and their families. Nor does it lessen the moral turpitude of officials and generals involved in non-genocidal massacres.
Mi Lai, by the way, happened in Vietnam in 1968. Most young people never heard of it.
on 21 April 2009
I’ve found out a bit more about Mr Thames’ champion, Kevin MacDonald. He’s a real charmer:
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/news/item.jsp?aid=252&site_area=1&printable=1
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2008/10/03/academic-senate-condemns-professor-kevin-macdonald%E2%80%99s-anti-semitic-research/
Perhaps ‘Mr Thames’ is Professor MacDonald under a pseudonym? It would explain a lot.
on 21 April 2009
If I might attempt to stabilize this conversation with a summary…I trust I will be corrected if I err in my understanding of the course of things….
The point of the article by Santomauro, as stated firmly in the title of the article of this thread, is that there was a massive massacre, but no Holocaust. This does not deny killing went on. It does not deny this killing went on against Jews either. It denies that there were systematic gassings of members of a creed.
Let’s talk about a definition.
What is a Jew? People talk of “Jewish” as if this is a race; it is not a race, as is African-American, or Latin, or Chinese. A Jew is a member of the Talmudic religious sect, Judaism. Because this religion in theory has strict rules about marrying in-kind (like most of these customs, routinely discarded by the hip new “Jews”), and the tendency of the adherents to this religion to share many aspects of their lives together, it gives the erroneous appearance as if “Jew” is a race or an ethnic group.
For many reasons denialists, let’s call them, skeptics, I would prefer, have been shut out from presenting evidence about the history of this event. The outcry still unheard is to allow people all over the world to speak about what they want, be it the consistency of jam or each and every event of historical or scientific claim.
Most of the arguments against this fair outcry have come from Zionists, which can be deduced by what they say about Islamic lands, and their general bristling at the slightest mention of anything questioning the standard view of this, for them, bedrock of history, the Holocaust. We have noted the tendency of these people to resort to ad hominems, I can in fact show you at least another 6 logical fallacies they have been using to rebut the denialists. But to be clear and fair wrongs went on during World War II, much of it malicious by even war standards, on the part of most countries involved and especially certain Nazis against certain Jews. Italy, Nazis for a time, never persecuted its Jews, as they saw them as Italians, of the Jewish religion, and in this there is a very large point.
Once we see that Judaism is a religion and not a race many things fall away. Apply the name “cult” to this religion, which it may very well be, and one sees a different picture.
A quick bit of history. Hebrew, the language of the Kabiru tribe, is extinct except for what is contained in the Bible. “Israel” as used in the Bible denotes a land promised to the descendants of Jacob, the 12 tribes. An “Israelite” in the Bible, is someone who follows the Torah, or the Pentateuch. In a sense, we are all of us, us Men of God, Jews, when we are good men. This “real” Judaism is a doctrine for all Men.
With the introduction of the Talmud, and its “commentaries” (its history much better than its interpretations…), we saw the birth of the new “cult” Judaism.
These things being said, let’s attack this problem.
The problem is motivated from the very beginning by William Henderson’s very flippant and biased handling (ok, ridiculing) of the Santomauro and denialist material. Remember? Here is the situation, once again, my comments in brackets:
“Regarding the Williamson affair, Holocaust denier Michele Renouf has stated that it is a “disgrace” that the Holocaust is not open to “reasoned debate”, and in doing so, she neatly underlines the position this book and deniers crave for: that the Holocaust is a debate, and ‘Revisionists’ are not charlatans of history but merely the other side of an argument.”
[What a woman, I'd say. How can you argue with this? You do not instead you present the following from one of the enshrined members of the Holy Jewry]:
“Yad Vashem has so far collected the names of over half of the 6 million or so reasons why there is no other side, but this hasn’t stopped Mr. Santomauro from trying to uphold this ridiculous dichotomy 22 minutes into a radio interview.”
[Looking up the name "Mary Smith" just for the heck of it, I got this result: http://www.yadvashem.org/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_2KE?last_name=smith&first_name=mary&location=&next_form=results. As you can see, there are many. But where is the proof linking any of these people to a gas chamber or "the Holocaust"? "List of victims" and "Page of testimony" is not good enough proof, as anybody who died during the war of Jewish religion can make it on such lists and pages. In fact if you click on some, you will see little about cause of death, and see lots about their being merely dead Jewish people from Allied nations. This "who gets on the list?" question is one of historical importance. We cannot let one man's lifelong obsession, which in fact makes every possible attempt to expand the list, using every means of available association, either be accepted as valid history. An Obituary list is what he is compiling, a morbid and assumed to be sacrosanct one at that.]
[Then Henderson quotes Santomauro:]
“I don’t deny that there was a massive massacre, there’s no question about it, there was a massive massacre towards Jews and non Jews alike, and no revisionist has denied that, no serious Holocaust revisionist denies that there was a massive massacre.”
[Is there any problem with this statement? As we have shown by our definitions, no, there is not. A massacre and a Holocaust are not the same.]
“We can only assume that the editorial board of Voice of Reason [sic] radio was out having lunch when this was broadcast. Here’s part of the introduction again [emphasis added]:”
[Condescension, as you can see for yourself, sets the tone from the beginning, because William Henderson knows all, and is cock-sure about the history of everything about these events which have been termed Holocaust. Fine in itself, I guess, but not for me or anyone else who knows respect for the right to inquiry, public inquiry, should not be breached because of subject matter. Already we see infringements on free speech condoned by the sheep, "expansion of hate statutes", and so on. What do we have to fear from speech? What qualifies as taboo and who sets it? Do you realize the Medieval implications when free inquiry is censored, free speech curtailed? Can we make exception for only this one event?]
“Traditional historians have thousands of surviving witnesses and the weight of history on their side. On the other hand there is a small, renegade band of writers and researchers who refuse to accept large parts of this story.”
Bingo, Michael. That’s why it’s called denial.”
See my earlier post about “denial”. What I wish to make clear is the bias toward denialists, which is subject of the article upon which we are commenting.
Let those people in jail for speaking against the standard Holocaustic History free. If you really have what you think you have on your side, you will defeat them in the public arena and affirm, cement further, your Zionist slant and so continuing imprint on every aspect of our waking lives.
Until that time as all such people are released, you oppressors, like Henderson, are the tyrants, you the Zionazis, you the persecutors.
Maybe I should start a list.
on 21 April 2009
John Thames,
Hopefully I’ll buy a better brain than you got stuck with - Irving himself filed the lawsuit in front of Judge Gray and spent thousands of dollars and countless attorneys’ fees. Haw haw
John, you’re not very smart , and tearing apart your credibility has been particularly easy. I suggest you stick to colorful name calling and personal insults - it’s more fun to read too.
on 21 April 2009
“Perhaps ‘Mr Thames’ is Professor MacDonald under a pseudonym? It would explain a lot.”
Does Professor MacDonald have a lover named Bill? Did you notice this little mess-up? Thames copied a path to a local document:
C:\Documents and Settings\Bill\My Documents\Historical Enemies the Jews behind Communism - Vanguard News Network Forum.mht
on 21 April 2009
‘Let those people in jail for speaking against the standard Holocaustic History free. If you really have what you think you have on your side, you will defeat them in the public arena and affirm, cement further, your Zionist slant and so continuing imprint on every aspect of our waking lives.’
Here’s a newsflash for you, Mr Caiazzo, we’ve already done it. Remember what happened to Irving when he tried to sue Lipstadt. That’s your lesson, boy. We’ll keep sticking it to you and the rest of your kind until you learn it.
on 21 April 2009
Two words - Alan Turing.
on 21 April 2009
You nitwits think that anyone needs to masquerade as anyone else, to satisfy your self-important fantasies?
Welchy…who do you think you are?
“Here’s a newsflash for you, Mr Caiazzo, we’ve already done it.”
WE who?
You’ve done NOTHING but spew nonsense at this page. You think that persecuting an 89-year-old, wheelchair-bound man WHO FED DOGS, is a noble endeavour?
You idiots make my colon tangle.
Hey…it’s Yom HaShoah! Everybody…break out the Easy Bake ovens, and let’s have a cookin’!
Woo Hoo!
Meanwhile…some idiots accost the president of Iran, repeating the absolute lie of his “wanting to wipe Israel off the map”…when we with working brain cells know that it’s ISRAEL wiping others off of maps.
Sometimes literally.
Once again…Lipstadt? Shut up, dummy…she can’t even prove the existense of “gas chambers”…unless you count your bloated maws.
on 21 April 2009
“You’ve done NOTHING”
Han’s apparently conducted an extensive study of everything you’ve done. After years of research, surveillance and interrogation, Han’s concluded his investigation and discovered that you’ve done nothing. Not one thing. Ever.
Except that time you persecuted an 89 year old wheel chair bound man who fed dogs. Han, of course, conducted a parallel investigation of the 89 year old man’s life and concluded he did nothing but feed dogs. Once. Far away from Germany. And it was only some bits of broccoli that his mother told him he had to eat in order to get dessert.
So lay off, because this conclusively proves that the Germans didn’t plan to affect endlösung der judenfrage through genocide.
/sarcasm
on 21 April 2009
Don’t you get it? The jig is up.
Despite all the the laws against “Holocau$t denial”, people are starting to realize that the stories don’t bloody add up.
How many people can be cremated in 12 hours, according to your calculations? You do know that the ovens couldn’t run 24 hours straight, right?
How do you reconcile the birthing clinics, the whorehouses, the medical facilities in these so-called “death camps”?
Why have EVERY ONE of the Holocau$t memoirs been proven to be ABSOLUTE LIES? Not “falsehoods”, not “misrememberings”, LIES.
You accuse the Iranians of wanting to wage war upon the rest of the world…only, they have not attacked anyone for HUNDREDS OF YEARS.
Can’t say the same for you goddamned Khazar mongoloids masquerading as Yids.
Happy Yom HaShoah!
on 21 April 2009
“Why have EVERY ONE of the Holocau$t memoirs been proven to be ABSOLUTE LIES? Not “falsehoods”, not “misrememberings”, LIES.”
How does one begin to argue with nonsense like this? How exactly do you go about proving that even a single memoir is an ABSOLUTE LIE? You can prove that everything about what someone remembers about their own life is a lie? Absolutely?
Someone’s got a god complex I think.
How about this, Han; If everything in every memoir about the holocaust is a lie, what about the memoirs that support your view? Are those lies too? Didn’t one of your confederates here quote someone who said they didn’t happen to see any gas chambers? Can I take this as confirmation that you think this person was lying and that in fact they did see gas chambers?
on 21 April 2009
It appears that I have really gotten under the skin of the pseudo-erudite Mr. Welch. Good. The truth of my researches is really starting to hurt.
Let us begin by getting the purely factual errors ( Mr. Welch makes a lot of them ) out of the way. The file numbers on “The Power and Aims of International Jewry” are precisely the ones that professor Bendersky gives in footnote 67 of Chapter Two of his book. Take your complaints up with him, not with me. I have the actual document before me and the quotes are exactly as I gave them. I supplied the document to one of my friends who then posted excerpts on the internet and spread it around. Mr. Welch reverses cause and effect. To Fangbeer: I am not Kevin MacDonald. Moreover, I write under many names and I would be very careful about concluding anything about me on that basis. Back to Joesph Welch. In point of fact, Raoul Hilberg was devastatingly cross-examined by Ernst Zundel’s defense attorney, Douglas Christie, at the first Zundel trial in Canada. His performance was extremely poor and he came under severe criticisms from his fellow Jews. This is all a matter of public record, Mr. Welch. You can read all about it in Robert Lenski’s book “The Holocaust On Trial”. ( Yes, Mr. Welch, I have actually read the book. ) You might also consult “Report on the Evidence” by Barbara Kulaszka. Hilberg was so thoroughly demolished that he refused to testify again at the second Zundel trial. Again, these matters are well-established, even if unknown to the university lecturer, Mr. Joseph Welch.
As to professor MacDonald, it would appear that Joseph Welch has done some tardy and very belated research. The criticisms leveled against professor MacDonald are substantially the same as those that have been leveled against me on this thread. No one has been able to find any factual errors in what he writes or to disprove his writings; they simply scream ( like Joseph Welch ) because they do not like what he writes. As to Adolf Hitler, he was actually a very gifted architect and painter. Anyone wjho looks at his actual work, as documented in Frederic Spotts book, “Hitler and the Power of Aesthetics” knows this. ( And no, Frederic Spotts does not “deny” the Holocaust or support Hitler’s social system. ) Finally, Joeph Welch jumps to the conclusion that I am a failure in life. Sorry, Mr. Welch, think again. I have had a very successful career in the corporate world and am now comfortably retired. Your suppositions are your own responsibility, not mine.
It is a fact that Jews wield immense power in the economy and do deliberately attempt to destroy the careeers of those who oppose them. Look at the immense pressures put on Ernest Zundel, Fred Leuchter, David Irving, Kevin MacDonald and others for their efforts, for example. I do know that Kevin MacDonald admitted to me in a private conversation that from what he heard at the Irving trial while attending as a witness, that the “six million” story obviously was not true. That he would not wish to admit it publicly and add to his problems is entirely understandable. Finally, Mr. Welch’s feeble efforts to discredit me. I have indeed read the books to which I refer and have analyzed them thoroughly. It should be obvious, merely from the huge numbers of esays and book reviews that I have posted, that I have indeed done the reading and the research. The composition of the essays is otherwise inexplicable. Thus, merely on the basis of self-evident facts, Mr. Welch is a proven liar. Mr. Welch also deliberately distorts what I have written. In all the incessant squawking about my alleged “distortions” no one wants to go back to the original essay I published on this post. I clearly stated that the true number of Jewish deathe in WW2 was between 1-2 million, including many Jews shot in Russia. I have not deviated from that position since this discussion began. I hold to it now.
There are many problems with the numbers of Jews claimed to have been killed in Russia and Poland. I have alluded to those problems in previous posts, including the original. For here I merely note that one of the key Nuremberg witnesses, Otto Ohlendorf, later repudiated his Nuremberg testimony on the Einsatzgruppen as politically motivated and denounced the kill totals as beyond the realm of possibilty. It is also worth noting, particularly since Mr. Welch is British, that at the trial of Field Marshall Manstein his English barrister, Paget, was able to demonstrate that of several thousand Jews supposedly killed in an anti-partisan operation in south Russia by troops under Manstein’s command, that the real number was fewer than three hundred and only some of them were Jews.
Mr. Welch is an interesting case. He typifies the abysmally low level of scholarship that prevails in the university system. Like a great many Englishmen, he appears to be in love with the patriotic myths of his own favorite criminal empire. If he will do a little “research” ( the very activity he so piously urges upon me ) he will discover that a dissident historical tradition exists even among his own nation. If he consults the literature of the post WW1 era, he may come across works by English authors such as George Peabody Gooch and Irene Cooper Willis, demolishing the holy English lies of the “Great War”. If he consults the ongoing revision of WW2, he will discover the works of John Charmley, the late John Costello, Max Hastings and others, all challenging both the real consequences of the war for Britain and demonstrating the thorough inferiority of British battlefield performance compared to that of the Germans in both wars. Mr. Welch is surely aware of the blatant English lying of the WW1 era. He refuses to consider whether the Psychological Warfare Executive and other English propaganda agencies may have lied about German behaviour the second time around the same way. The credibility of his own nation’s war time propaganda is not an issue with him ( only my credibility is an issue ).
Throughout these postings I have sneered at Mr. Welch and his pretensions to “superior knowledge”. I sneer at him still. University hacks like Mr. Welch have no monopoly on historial truth and, in fact, no particular insight into the truth. They are paid servants and, like all paid servants, they exist at the discretion and good will of the powers who control the system. Their pretense to disinterested objectivity is precisely that, a pretense. I have demonstrated throughout this discussion many examples of “reputable historians” distorting the truth. Mr. Welch has offered no rebuttals to those demonstrations, for he has none. Mr. Welch knows perfectly that there are powerful forces at work suppressing the truth of what really happened to the Jews in WW2. He knows it, but he preserves his “amor propre” by Sieg Heiling the truth of the legend by every rhetorical devise at his command.
on 21 April 2009
“The truth of my researches is really starting to hurt.” - John thames
“the evidence for gas chambers was not so strong as he had supposed” - John Thames (attempting to quote Judge Gray)
“no objective, fair-minded historian would have serious cause to doubt that there were gas chambers at Auschwitz ” - Judge Gray
“I am constantly accused of mindless Jew hatred, a charge I thoroughly debunked.” - john thames
“I … will hunt you down …you deserve it, and so do millions of others of your satanic tribe.” - john thames
“I will now be abandoning this site for a few weeks …” John Thames 14 April 2009
The truth of your research? Are you a comedian or what?
on 21 April 2009
Ron:
Say something on point or shut up.
on 21 April 2009
You’re the one spamming.
Either justify your racism with fresh material or justfy it somewhere else
on 21 April 2009
John Thames,
You’ve proven once again today that no one can rely on the accuracy of what you write (no matter how long your copy ‘n paste posts are)
Today, you misquoted Judge Gray’s opinion in a way that completely distorted what the judge actually said. And you did it to make it seem like Judge Gray supported your doubt about gas chambers at Auschwitz, when in fact Judge Gray said just the opposite - that there was no serious doubt.
There is no stronger point to be made, and no stronger point has been made here.
Congratulations, you have certainly earned (dis)merit enough to join the ranks of fellow exposed frauds.
on 21 April 2009
re. the latest non-statement by the ignorant Mr. Welch:
” That’s your lesson, boy. We’ll keep sticking it to you and the rest of your kind until you learn it.”
Boy? LOL! Oh you really socked it to me there!
(Betcha 100 pounds you wouldn’t have said that to my face…;) )
Keep trying, douchebag. Your insults in lieu of argument to any point I have brought up regarding this discussion is a sad statement. In the very quoted insult to me, you went out of the way to write a post that said nothing, yet you did not even touch the subject of concern to me and the other dissenters on this thread, namely, you SELF-RIGHTEOUS PIECE OF SHIT, the one about:
WHY are people forbidden from talking about only this one piece of history? Why are people in jail over it, why have others like McDonald lost their positions, or stature over it.
Once again…that you cannot see why this is a problem is a result of your hypnotized state…that and taking one too many sets of balls against the buttocks.
Domesticated chimp. You are a sorry excuse for an academic at that.
When you answer me, as you will directly or indirectly (I know your kind), answer me correctly, with respect, or do not expect a response. I only have time to offer so many chances.
FINALLY let me offer you a challenge, Welchberg. Read this conversation to your students. Show it to your “Superior” (I have no such person over me…). Blot out the names if you like. Then when THEY tell you how you got a reamed, let them know, while you have your tail between your legs, that you got bested by the layman.
Self-righteous ass, And you imbeciles wonder why people become hateful of you. You start the hate, the kabbals, and then when you get slammed, you whine like pigs.
on 22 April 2009
“Keep trying, douchebag. Your insults in lieu of argument to any point I have brought up regarding this discussion is a sad statement.”
Irony. That right there is the definition of it.
“taking one too many sets of balls against the buttocks.”
Man, another white supremacist on the thread who has homo erotic fantasies. Is that in the club charter or something? Every single one of you has eluded to a homosexual fantasy. That can’t be a coincidence. Seriously. Stop dreaming about my ass, and my dick and my nuts. Or at least think about man junk on your own time. Frankly I don’t how it contributes to your argument at all.
“Betcha 100 pounds you wouldn’t have said that to my face”
Ooh a tough guy.
On the internet.
That takes a lot of courage.
“answer me correctly, with respect”
There is nothing respectable about your argument or your comportment. The reason that you do not receive respect is that you do not deserve it. And then you have the nerve to come to someone else’s house and issue them orders? You’re going to come here and try and command respect? Yeah. Let’s see how that works out for you.
on 22 April 2009
Judge Grey did, in fact, state at the beginning of his ruling that there was “less evidence for the “gas chambers’ than he had supposed”. He then ruled ( predictably ) that the gas chambers were an undoubted fact of history. Thus, he made a slight concession toward objectivity while ultimately reaching the approved conclusion.
Angelo, take it with a grain of salt, like me. I take the long view of these discussions. The other side will not lay down and play dead. They cannot. They have too much capital tied up in their hoax. All the nonsense and vituperation is only to be expected. Approach the debate like a boxer. Let the other side flail away, wildly. Wait for the appropriate opening - and then deck them with the facts.
I know that I sometimes respond to the vituperation in kind. Then I go back to the right cross and the left hook - and deck them again. Wait until I type in my “Academic Correctness” essay. Yo’ll love it - and, so I predict, will the irate Mr. Welch.
Thanks for all your assistance.
on 22 April 2009
From Walter Sanning’s book, “The Dissolution of European Jewry”,p.190:
“Adding it all up, one obtains the following picture: Of the 5.3 million Jews under Soviet domination in 1939/1940 at least 700,000 lost their lives during the deportation to the east or in the Siberian “accomodations”, labor and concentration camps. 200,000 were killed in combat while serving in the Red Army and partisan units and a further 130,000 may have died because of the fighting in the cities, pogroms of the native population, hunger, epidemis, lack of medical attention, over-aging and, last but not least, because of German retributions against Jewish hostages in retaliation for Germans murdered by partisans. All of these developments may well have caused a loss of over one million. For this reason, one should not expect that more than 4.3 million Jews survived the ear in the Soviet Union - a loss of 20% compared tp early 1940. In tableform the development looks like this:
Under Soviet domination - 1939/1940 5,337,000
deduct:
War and deportation losses
- Jewish Red Army men killed in combat 200,000
- Deportation and concentration camp losses
in Siberia 700,000
900,000
Losses in the German - Soviet
theater of war 130,000
Total losses 1,030,000
Remaining 4,307,000
Other changes:
Hungarian Jews retained in the USSR 65,500
Annexation of Ruthenia 86,000
151,500
Jewish refugees returned
from the USSR 157,500 6000
Jewish population in the USSR at the
end of WW2 ( max. )
4,301,000″
on 22 April 2009
Correction:
From p. 109 of Sanning’s book.
on 22 April 2009
Angelo, take it with a grain of salt, like me. I take the long view of these discussions. The other side will not lay down and play dead. They cannot. They have too much capital tied up in their hoax. All the nonsense and vituperation is only to be expected. Approach the debate like a boxer. Let the other side flail away, wildly. Wait for the appropriate opening - and then deck them with the facts.
“But if the day ever comes for “Payback” you pink, circumsized piece of greasy pork, I, and millions of other whites who finally know the truth, will hunt you down and nail your kosher ass to a crucifix with your amputated balls stuffed between your circumsized lips. You deserve it, and so do millions of others of your satanic tribe.” - john thames 11 April 2009
on 22 April 2009
That day will come, Marc.
on 22 April 2009
“ACADEMIC CORRECTNESS”
Career academics, when confronted by the heresy of “Holocaust Denial”, invariably revert to the doctrine of “academic correctness”. Academic correctness is the doctrine that only university-trained historians are competent to pronounce on the truth of any supposedly settled historical controversy. This, of course, is the mentality of a priestly caste, self-appointed to pontificate to the people who lack their superior wisdom. It is not hard to puncture the illusions and pretensions of this pack of charlatans. In fact, it is ridiculously easy. These professional know-it-alls are constantly having to “revise” their findings on all kinds of subjects. This is a polite way of stating that they got it all wrong the first time. Naturally, they will not admit they got it wrong. Instead, they will argue that they were reasoning based on incomplete information and, naturally changed their minds when they got “fuller information”. The possibility that the hoax of the extermination of Europe’s Jews may have been hidden behind a fog of disinformation and that a hidden archive of “new information” may be awaiting them is, of course, too implausible to consider.
Now, as to the lengthy record of misinformation and deliberate lying achieved by these charlatans. I have already commented at length on the World War One and Pearl Harbor lies of these distinguished academics. Now I shall address another such example. For years now, the real history of the Zionist state has been hidden behind a propaganda legend of the “only democracy in the Middle East”. The average American remains abysmally ignorant of the real history of Zionism. Most Americans do not even know that the British were ever in control of Palestine between the two world wars. As for any knowledge of the British White Papers or Royal investigations during the 1920’s or 1930’s, one might as well speak Greek to the average American. The first major history to attempt to write the suppressed story for the benefit of an American audience was Dr. Robert John’s “The Palestine Diary” back in 1970. The publication of the book has a very interesting history. Dr. John submitted it to a great many university presses for publication. It was invariably rejected. The reasons for rejection had nothing to do either with the quality of the research or the writing, both of which were admittedly very good, but with fear of Zionist reprisal. Dr. John found that there was always at least one Zionist on the university review boards, who would immediately veto publication. Despite the fact that his book had the approval of, and a foreword by, world-renowned historian Arnold J. Toynbee, Dr. John was unable to find an academic publisher for the “Palestine Diary”. Eventually the “Palestine Diary” was published in Beirut by the Institute For Palestine Studies and in New York by New World Press. New World Press had its presses burned by unknown assailants and its entire run of copies destroyed. The publishers were themselves severely beaten with metal rods wrapped in rubber (a well-known Israeli torture technique). and their spines permanently injured. Dr. John, a consultant to American corporations on their legal obligations, was then driven from job to job as penalty for having published his book. The “lobby” had gotten him. Today, Dr. John’s book is regarded as a classic in its field. But in those days of historical cover up, the price of telling the truth was very high. De. John’s experience with the terrible power of Zionism parallels, in many ways, the ordeals of the Holocaust revisionists.
Now I shall review the lies and distortions of the historians of Zionism. For many decades the orthodox historians and media pundits have pretended that
: (1) there were never any Arabs in Palestine; (2) that if there were Arabs in Palestine they only arrived in response to the enormous prosperity the Jewish immigrants were supposedly creating (the Joan Peters “From Time Immemorial” nonsense); (3) that the Arabs voluntarily vacated Palestine in 1948 rather than being expelled by Zionist force; (4) that the Jews in the 1948 war were confronted by Arabs who had them outnumbered and outgunned; (5) that the Jews did not commit atrocities in the war to deliberately terrorize the Arab civilian population, etc. Those lies have been repeated endlessly by “reputable people” in the universities and media for decades. Only now are those lies starting to break down. The Israeli revisionist historians ( Sima Flaphan, Benny Morris, Ilan Pape, Avi Shlaim, etc. ) have proved conclusively that the histories of their forefathers were shame-faced lies. Had any student of the 1950’s dared to make the charges since corroborated by Morris, et.al., he would have been denounced as a “conspiracy theorist” suffering from delusional right wing fantasies. It would be the same charge, in essence, as that leveled against the increasingly confirmed Pearl Harbor revisionists. In short, the decades old historiography of Zionism is as much a lie as the English saga of World War One, the myth of a German sneak attack on an innocent, unprovoked Russia, the myth of Roosevelt’s “surprise” at Pearl Harbor, the myth of Hitler’s hostility toward the British Empire, the myth of scientific socialism and the greatest myth of all, the so-called Holocaust.
Academic correctness is the cover for a priestly caste of intellectual prostitutes, courageous in their timidity, devoted to the vested interests which employ them and willing to attack any myth of the political underground while fleeing in terror at any exposure of the ethnic blanket that tucks them beneath the unpleasant facts they are paid to ignore.
on 22 April 2009
Internet tough guy, eh Billy- er, Johnny Boy?
Well, considering you are a white supemacist and a Holocaust denier, it really doesn’t surprise me. Ultimately, all three stem form blaming your own inadequacies on outside factors.
on 22 April 2009