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.
If you enjoyed this post, why not subscribe to our RSS feed or follow us on Twitter? You might also consider making a donation to the Counterknowledge.com fighting fund.
1853 responses
Perhaps in the same way “Did Queen Victoria really exist?” is a “tough question”.
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?
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”.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
“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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Some of the most prominent Holocaust Revisionists are Jewish or from interfaith backgrounds where one side is Jewish.
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
Got anything relevant to say, Santomauro?
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.
While we’re on the subject of backgrounds, Michael…
‘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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
“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.
“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.
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.”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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, 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” 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 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 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 Luftl, 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.
Until I read the comment above, I didn’t realise that sewers were connected to the internet.
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.
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!
Gentlemen:
It is my original creation.
Try reading it.
P.S.
“Counterknowledge” needs a name change. “Idiotinc.” would do nicely.
‘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.
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
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?
Religion has nothing to do with any of this. ‘Jewish’ is not a religion no more than ‘Italian’ or ‘German’ is.
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.
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?
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.
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!
John Thames…excellent work.
I’ll just add, once again…EVERY HOLOCAU$T TALE HAS BEEN REVEALED AS A HOAX.
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!
Notice John and Hanover falling over themselves to answer my previous message…
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.
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.
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/tmotsm/A5.html
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.
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.
‘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’.
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!
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?
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.
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.
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.
“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.
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.
…
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.
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.
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.
“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.
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?
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.
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.
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 ?
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.
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?
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.
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.
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?
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.
“
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?
@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
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
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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!
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 ?
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.
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.
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 ?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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
———— * * * * * ————
in the future when that voice tells you to desist from posting listen to it.
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.
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!
Ron thinks that he is practicing the technique of “reductio ad absurdum”. In reality, Ron is merely demonstrating that Ron is an idiot.
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…
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.
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.
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.
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.”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
“ooo an axiom you utter fool”
fish, barrel etc.
“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.
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.
The rest speaks for itself.
indeed
Who was it again that started this whole “superior” or “chosen people” business?
A question, perhaps, a point.
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.
Ron:
We are not superior. We have merely done the research and seen through the lies.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.”
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 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
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.
http://www.middleeast.org/comments/1/2969.shtml
This is pretty well done.
ex scientia vera…
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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
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.
“
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!”
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.
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.
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.
“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?
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?
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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”.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
“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.)
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.
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 ?
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
John
Perhaps you should take notice because despite your verbal diarrohea (also devoid of content) you offer nothing other than words
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
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.