yourself from the power of a lie designed to render you impotent. By instilling unwarranted guilt and
shame upon humanity via the "holocaust", humanity is rendered incapable, or at least very hesitant,
to criticize, much less interfere with, any of the designs of Jews or their nation of Israel. The "holocaust"
is also an ongoing cash cow for Jewish "holocaust survivors" through the collection of hundreds of
billions of euros from Germany, and elsewhere, as WWII reparations that continues to this day.
No one can deny that Jews were rounded up and imprisoned by Germans in
German occupied territories after the suspension of the HAAVARA TRANSFER AGREEMENT during WWII. Nor can anyone
deny that Japanese Americans were rounded up and imprisoned in America for the same reasons, those reasons being
primarily security issues, and in the same fashion during WWII. And, after examining the facts, the German prisons
built for Jews were far more humanely accommodating than the American prisons built for Japanese.
What is staunchly denied is the existence, much less the use, of homicidal gas chambers,
the manufacture of human skin lampshades, the manufacture of human derived soap, institutionalized torture all
conducted at "death factories" where 6,000,000 Jews were gassed and cremated and other outright lies
disseminated by vindictive and vengeful Jews.
Indeed tens of thousands (The International Committee of the Red Cross reported: 272,000 concentration
camp inmates died in German custody, about half of them Jews) of imprisoned Jews died during the last months
of WWII due to disease, especially typhus, and starvation. After all, as the fortunes of war turn against the
losing side, food and medicine become extremely scarce... and deadly scarce for those imprisoned by the losing
side due to the ruination of food production, medicine manufacturing, and transportation supply lines. Germany
was carpet bombed and firebombed into the stone age during the last year of WWII (a totally merciless war conducted
by three Jewish controlled empires against a country the size of Montana).
there were crematoriums working overtime as a means of sanitarily disposing of disease ridden corpses, but
these were built during the last year of the war and never was a living person burned alive in one as JEWS would
have you believe.
As a matter of fairness,
try to imagine what would have become of all the Japanese incarcerated in American prison camps during WWII
had the fortunes of war turned against an America that was bombed into the stone age. I'll wager that they would
have been massacred by furious Americans before they had starved to death.
Once you fully realize that there were no "gas chambers" or such things as
human skin lampshades, most of the Jewish narrative regarding the so called "holocaust" becomes a self-serving
fabrication disseminated by the lowest sort of scammers.
Only lies need laws for protection. There are many individuals who have been imprisoned in occupied
Germany for merely telling the truth about the holocaust scam. These people are imprisoned for "inciting
hatred for the Jews" whereas it's actually the JEWS incessantly inciting hatred for Germans with their holocaust
Offer the FREE HOLOCAUST DEPROGRAMMING
COURSE to those who may need it: http://user1252122.sites.myregisteredsite.com/id172.html
The JEWS had to invent the "holocaust" because the truth is that the Germans were actually the "good
guys" leading up to and during WWII and many people thought so before and during the war... so the "holocaust"
lie does a very good job of falsely demonizing Germans.
Click on this text to watch HOLOCAUST: Shifting the Blame, Part 1, Jews for Hitler...
View the REAL PLAN for a massive HOLOCAUST perpetrated by JEWS titled EUROPA THE LAST BATTLE (Part 5)...
Click on this text to watch a six minute video titled: Hard Facts Of The Holocaust Lies...
Click on this text to examine the enhanced HOLOCAUST DEPROGRAMMING COURSE...
“New Pages” of Anne Frank Diary Prove that Her Father Wrote
Most of the Book
Two “newly discovered” pages from the
“Diary of Anne Frank” — which supposedly contain risqué jokes — are in fact further proof
that the book attributed to the Jewish teenager was in fact written by her father — because the “hidden”
writing is, like most of the rest of the “diary,” in her father Otto Frank’s handwriting.
(The New Observer)
The “newly-discovered” pages were announced
at a press conference at the “Anne Frank House” museum in Amsterdam, where researchers apparently were able
to remove two brown paper pasted pages and “read” the obscured writing underneath using lamps and optical character
The compliant Jewish lobby controlled
media focused all its attention on the contents of the “new pages,” but ignored the obvious fact of the difference
in handwriting styles on the new pages, with the “new material” all in her father’s handwriting, which
contrasts obviously and strongly with the juvenile scrawl of Anne herself.
In fact, as revealed in 2015, most of the diary was written by her father after the war, and who then passed it
off as “real” in order to sell it as a “holocaust memoir.”
The scam was revealed in an article in the New York Times that year, when the copyright holders
to the diary admitted Otto Frank’s involvement in an attempt to extend their control of the manuscript.
As the New York Times pointed out, when “Otto Frank first published his daughter’s red-checked diary
and notebooks, he wrote a prologue assuring readers that the book mostly contained her words, written while hiding from
the Nazis in a secret annex of a factory in Amsterdam.”
copyright on books extends only 70 years after the author’s death. As Anne Frank died of typhus in Bergen Belsen in
February 1945, the book theoretically entered the public domain in February 2015.
But, as the New York Times went on to say, the Anne Frank Fonds has now decided to try to extend copyright
on the book past the 70 year cut-off period—by admitting that Otto Frank, who died in 1980, was indeed a “co-author”
The implications of this admission are obvious.
As the New York Times put it:
the foundation, the Anne Frank Fonds, in Basel, signaled its intentions a year ago, warnings about the change have provoked
a furor as the deadline approaches. Some people opposed to the move have declared that they would defy the foundation and
publish portions of her text.
Foundation officials “should think very carefully about the consequences,” said Agnès
Tricoire, a lawyer in Paris who specializes in intellectual property rights in France, where critics have been the most
vociferous and are organizing a challenge. “If you follow their arguments, it means that they have lied for years
about the fact that it was only written by Anne Frank.”
The latest pages confirm once again that much of what is claimed to be “Anne Frank’s
diary” was in fact written by her father after the war—a fact which also explains the use of ball point pen in
the “diary,” a writing device which only became available after 1945.
Click on this text to examine the Anne Frank Fraud.
The Secular Religion of the 'HOLOCAUST'
of "the Holocaust" is a secular one: it belongs to the lay world; it is profane; in actuality, it has at its
disposal the secular arm, that is a temporal authority with dreaded power. It has its dogma, its commandments, its decrees,
its prophets and its high priests. As one revisionist has observed, it has its circle of saints, male and female, amongst
whom, for example, Saint Anne (Frank), Saint Simon (Wiesenthal) and Saint Elie (Wiesel). It has its holy places, its rituals
and its pilgrimages. It has its sacred (and macabre) buildings and its relics ...
Click on this text to examine PEOPLE EXPOSING THE HOLOCAUST LIES...
Click on this text to watch JIM RIZOLI - HOLO-FACTS
Click on this text to examine the enormity of Jewish lies regarding the HOLOCAUST HOAX...
Click on this text to examine the truth about AUSCHWITZ.
Click on this text to watch a video titled INSIDE AUSCHWITZ that reveals the truth about the work camp.
Click on this text to examine websites exposing the holocaust lies.
Click on this text to visit the CODOH (Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust) page.
Click in this text to meet holocaust revisionist Germar Rudolf.
Click on this text to examine the HAAVARA Transfer Agreement (The Transfer Agreement between Germany and German Jews prior
WORLD POPULATION 1938
For over a century, the Jewish World Almanac has been widely
regarded as the most authentic source for the world’s Jewish population numbers.
Academics all over the world, including the editors of the Encyclopedia Britannica, used to rely on the
accuracy of those numbers.
Here is what the World Alamanacs
of 1933 and 1948 had to say about the world population of Jews.
World Population 1948
In other words, according to the World Almanac
the world population of Jews increased (!) between 1933 and 1948 from 15,315,000 to 15,753,000. If the German government
under Adolf Hitler had – as alleged – murdered six million Jews those losses should have been reflected in the
Jewish population numbers quoted in the World Almanac.
suspicions raised by above numbers concerning the veracity of the allegations made against the Hitler government are confirmed
by the official three-volume report by the International Committee of the Red Cross, released 1948 in Geneva, according
to which 272,000 concentration camp inmates died in German custody, about half of them Jews. The following article elaborates.
A Factual Appraisal Of The ‘Holocaust’ By The Red Cross
The Jews And The Concentration Camps: No Evidence
one survey of the Jewish question in Europe during World War Two and the conditions of Germany’s concentration
camps which is almost unique in its honesty and objectivity, the three-volume Report of the International Committee
of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War, Geneva, 1948.
This comprehensive account from an entirely neutral source
incorporated and expanded the findings of two previous works: Documents sur l’activité du CICR en faveur
des civils détenus dans les camps de concentration en Allemagne 1939-1945 (Geneva, 1946), and Inter Arma
Caritas: the Work of the ICRC during the Second World War (Geneva, 1947). The team of authors, headed by Frédéric
Siordet, explained in the opening pages of the Report that their object, in the tradition of the Red Cross, had
been strict political neutrality, and herein lies its great value.
The ICRC successfully applied the 1929 Geneva military convention in order to
gain access to civilian internees held in Central and Western Europe by the Germany authorities. By contrast, the
ICRC was unable to gain any access to the Soviet Union, which had failed to ratify the Convention. The millions
of civilian and military internees held in the USSR, whose conditions were known to be by far the worst, were completely
cut off from any international contact or supervision.
The Red Cross Report is of value in that it first clarifies the legitimate circumstances under
which Jews were detained in concentration camps, i.e. as enemy aliens. In describing the two categories of civilian
internees, the Report distinguishes the second type as “Civilians deported on administrative grounds (in German,
“Schutzhäftlinge”), who were arrested for political or racial motives because their presence was
considered a danger to the State or the occupation forces” (Vol. 111, p. 73). These persons, it continues,
“were placed on the same footing as persons arrested or imprisoned under common law for security reasons.”
The Report admits
that the Germans were at first reluctant to permit supervision by the Red Cross of people detained on grounds relating
to security, but by the latter part of 1942, the ICRC obtained important concessions from Germany. They were permitted
to distribute food parcels to major concentration camps in Germany from August 1942, and “from February 1943
onwards this concession was extended to all other camps and prisons” (Vol. 111, p. 78). The ICRC soon established
contact with camp commandants and launched a food relief programme which continued to function until the last months
of 1945, letters of thanks for which came pouring in from Jewish internees.
Red Cross Recipients Were Jews
The Report states that “As many as 9,000 parcels were packed daily. From the autumn of 1943 until
May 1945, about 1,112,000 parcels with a total weight of 4,500 tons were sent off to the concentration camps”
(Vol. III, p. 80). In addition to food, these contained clothing and pharmaceutical supplies. “Parcels were
sent to Dachau, Buchenwald, Sangerhausen, Sachsenhausen, Oranienburg, Flossenburg, Landsberg-am-Lech, Flöha,
Ravensbrück, Hamburg-Neuengamme, Mauthausen, Theresienstadt, Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen, to camps near Vienna
and in Central and Southern Germany. The principal recipients were Belgians, Dutch, French, Greeks, Italians, Norwegians,
Poles and stateless Jews” (Vol. III, p. 83).
In the course of the war, “The Committee was in a position to transfer
and distribute in the form of relief supplies over twenty million Swiss francs collected by Jewish welfare organisations
throughout the world, in particular by the American Joint Distribution Committee of New York” (Vol. I, p.
644). This latter organisation was permitted by the German Government to maintain offices in Berlin until the American
entry into the war. The ICRC complained that obstruction of their vast relief operation for Jewish internees came
not from the Germans but from the tight Allied blockade of Europe. Most of their purchases of relief food were made
in Rumania, Hungary and Slovakia.
The ICRC had special praise for the liberal conditions which prevailed at Theresienstadt up to the time
of their last visits there in April 1945. This camp, “where there were about 40,000 Jews deported from various
countries was a relatively privileged ghetto” (Vol. III, p. 75). According to the Report, “‘The
Committee’s delegates were able to visit the camp at Theresienstadt (Terezin) which was used exclusively for
Jews and was governed by special conditions. From information gathered by the Committee, this camp had been started
as an experiment by certain leaders of the Reich … These men wished to give the Jews the means of setting
up a communal life in a town under their own administration and possessing almost complete autonomy. . . two delegates
were able to visit the camp on April 6th, 1945. They confirmed the favourable impression gained on the first visit”
(Vol. I, p . 642).
also had praise for the regime of Ion Antonescu of Fascist Rumania where the Committee was able to extend special
relief to 183,000 Rumanian Jews until the time of the Soviet occupation. The aid then ceased, and the ICRC complained
bitterly that it never succeeded “in sending anything whatsoever to Russia” (Vol. II, p. 62). The same
situation applied to many of the German camps after their “liberation” by the Russians. The ICRC received
a voluminous flow of mail from Auschwitz until the period of the Soviet occupation, when many of the internees were
evacuated westward. But the efforts of the Red Cross to send relief to internees remaining at Auschwitz under Soviet
control were futile. However, food parcels continued to be sent to former Auschwitz inmates transferred west to
such camps as Buchenwald and Oranienburg.
No Evidence Of Genocide
One of the most important aspects of the Red Cross Report
is that it clarifies the true cause of those deaths that undoubtedly occurred in the camps toward the end of the
war. Says the Report: “In the chaotic condition of Germany after the invasion during the final months of the
war, the camps received no food supplies at all and starvation claimed an increasing number of victims. Itself alarmed
by this situation, the German Government at last informed the ICRC on February 1st, 1945 … In March 1945,
discussions between the President of the ICRC and General of the S.S. Kaltenbrunner gave even more decisive results.
Relief could henceforth be distributed by the ICRC, and one delegate was authorised to stay in each camp …”
(Vol. III, p. 83).
the German authorities were at pains to relieve the dire situation as far as they were able. The Red Cross are quite
explicit in stating that food supplies ceased at this time due to the Allied bombing of German transportation, and
in the interests of interned Jews they had protested on March 15th, 1944 against “the barbarous aerial warfare
of the Allies” (Inter Arma Caritas, p. 78). By October 2nd, 1944, the ICRC warned the German Foreign Office
of the impending collapse of the German transportation system, declaring that starvation conditions for people throughout
Germany were becoming inevitable.
with this comprehensive, three-volume Report, it is important to stress that the delegates of the International
Red Cross found no evidence whatever at the camps in Axis occupied Europe of a deliberate policy to exterminate the Jews.
In all its 1,600 pages the Report does not even mention such a thing as a gas chamber. It admits that Jews, like
many other wartime nationalities, suffered rigours and privations, but its complete silence on the subject of planned
extermination is ample refutation of the Six Million legend. Like the Vatican representatives with whom they worked,
the Red Cross found itself unable to indulge in the irresponsible charges of genocide which had become the order
of the day. So far as the genuine mortality rate is concerned, the Report points out that most of the Jewish doctors
from the camps were being used to combat typhus on the eastern front, so that they were unavailable when the typhus
epidemics of 1945 broke out in the camps (Vol. I, p. 204 ff) – Incidentally, it is frequently claimed that
mass executions were carried out in gas chambers cunningly disguised as shower facilities. Again the Report makes
nonsense of this allegation. “Not only the washing places, but installations for baths, showers and laundry
were inspected by the delegates. They had often to take action to have fixtures made less primitive, and to get
them repaired or enlarged” (Vol. III, p. 594).
Not All Were Interned
Volume III of the Red Cross Report, Chapter 3 (I. Jewish
Civilian Population) deals with the “aid given to the Jewish section of the free population,” and this
chapter makes it quite plain that by no means all of the European Jews were placed in internment camps, but remained,
subject to certain restrictions, as part of the free civilian population. This conflicts directly with the “thoroughness”
of the supposed “extermination programme”, and with the claim in the forged Höss memoirs that Eichmann
was obsessed with seizing “every single Jew he could lay his hands on.”
In Slovakia, for example, where Eichmann’s assistant Dieter Wisliceny was in charge,
the Report states that “A large proportion of the Jewish minority had permission to stay in the country, and
at certain periods Slovakia was looked upon as a comparative haven of refuge for Jews, especially for those coming
from Poland. Those who remained in Slovakia seem to have been in comparative safety until the end of August 1944,
when a rising against the German forces took place. While it is true that the law of May 15th, 1942 had brought
about the internment of several thousand Jews, these people were held in camps where the conditions of food and
lodging were tolerable, and where the internees were allowed to do paid work on terms almost equal to those of the
free labour market” (Vol. I, p. 646).
Not only did large numbers of the three million or so European Jews avoid internment altogether, but the
emigration of Jews continued throughout the war, generally by way of Hungary, Rumania and Turkey. Ironically, post-war
Jewish emigration from German-occupied territories was also facilitated by the Reich, as in the case of the Polish
Jews who had escaped to France before its occupation. “The Jews from Poland who, whilst in France, had obtained
entrance permits to the United States were held to be American citizens by the German occupying authorities, who
further agreed to recognize the validity of about three thousand passports issued to Jews by the consulates of South
American countries” (Vol. I, p. 645).
As future U.S. citizens, these Jews were held at the Vittel camp in southern France for American aliens.
The emigration of European Jews from Hungary in particular proceeded during the war unhindered by the German authorities.
“Until March 1944,” says the. Red Cross Report, “Jews who had the privilege of visas for Palestine
were free to leave Hungary” (Vol. I, p. 648). Even after the replacement of the Horthy Government in 1944
(following its attempted armistice with the Soviet Union) with a government more dependent on German authority,
the emigration of Jews continued.
The Committee secured the pledges of both Britain and the United States “to give support by every
means to the emigration of Jews from Hungary,” and from the U.S. Government the ICRC received a message stating
that “The Government of the United States … now specifically repeats its assurance that arrangements
will be made by it for the care of all Jews who in the present circumstances are allowed to leave” (Vol. I,
p . 649).
agreed that in the nineteen instances that “Did Six Million Really Die?” quoted from the Report of
the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War and Inter Arma Caritas
(this includes the above material), it did so accurately.
A quote from Charles Biedermann (a delegate of the International Committee of
the Red Cross and Director of the Red Cross’ International Tracing Service) under oath at the Zündel Trial
(February 9, 10, 11 and 12, 1988).
The above is chapter nine from the book “Did Six Million Really Die?”.
the quote below by Gerard Menuhin mentioning the "annihilation of millions of disarmed soldiers and innocent civilains"
after the German surrender, it needs to be understood that he was referring to German soldiers and German civillians.
Click on this text to watch Natali Cohen Vaxberg, a radical Israeli political performance artist point out the fact that the
"Holocaust" has been used to justify the Creation of Israel in 1948 and it's immoral army, the brutal and sometimes perverse
persecution of Palestinians without interference from super-powers, and the creation of a nuclear weapons stockpile. BTW:
a dreidel is a four-sided toy top played with during Hannukkah...
Click on this text to view: Cremation Technology vs the Holocaust...
Click on this text to meet HOLOCAUST REVISIONIST ROBERT FARISSON.
Footage allows the viewer to see more
about Professor Robert Faurisson, who is arguably the one key individual in modern revisionism who opened
the door for many more questions to be asked about the historiography, the narrative of what is now called the Holocaust
and open the way for many more of those who would dare to openly question the Holocaust in a serious,
much more objective manner free of dogma or ideology.
Fake shower heads …
One more reason
why the real gas chambers
had to have real shower heads
Like all strong poisons, hydrocyanic acid (HCN)
is very good at being water-soluble –
have been most effectively dispensed dissolved
in boiling water – or, better still, superheated
steam – run through the real shower heads.
Moreover, while a whole can of Zyklon B was
required to kill all insects in a relatively small
fumigation chamber, hardly more than one
scoop of the Zyklon B pellets
been needed to dispatch any number of
humans in a shower room of any size.
Besides, only the lethal agent HCN was
required, Zyklon B as such was unnecessary.
This more costly compound was specifically
developed for use in fumigation chambers,
where, not unlike any other dry cleaning
process, the fumigated clothes
had to be
given back dry to the inmates coming out
of the shower rooms – as the properly run
What's more, HCN
itself – highly flammable
and potentially explosive – was superfluous
to the task, as, in an enclosed
volatile noxious substance – such as cheap
as rubbish ammonia, for example – is just
as deadly, but reasonably safe to handle.
As the Jews themselves very well know,
they murdered numerous Palestinians just
by firing ‘harmless’
tear gas into their houses.
The more one reads
the Holohoax literature
and the closer one looks at those putative
‘gas chambers’ – the less
sense they make.
And the kosher Holo-mongers themselves
are keenly aware of this. And hence, those
once-obligatory Jewish ‘holes in the roof’ or
the later ‘holes in the wall’ – through which
the Zyklon B
was supposedly chucked in –
are hardly ever heard of anymore.
The Jewish Holohoax is getting assimilated.
It's no longer as Jewish and hysterical
it used to be in the 1970s-80s, in the wake
of the October (Yom Kippur) War (1973-4),
when little I$rael is
said to have experienced
some ‘existential angst’ (enter Madison Avenue).
In their latter-day rendition, the physical details
of this ever-apocryphal
Zio narrative get to be
more and more like the Holy Ghost – positively
invisible – and never again
rendered in graven
images. And the ‘venerable’ Anne Frank gets
to be more and more like the Holy Virgin...
(In fact, with HCN
boiling point at 25.6 °C,
Zyklon B couldn't have been used
temperature in fumigation chambers, either –
not without the special pulverizer/blower –
never ever mentioned in the whole
of the Holohoax literature in relation
to the putative gas chambers.)
In order to deprogram yourself, after an entire lifetime of incessant brainwashing by the JEW owned and controlled
media, you can begin almost anywhere... such as learning exactly WHO coined the word "NAZI" - THE Most Misused
Word in Any Language... see here: http://www.chuckmaultsby.net/id143.html
____________Holocaust Revisionism Articles____________
Torture and Testicle Crushing at Nuremberg
. . . by Lasha Darkmoon
Confessions at Nuremberg were obtained under torture. The grimmest of these tortures,
practiced mostly by Jewish operatives on their German prisoners of war, was testicle crushing.
(Left) German defendants at the Nuremberg War Crimes trials, 1946-1949. How many of them had their testicles crushed?
“The Holocaust legend is built on ‘confessions’ obtained by the
use of torture.” So begins an article that has just been brought to my attention by an unknown emailer.
At the same time, by sheer coincidence, another correspondent has just sent me some stomach-churning details
about testicle crushing. He ends his letter with these words : “This is what Jewish interrogators did
to their German prisoners of war after WWII in order to get them to “sing”—i.e., to confess to crimes they
I was a bit shocked by these
words. To tell the truth, testicle crushing is not something I have thought about a great deal, nor do I wish to dwell too
much on this distasteful subject. I am aware of course that a lot of testicle crushing went on at Nuremberg in order to wring
confessions out of the prostrate Germans, but I had been unaware that American Jews had been foremost in the ranks
of these torturers.
Apparently, as many as three out four
interrogators at Nuremberg had been Jewish—and these Jewish interrogators, I was to learn to my horror, had been by
far the most sanguinary and sadistic. There was almost no level of human depravity to which these monsters were not willing
to sink, including forcing their German victims to eat excrement and to have sex with disinterred corpses.
Yes, so this is something we ought to bear in mind when watching all those Hollywood movies
celebrating the heroic deeds of the Allies in World War Two and lamenting the horrors of the Holocaust : that Jewish interrogators,
working for the Americans, are known to have beaten, tortured, and crushed the testicles of German defendants before charging
them with war crimes at Nuremberg. Without these confessions, obtained under extreme torture, there is no solid proof that
any Jewish Holocaust took place at all. There is only legend, hearsay and “eyewitness accounts” : like those
of Elie Wiesel and his kind—accounts that have turned out, in retrospect, to be based on pure fantasy, fiction, and
Proponents of the official storyline
say that some of the strongest evidence that “proves” the Holocaust—i.e. the systematic extermination
of 6 million Jews in gas chambers on the instructions of Hitler—consists of the supposed “confessions”
of the German officials who were put on trial at Nuremberg. What they neglect to tell you is that most of these confessions
were obtained under extreme torture. Indeed, according to Jewish investigator John Sack, torture was often practiced for its own sake, even when there was nothing to find out. It was practiced for sheer pleasure: because it gave the torturers a
‘high’, a feeling of sadistic omnipotence, of orgasmic euphoria.
It has since been openly admitted in the memoirs of the top British official, Colonel Alexander Scotland, who ran
the interrogation program, that thousands of Germans were tortured by British Military Intelligence, under the direction of the Prisoner of War Interrogation Section (PWIS). This torture of German POWs occurred during
the war to obtain military intelligence. After the war was over, it was used again in order to obtain confessions for convictions
of “war crimes”.
reported that the torture techniques included deprivation of sleep, starvation, systematic beatings, ripping hair from the
scalp, menacing with red-hot pokers, threatened use of electrical devices to deliver shocks, and, finally, the worst torture
of all, the slow and systematic mangling of the spermatic cords of the testicles—a procedure that had their victims
thrashing about and screaming like wild animals for hours.
The prosecutors at Nuremberg accused and convicted the Germans of murdering some 4 million people at Auschwitz.
These charges were based largely upon the supposed “confessions” obtained by the torture of German officers,
such as the signed “confession” by Rudolf Höss, the commandant at Auschwitz, giving details of how he had personally supervised the murder of 2.5
In 1989, however, the Soviet government reduced
the claim of the number killed at Auschwitz from 4 million to 1.5 million. (See picture below).
This was later reduced to 1 million.
It became apparent at once that if only 1 million Jews had
died at Auschwitz, as was now officially admitted, it no longer became possible to state that 2.5 million Jews had
been killed there under Höss while he was a commandant there. The “confession” by Höss
that 2.5 million Jews had been killed at Auschwitz under his auspices was therefore worthless. It had been a
confession clearly extracted under torture.
moreover, only 1 million Jews perished at Auschwitz instead of the 4 million originally claimed to have died there, it’s
obvious that there has been an overestimate of three million dead Jews. It is no longer possible to assert that 6 million
Jews died in the Holocaust. That becomes a mathematical impossibility.
yet, incredibly, this mathematical impossibility is brazenly asserted to this day in every mainstream media outlet.
We are all expected to pretend that 6 million Jews
minus 3 million Jews somehow equals 6 million Jews, just as Winston Smith (in Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four)
was expected to believe that 2 + 2 = 5. Winston Smith, you will remember, managed to believe this absurdity
in the end, with the help of a little extra tuition he received via the famous “rat torture“.
The startling revelation that
almost all the German defendants at Nuremberg had had their testicles crushed must make us sit up and think. How can testimonies
obtained under testicle crushing be regarded in any way as reliable?
Following reports that defendants were tortured at the Malmedy massacre trial, the US Army formed the “Simpson Commission” to investigate the alleged misconduct. Judge Edward L. Van
Roden was part of this commission. According to Van Roden’s book, American Atrocities in Germany,
out of 139 cases of treatment of alleged German “war criminals” who were investigated by the commission—and
who were subsequently put on trial by the American Military Tribunal in Dachau after World War II—”137 of these Germans were tortured by having their testicles crushed.”
used by the American interrogators included brutal beatings, placing a hood over prisoners and punching them in the face
with brass knuckles, breaking their jaws, knocking out their teeth, putting them on starvation rations, and subjecting them
to solitary confinement. The prisoners were then presented with prepared statements to sign. Confess or face
It emerged that Jewish prosecutors
and interrogators had obtained complete control over the US Military tribunal that was to put German officials on trial
for war crimes. This is seldom mentioned, as to do so is regarded as “anti-Semitic”. To state the unvarnished
truth—that 137 Germans had their testicles mangled at Nuremberg by largely Jewish interrogators in order to obtain
proof for the Holocaust—is regarded as “hate speech”.
Lt. William Perl (pictured left) was an Austrian Jew who had emigrated to America in 1940. He was the
chief interrogator of Germans accused of the Malmedy massacre. This was because he could speak fluent German; and indeed many of the interrogators at Nuremberg were German or Austrian
Jews who had emigrated to America before WWII and were known as the ‘Ritchie Boys’. There were roughly 9000
of these Jews in America and they specialized in the “interrogation” of German prisoners. (See here).
Perl supervised the torture of the German defendants. He
was an ardent and active Zionist and was assisted by other Jews in his endeavors to extract confessions by the infliction
of maximum pain. Jews specalizing in torture techniques at Nuremberg included Josef Kirschbaum, Harry Thon and
Morris Ellowitz. (See here)
This is what Wikipedia has to say about the interrogation
of Germans at Malmedy:
[against the German defendants] were mainly based on the sworn and written statements provided by the defendants
in Schwäbish Hall. To counter the evidence given in the men’s sworn statements and by prosecution witnesses, the
lead defense attorney, Lieutenant Colonel Willis M. Everett tried to show that the statements had been obtained by inappropriate methods.
Note that exquisite euphemism: “inappropriate
methods”. That’s how respectable, politically correct Americans refer to confessions obtained under torture.
The methods are not described as horrendously cruel. They are not described as morally indefensible. They are described
On Sept. 25, 1945, Thomas Dodd, who was
the second in command on the American prosecution team at Nuremberg, made the following observation in which he claimed that
three out of four interrogators at Nuremberg were Jewish:
“You know how I have despised anti-Semitism,” he said. “You know how strongly I feel toward
those who preach intolerance of any kind. With that knowledge, you will understand when I tell you that this staff is about seventy-five percent Jewish.”
One person who has made a close
study of the Nuremberg trial archives in the original German and knows more about this subject than anyone else I know is
the multilingual American scholar Carlos W. Porter who is fluent in German, French, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese. Having renounced
his American citizenship in 1984, and having then relocated to Belgium with his wife and children, the Holocaust revisionist
author of “Not Guilty at Nuremberg” took the trouble to write to me about the Nuremberg trials in a private communication (July 28, 2015 at
9:55 pm). Porter confirmed what I had always suspected: that most of the American interrogators at Nuremberg had been Jews,
and that torture had been freely practiced against the helpless Germans on trial in order to force them to confess to non-existent
“You can be absolutely CERTAIN,”
Carlos Porter wrote to me, “that nearly ALL the interrogators and interpreters in ALL the trials were Jewish, because
the Americans stamped out the German language from all American schools during WWI, so German Jewish refugees were almost
the only competent people they had. Of course, other “German-Americans” could not be trusted not to be “Nazis”,
so they were stuck with the German Jews.
was a great deal of mistreatment and torture in the minor trials is absolutely certain. I reproduced a couple of accounts
of torture at the Dachau trials in “War Crimes Trials and Other Essays”. But I’m sure it’s only the
tip of the iceberg. Minor personnel could be tortured with impunity, and 99% of them would be afraid even to mention it.
It would be hard to get away with torturing somebody like Goering though.
a lot of literature on the subject, more all the time. The Brits appear to have been surprisingly enthusiastic torturers,
whether Jewish or not.”
crushing, incidentally, is a tried and tested method for obtaining confessions. It was used throughout the Middle Ages and
particularly in France during the French Revolution. That the Jews, a scholarly race noted for their vast erudition and
academic achievements, should have mastered all the techniques of testicle crushing is therefore not surprising. Their talents
for acquiring such outré information must not be underestimated.
Though Perl had lots of German blood on his hands, he was nevertheless allowed by the Americans
to serve as a prosecutor at the Nuremberg War trials. Another Jew of note at the Nuremberg war crimes trials was Richard
W. Sonnenfeldt. He was the chief interpreter for American prosecutors such as Perl. He “interrogated”
some of the most notorious Nazi leaders of World War II and died in 2009, age 86, at his home in Port Washington, N.Y.
The Presiding Judge at Nuremberg was also—coincidence?—a
Jew. His name was A.H. Rosenfeld and he was a colonel in the American army. Col. Rosenfeld cheerfully
admitted to torturing German prisoners of war as a matter of policy. “We couldn’t have made those birds talk
otherwise,” he remarked cynically. “It was a trick, and it worked like a charm.”
In a recent private email to me, in response to some of my queries about torture at Nuremberg, Thomas Goodrich, acclaimed
author of Hellstorm : The Death of Nazi
Germany (1944-1947), mentioned the names of four well-known Jews in the American zone whom he identified as “torturer-inquisitors”
: Harry Thon, William Perl, AH Rosenfeld, and Shlomo Morel.
This last-named individual, Shlomo Morel (pictured right), was a particularly nasty piece
of work whom Goodrich describes as follows:
vicious monster who drowned men and women in outdoor latrines, who made them eat excrement, who personally beat captives
to death, and who forced women to kiss and make love with disinterred corpses.”
(For more grisly details, confirming all this, see here)
After escaping from the killing fields
of Germany, where he had taken immense pleasure in dancing over mounds of corpses and shedding rivers of human blood,
this cruel psychopath “lived out his life in comfort and ease in Israel.” Yes,
Israel!—the final bolthole and refuge dump for many a runaway Jew fleeing the long arm of the law, a place
described in a prescient comment by Adolf Hitler as early as 1925 as “a haven for convicted scoundrels
and a university for budding crooks.” (Mein Kampf, chapter 11, excerpt.)
Here now are some grisly details about testicle crushing that the reader may find of some
interest. These distasteful details are given here only because they are relevant to our discussion. If you are of a queasy
disposition and prone to easy vomiting, you are advised to skip the description and stop reading right here. Remember that
all this was done to 137 Germans at Nuremberg in order to extract confessions from them with a view to establishing the
“truth” about the Holocaust. Without all that testicle crushing, the Holocaust might have been much harder to
“Standard practice [to obtain
castration] in France from the Middle Ages to the French Revolution was to crush the condemned’s testicles in a vise,
which burst them as mush from the scrotum, then crunch the spermatic cords with pliers. The condemned was turned upside
down in order to maximize the blood flow to his brain, after which he was unable to pass out or enter a state of shock until,
perhaps, the last few seconds of his ordeal.
The condemned was
sure to vomit repeatedly with violent convulsions, even well after he had voided the contents of his stomach, but he rarely
screamed except for an initial shriek, which immediately silenced, because the pain overwhelmed his ability to breathe. Most
men would hang and thrash wildly during and after the crushing of each testicle, and their thrashing would renew upon the
crushing of each spermatic cord.
This torture method (accompanied
by others) was usually reserved for the crime of regicide or attempted regicide. The condemned was mercifully put to death
afterwards, but his torture routinely lasted for the better part of a day, witnessed by large crowds. It is interesting
to note that, whereas most crowds were instructed to jeer, mock, and ridicule the condemned, and did so even during a disemboweling,
and drawing and quartering, most crowds remained silent and stared with shocked expressions as a castration was carried out
in this manner.
Onlookers, male and female, are recorded to have
vomited at the sight of the spectacle.
certainly knew what they were doing at Nuremberg! They were the experts.
>The Tribunal shall not be bound by
technical rules of evidence. It shall adopt and apply to the greatest possible extent expeditious and nontechnical procedure,
and shall admit any evidence which it deems to be of probative value.
>The Tribunal shall not require proof
of facts of common knowledge but shall take judicial notice thereof. It shall also take judicial notice of official
governmental documents and reports of the United Nations, including the acts and documents of the committees set up in the
various allied countries for the investigation of war crimes, and of records and findings military or other Tribunals
of any of the United Nations.
Documentaries and Videos___
Ordered To Be Silent
the Jews’ version of history
or face gag orders and/or jail time
The thing to keep in mind is that people are being put
in jail for telling the truth.
That makes the idea that you are living in
a free country a willful delusion
from which no competent decisions about anything
may be made.
By John Kaminski
You are no longer allowed to tell a story that is not approved by the Jews, especially if it involves
holy Holocaust defamation. Like a spreading stain of darkness slowly asphyxiating the minds of everyone on Earth,
the monstrous judicial invention that “truth is no defense” has unleashed the worst possible future
upon our lemming-like human species.
People are being snatched off the streets for daring to analyze their country’s provably criminal
history. A woman lampooning a well-known ethnic group is ordered to stay off the Internet for a year. And anyone
who dares speak critically about Jews in public, after first having their character assassinated by a huffy Jewish
spokesperson, is likely to be arrested by a very real thought police.
The stain of darkness has spread much further than you may have thought, but a quick scan of the literature that
has not yet been completely erased by Amazon and the other Jewish mind erasers reveals the public knew more 80
years ago about the problem that has poisoned all life on this planet than we do today.
Those who claim to be involved in the quest for justice
should take this assessment to heart, for the time is running out for humanity’s best qualities as they are steadily
being erased by crazies who know nothing of compassion, humanity or justice.
Revisionists are telling the truth
You know the revisionists are telling the truth, that Holohoax
is the proper term for all this Jewish Holocaust hysteria, because you know by now — if you are even remotely
conscious — that your government is lying about everything it does, so if it says the Holocaust was real,
you’d automatically know it is lying to you . . . again . . . and still.
For instance, our government says it is fighting ISIS in Syria, and then we learn
it is funding ISIS in Syria through such third party operatives as Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
This not the first time this has happened. America’s longest war is now Afghanistan, and the same principles
are at work. The U.S. trains and funds the very people it is supposed to be fighting. We trained the mujahadeen
and they became al-Qaeda, paid by our Pentagon to be both friend and foe.
The purpose of all these tragic invasions is the same. In Afghanistan, 17 years of military adventurism and many
thousands of lives were spent to protect the poppy crop, providing fuel for the cycle of depravity that funnels
drugs to the streets, children into prison, and profits from slave labor. In Syria, it’s the oil in the Golan
Heights which Israel is already stealing.
The thing to keep in mind is that people are being put in jail for telling the truth. That makes the idea that
you are living in a free country a willful delusion from which no competent decisions about anything may be made.
thing Jews fear is the truth.
why all these white countries that have been taken over by Jews are slamming people into jail for challenging the
bogus Jewish version of history. Unfortunately — due to Jews owning the majority of media outlets around
the world — the majority of the people in the world tend to believe their well-distributed propaganda.
Like the official story of 9/11 that has long since
fallen apart, or the now-debunked lies about the invasion of Libya, which led to the mass invasion of migrants
in Europe. Jew puppets Hillary and Obama were responsible for the tragic debasement of Europe, which they triggered
by their criminal assassination of Libya and its beloved leader.
One hundred years of evidence clearly reveals that the Jews tell the truth about nothing, but nothing
they have done matches the lies they have told about what they did to the Germans during World War II.
These lies, and the twisted laws they have spawned, are inexorably
strangling every country on Earth, and every person on this planet. These laws prevent the perpetrators from humanity’s
greatest crimes from ever being apprehended, charged and convicted — because it would be anti-Semitic.
No one who knows the real history
of the 20th century dares to travel to Germany — or any European Union nation — anymore. They
will be slammed into prison for harboring unacceptable thoughts.
As we speak Lady Michelle Renouf, attempting to attend the kangaroo court trial of the Schaeffer siblings,
fears suffering the same fate as Monika Schaeffer, the Canadian fiddle player who made a humorous YouTube about
her mother and the Holocaust, went to Germany to visit her brother Alfred, and then was promptly snatched by the
Holohoax police and slammed into prison with no charges for many months.
She and her brother Alfred are in court this week, with their futures not bright and on the line.
This is banana republic garbage. In Germany there is no
liberty or justice for those who understand the worldwide Jewish mind scam. Now that Merkel has set the Africans
free in Germany, one can no longer expect any justice there. Renouf has to skulk around Stuttgart clandestinely
lest she be arrested by Jewish thugs and funneled off to jail for yet another trial.
And now for the first time, this mind virus has spread to England,
where for the first time a man has been jailed for daring to insist on the true facts of history.
Jew cops in England
Jeremy Bedford-Turner —
a.k.a. Jez Turner — was sentenced to 12 months for a 2015 speech he gave criticizing a Jewish organization
known as Shomrim, which is essentially a Jewish police force that works closely with local police.
Prior to Turner’s hasty conviction, Andrew Joyce
Bear in mind that the Crown Prosecution Service has already told Gideon Falter—not
once, but several times—that Jez Turner has committed no crime. If Jez is now found “guilty”
on some trumped-up charge, the Crown Prosecution Service will not only lose all credibility but the world will
see for itself that Jez was right all along when he allegedly said: “All politicians are nothing but a bunch
of puppets dancing to a Jewish tune.”
Writer Robert Henderson wrote,
But even with a jury the odds
were heavily against a not guilty verdict. In the minds of jurors must be the fear of being called a racist, a
fear which has been so successfully inculcated in the general population that it produces an automated reflex
of panic and terror when faced with the possibility of the label being stuck on them. Any juror faced with a case
such as this must have in the back of their minds that to return a not guilty would be to risk being called a racist.
There is also the sheer shock factor of hearing politically incorrect views being unashamedly spoken. As it was
the jury was out for less than two hours and returned a unanimous version of guilty.
Long ago we knew
more than we know now
Before World War II
started, one observer wrote:
press has degenerated under Jewish control and influence into lying propaganda agencies whose chief mission appears
to be to deceive and befuddle the people. In Protocol 12 the Elders of Zion say of the Press:
“Not a single
announcement will reach the public without our control. Even now this is already being attained by us inasmuch as
all news items are received by a few agencies, in whose offices they are focused from all parts of the world. These
agencies will then be already entirely ours and will give publicity only to what we dictate to them.
— George Armstrong, The Rothschild Money Trust, 1940, p.47
This Protocol was written before 1905. Seventy-eight years after
this was written, the modern world has much less an idea that Jews control everything, and the laws across Europe
that prevent debunking all these obvious Jewish lies are swallowing up people trying to point out the truth of
history one valiant martyr at a time.
can’t prove 6 million died, but we can prove 273,000 died, not all of them Jews, in the German labor camps.
To think of all the false Jewish stories about fake Holocaust
stories told by pathetic wretches in search of celebrity is to contemplate the spectrum of human psychological
So, the long and
short of it is, you may not even think about a story that affects Jews negatively, because this has been determined
to be a crime against the state.
you can think of other things that the Jews appear to be out to take from you, beyond your ability to think for
John Kaminski is a writer who lives
on the Gulf Coast of Florida, constantly trying to figure out why we are destroying ourselves, and pinpointing
a corrupt belief system as the engine of our demise.
British historian David Irving talks about the manipulation
of history. A video talk in four parts that you cannot miss!
British historian David Irving talks about the manipulation of history.
A video talk in four parts that you cannot miss!
British historian David Irving talks about the manipulation of history.
A video talk in four parts that you cannot miss!
British historian David Irving talks about the manipulation of history.
A video talk in four parts that you cannot miss!
Greetings ladies and gentlemen. A few days ago an article about your humble
author appeared at the Holocaust Controversies blog written by a certain Hans Metzner. Titled Panagiotis Heliotis -
The New Star Shining in the Revisionist Coffin?
This is the last of a series of parts on the same topic. And what
a topic that is! If you have missed the previous parts you can find them here or on our You Tube Channel.
to the Treblinka “Gas Chambers”
“CONFESSIONS” UNDER TORTURE
The Allies used extremely brutal torture against their German prisoners, not just during the
war, but afterward, to force them to provide fraudulent confessions to crimes they never committed—all to get convictions
at war crime trials. The subject is well known to Revisionists, but the facts have been suppressed by the mainstream for
more than 65 years and few people outside of this circle are aware of it.
The American Senator, Joseph McCarthy, in a statement given to
the American Press on May 20th, 1949, drew attention to the following cases of torture to secure such confessions. In the
prison of the Swabisch Hall, he stated, officers of the S.S. Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler were flogged until they were soaked
in blood, after which their sexual organs were trampled on as they lay prostrate on the ground. As in the notorious Malmedy
Trials of private soldiers, the prisoners were hoisted in the air and beaten until they signed the confessions demanded
of them. On the basis of such “confessions” extorted from S.S. Generals Sepp Dietrich and Joachim Paiper, the
Leibstandarte was convicted as a “guilty organisation”. S.S. General Oswald Pohl, the economic administrator
of the concentration camp system, had his face smeared with faeces and was subsequently beaten until he supplied his confession.
In dealing with these cases, Senator McCarthy told the Press: “I
have heard evidence and read documentary proofs to the effect that the accused persons were beaten up, maltreated and physically
tortured by methods which could only be conceived in sick brains. They were subjected to mock trials and pretended executions,
they were told their families would be deprived of their ration cards. All these things were carried out with the approval
of the Public Prosecutor in order to secure the psychological atmosphere necessary for the extortion of the required confessions.
If the United States lets such acts committed by a few people go unpunished, then the whole world can rightly criticise us
severely and forever doubt the correctness of our motives and our moral integrity.” The methods of intimidation described
were repeated during trials at Frankfurt-am-Mein and at Dachau, and large numbers of Germans were convicted for atrocities
on the basis of their admissions.
The American Judge
Edward L. van Roden, one of the three members of the Simpson Army Commission which was subsequently appointed to investigate
the methods of justice at the Dachau trials, revealed the methods by which these admissions were secured in the Washington
Daily News, January 9th, 1949. His account also appeared in the British newspaper, the Sunday Pictorial, January 23rd, 1949.
The methods he described were: “Posturing as priests to hear confessions and give absolution; torture with burning
matches driven under the prisoners finger-nails; knocking out of teeth and breaking jaws; solitary confinement and near starvation
rations.” Van Roden explained: “The statements which were admitted as evidence were obtained from men who had
first been kept in solitary confinement for three, four and five months … The investigators would put a black hood
over the accused’s head and then punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him and beat him with rubber hoses
… All but two of the Germans, in the 139 cases we investigated, had been kicked in the testicles beyond repair. This
was standard operating procedure with our American investigators.”
The American investigators responsible (and who later functioned as the prosecution in the trials) were: Lt.-Col.
Burton F. Ellis (chief of the War Crimes Committee) and his assistants, Capt. Raphael Shumacker, Lt. Robert E. Byrne, Lt.
William R. Perl, Mr. Morris Ellowitz, Mr. Harry Thon, and Mr. Kirschbaum. The legal adviser of the court was Col. A. H.
Rosenfeld. The reader will immediately appreciate from their names that the majority of these people were “biased
on racial grounds” in the words of Justice Wenersturm – that is, were Jewish, and therefore should never have
been involved in any such investigation. Despite the fact that “confessions” pertaining to the extermination
of the Jews were extracted under these conditions, Nuremberg statements are still regarded as conclusive evidence for the
Six Million by writers like Reitlinger and others, and the illusion is maintained that the Trials were both impartial and
impeccably fair. When General Taylor, the Chief Public Prosecutor, was asked where he had obtained the figure of the Six
Million, he replied that it was based on the confession of S.S. General Otto Ohlendorf. He, too, was tortured and his case
is examined below. But as far as such “confessions” in general are concerned, we can do no better than quote
the British Sunday Pictorial when reviewing the report of Judge van Roden: “Strong men were reduced to broken wrecks
ready to mumble any admission demanded by their prosecutors.”
of widespread torture at the postwar American-run “war crimes” trials at Dachau leaked out, resulting in so
many protests that a formal investigation was eventually carried out. A US Army Commission of inquiry consisting of Pennsylvania
Judge Edward van Roden and Texas Supreme Court Judge Gordon Simpson officially confirmed the charges of gross abuse. German
defendants, they found, were routinely tortured at Dachau with savage beatings, burning matches under fingernails, kicking
of testicles, months of solitary confinement, and threats of family reprisals. Low ranking prisoners were assured that their
“confessions” would be used only against their former superiors in the dock. Later, though, these hapless men
found their own “confessions” used against them when they were tried in turn. High ranking defendants were cynically
assured that by “voluntarily” accepting all responsibility themselves they would thereby protect their former
subordinates from prosecution.
One Dachau trial court
reporter was so outraged at what was happening there in the name of justice that he quit his job. He testified to a US Senate
subcommittee that the “most brutal” interrogators had been three German-born Jews. Although operating procedures
at the Dachau trials were significantly worse than those used at Nuremberg, they give some idea of the spirit of the “justice”
imposed on the vanquished Germans.
Virtually all of
the US investigators who brought cases before American military courts at Dachau were “Jewish refugees from Germany”
who “hated the Germans,” recalled Joseph Halow, a US Army court reporter at the Dachau trials in 1947. “Many
of the investigators gave vent to their hated by attempting to force confessions from the Germans by treating them brutally,”
including “severe beatings.”
of Gustav Petrat, a German who had served as a guard at the Mauthausen, was not unusual. After repeated brutal beatings
by US authorities, he broke down and signed a perjured statement. He was also whipped and threatened with immediate shooting.
Petrat was prevented from securing exonerating evidence, and even potential defense witnesses were beaten and threatened
to keep them from testifying. After a farcical trial by a US military court at Dachau, Petrat was sentenced to death and
hanged in late 1948. He was 24 years old.
James J. Weingartner, the author of A Peculiar Crusade: Willis
M. Everett and the Malmedy Massacre, wrote the story of the Dachau proceedings from information provided by Everett’s
family and gleaned from his letters and diary. According to Weingartner, shortly before the proceedings were to begin, defense
attorney Lt. Col. Everett interviewed a few of the 73 accused with the help of an interpreter. Although the accused were
being held in solitary confinement and had not had the opportunity to consult with each other, most of them told identical
stories of misconduct by their Jewish interrogators.
Ferencz, Jewish lead U.S. prosecutor at the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunals in 1945 and 1947: “We did not have a regular
courtroom where to call witnesses and question them, with a secretary present and someone who did the cross-examination
or that would guarantee their rights. We collected statements from witnesses that we considered favorable and they would
write an affidavit. And then they had to swear it in front of an officer. If it was from a hostile witness we would interrogate
him privately to see if we could determine the truth. And when we reached the point where we felt we had ascertained the
truth, we asked him to write in his own hand and sign it; then usually brought in an officer to witness that.”
– USHMM interview 1994
Washington Post: Giving Hitler Hell (21 July 2005)
Jewish Intelligence Officer Arnold Weiss: “How did you do it?” I ask Weiss. “The
kapos,” he explains, “that’s where we got the idea. We had seen what the DPs (displaced persons) did to
the kapos, and we realized they could do us a favor. We studied up a little on military law, and there was nothing on the
books preventing us from delivering suspects for additional debriefing to the DPs,” Weiss recalls. He says he’s
not sure where the idea originated, who first put it into motion, or how widespread it was. “Whoever first came up
with this, I honestly don’t know. I don’t think they’d own up to it anyway.”
While it was perfectly legal under military law to hand over suspects for further questioning
to DPs, says Benjamin Ferencz, who was a lead U.S. prosecutor at the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunals in 1945 and 1947, knowingly
delivering suspects for execution was not. And of course the DPs were not interested in extracting information.
Benjamin Ferencz: “I once saw DPs (displaced persons) beat
an SS man and then strap him to the steel gurney of a crematorium. They slid him in the oven, turned on the heat and took
him back out. Beat him again, and put him back in until he was burnt alive. I did nothing to stop it. I suppose I could
have brandished my weapon or shot in the air, but I was not inclined to do so. Does that make me an accomplice to murder?”
Lt. William Perl was an Austrian Jew who had emigrated to America
in 1940. He was the chief interrogator of Germans accused of the Malmedy massacre. This was because he could speak fluent
German; and indeed many of the interrogators at Nuremberg were German or Austrian Jews who had emigrated to America before
WWII and were known as the ‘Ritchie Boys’. There were roughly 9000 of these Jews in America and they specialized
in the “interrogation” of German prisoners. Perl was an active Zionist who had worked to get European Jews into
Palestine illegally before he came to America. Perl was also a good friend and associate of the Zionist Ze’ev Jabotinsky,
founder of the murderous Irgun terrorist organization in Israel. Perl supervised the torture of the German defendants. Other
Jews on the interrogation staff specalizing in torture techniques at Nuremberg included Josef Kirschbaum, Harry Thon and
British Postwar Torture Centers
Col. Robin Stephens (pictured left) was in charge of a sadistic
torture program during and after WWII, still largely covered up by the British government. Much of the fabricated “evidence”
obtained under duress was used as a pretext to convict National Socialist leaders for war crimes.
The London Cage was used partly as a torture centre, inside which large numbers of German
officers and soldiers were subjected to systematic ill-treatment. In total 3,573 men passed through the Cage, and more than
1,000 were persuaded to give statements about war crimes. The brutality did not end with the war, moreover: a number of
German civilians joined the servicemen who were interrogated there up to 1948.
Cruel Britannia: A Secret History of Torture by Ian Cobain
The secrets of the London Cage
How Britain tortured Nazi PoWs
Bad Nenndorf interrogation centre
The interrogation camp that turned prisoners into living skeletons
The postwar photographs that British authorities tried to keep hidden
Tortured Confessions: How the Allies extracted confessions out of captured
German soldiers after WWII
Torture and Testicle Crushing at Nuremberg
How the Allied Victors of WWII tortured and killed their German prisoners
How Jews tortured innocent Germans to make Holocaust Evidence
The Holocaust legend is built on “confessions” obtained VIA TORTURE; Jewish interrogators beat, tortured,
and crushed the testicles of German defendants at war crimes trials
Untrue Confessions: Fabricated Testimony & Circumstantially Prudent Concessions
Hellstorm — The Death of Nazi Germany, 1944-1947 By Thomas Goodrich
I DENY NO HOLOCAUST
ignorant, brainwashed people have contemptuously called me a “Holocaust Denier”. The
following is the response I give, to those who will listen:
Excuse me, but
I don’t “deny” ANY “Holocaust”… Do you?
fully accept the account of the brave and famous Russian writer and historian, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn,
who was often called “The Conscience of the 20th Century”; who served eight long years in
the Soviet Gulag prison system, when he reports in the book he published in the year 2000 entitled “Together
For Two Hundred Years” that, in the Soviet Holocaust, 66 million innocent Gentiles, mostly Christians
(and it being a full ELEVEN TIMES the number of Jews claimed to have been killed by the Germans in WWII),
were kidnapped, tortured, raped, and murdered in a wide variety of cruel, wanton, and horribly inhuman
ways in the thousands of monstrously evil Gulag concentration camps at the hands of the Jewish Bolshevik
“Ivan the Terrible” Cheka corps.
I freely acknowledge the fact that on
February 13 & 14, 1945, in the quintessential Holocaust of the non-military city of Dresden, more
than 700,000 phosphorus bombs were dropped on 1.2 million helpless people, which produced a firestorm
that was called a “Single Column of Flame”, where the temperature in the center of the city
reached 1600 degrees centigrade, and in which approximately 500,000 German women, children, elderly, wounded
soldiers, random citizens, and even all of the animals in the city zoo were slaughtered by concussion
and fire in a single night.
I absolutely recognize that more people
died there in Dresden, in that one big flame, than the estimated total of 246,000 helpless people who
died in two other quintessential Holocausts, the senseless, wantonly murderous, abominable, and unnecessary
atomic attacks upon the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.
openly avow the virtually forgotten Holocaust endured by the passengers and crew of the Wilhelm Gustloff,
an unarmed German passenger liner which was torpedoed and sunk in the freezing waters of the Baltic Sea,
13 miles off the coast of Pomerania on January 30, 1945, as it carried, besides it’s men and crew,
some 73 wounded soldiers, 373 members of the Womens’ Naval Auxilliary, and some 9,000 German civilian
refugees – mostly women and children – who were all fleeing in terror from East Prussia in the
advance of the Red Army, and where only a few hundred lived to tell the tale, making it the deadliest disaster
in maritime history, killing nearly ten times the number who died on the Titanic.
I fully admit that, as tallied and reported by the International Red Cross, a grand total of 271,304
people – not all of them Jews – died in all of the German concentration camps, combined,
by the end of World War II – a Holocaust which was solely the result of typhus epidemics and starvation
caused by the Zionist controlled, allied carpet bombings of supply routes and centers all over Germany
that made it impossible to transport food and medical supplies to prisoners, soldiers, and civilians
I certainly do not deny the Holocaust of the over 1,000,000 German
post-war, non-combatants who were rounded up, detained without any food, water, shelter, or medical care,
and purposely, and systematically killed through starvation and exposure in 1945-46 under the supervision
of the allied commander Dwight D. Eisenhower, in the largest outdoor concentration camp this side of
modern-day Palestine, or the concurrent Holocaust of the wholesale cold-blooded rape and murder of untold hundreds
of thousands, if not millions, of women and children as the communist Red Army of the Soviets also took
its “revenge” upon the defeated Germans.
I do not deny the Holocaust
suffered by the good men and crew of the practically unarmed USS Liberty surveillance ship, which was deliberately
attacked by air and sea, with machine gun, cannon, and torpedo fire by Israeli forces on June 8, 1967,
killing 34 and wounding 174, in an attempted false flag operation which was intended to sink the ship, and murder
all aboard, in order to draw the United States into the Middle East conflict on the side of Israel,
and was only foiled by the ingenuity and resourcefulness of the crew in aiding the radio operator to
successfully get off a call for help.
And I do not deny the Holocaust
of the some 3,000 people who died in a single day as a result of the false flag attack on the World Trade
Center in New York which was engineered and perpetrated by leaders of Israel in order to kick off their
pre-planned “Clash of Civilizations” which they hope will eventually cause their two sworn
enemies, the Christians, and the Muslims, to forget their historical religious commonalities, and annihilate
one another in the yet to be the greatest Holocaust in history – a third world war – as the
“Chosen Ones” sit on the sidelines… and direct… and watch… and profit…
while gleefully rubbing their hands as even more untold millions of innocents die.
I also do not deny the Holocaust of the Jenin Refugee Camp, on April 13, 2002,
where Israeli forces attacked the camp using bulldozers, tanks, and Apache helicopters, in a cruel, indiscriminate,
blood-lust slaughter, which was said to be “Horrific beyond belief”, and which lasted for
13 days, flattening large areas of the town, and killing unknown hundreds of innocent men, women, and
children, many of whom were buried alive; or the earlier, similar, Holocausts at the Sabra and Shatila
refugee camps in Lebanon in 1982, in which it is known that at least 800 Palestinians were killed.
Nor do I deny the wholesale slaughter and destruction perpetrated upon
the sovereign nation of Iraq, in the Holocaust that was the illegal, and unjustified war of aggression
that, from 2003 to the present, has resulted in the murder of over 1,000,000 innocent Iraqi men, women, and
children, and brought their country to ruin, as one of the first steps in Israel’s ongoing war
of terror, which they have the unmitigated gall to present to the world as a war “ON” terror…
for which the final tally of victims is yet to be seen.
I’m at it, let me just note here that I fully acknowledge the fact that the perpetrators of
the above mentioned, and relatively recent Holocausts have a very long history of either directly, or indirectly
committing numerous other such atrocities against many peoples over many millenia, even since ancient
Biblical times – from the slaughter of the Midianites to the African slave trade – a number
of which being the basis of, and celebrated during various Jewish holidays. And though I do not particularly
describe them here, I don’t deny any of them either.
I do deny is the ridiculous and exaggerated claim that there is ANY evidence at all that ANY Jews at
all – much less “six million” of them – died from ANY intentional gassings, or as
a result of ANY kind of organized or systematic program of genocide perpetrated against Jews by Germany’s
Nazi regime… and I challenge you to produce ANY evidence or “proof” that is not merely
made up of either pre-war, wartime, or post-war anti-German propaganda… because none, from either
then or now, actually exists.
So, if you want to talk
about a “Holocaust”… and I mean a REAL, genuine, genocidal “Holocaust”,
and not only the ones from the past, but one that is happening right NOW, in the present, all you need to do
is to pull your brain-dead/brainwashed heads out of your collectively ignorant rear ends, and look into
the current goings-on in Gaza, The West Bank, Syria, and the Middle East in general, where the racist, supremacist,
Zionist, Talmudic Jews are feverishly working day and night to exterminate anyone, either Gentile or
Jew, who stands in their way in their quest to build their racist, supremacist, “Kingdom of the
World”… a.k.a., Eretz Israel.
if any of you sanctimonious accusers deny any of these realities, and merely cling to the all too common
view that the only “Holocaust” that really matters is one that is purported to have been suffered
by the Jews, then for people like you to call anyone else a “Holocaust Denier” is one of the
most laughable, and hypocritical examples of psychopathic projection I have yet seen anywhere…
even as you continue to stupidly, and unashamedly, prove your ignorance and psychopathy with every ridiculous
charge you make.
THE OPEN LETTER SPIELBERG COULDN’T REPLY TO
BY R. Dommergue Polacco de Ménasce, a noted Jewish holocaust researcher:
“Dear Mr. Spielberg, I wish
your honesty to be equal to your talent. I saw you on TV in France. You declared that you would pour out Shoah (holocaust)
propaganda in German schools. I feel it my duty as a Jew and after 20 years of study of the historical problem of the holocaust,
to call your attention to the facts.
Jewish Prof. Roger Dommergue
Facts are very stubborn and as no one can contradict them, zealots have been forced to make disgusting politicians
enact Orwellian laws which forbid to mention anything concerning the dogma of the ‘six-million-gas-chambers’.
Professor Faurisson, who has been studying the subject for 20 years, has been massacred.
These laws are, accordingly, the absolute proof of the fake before we study its arithmetical and technical ineptitude. No
Sir, you will not find a single witness who saw six million Jews slaughtered. You will not find one witness of gas chambers
to exterminate 1000 or 2000 people at a time, close to the crematoria. The 6-million-gas-chambers myth is an arithmetic
and technical nonsense.
As a matter of fact the howling, snivelling, Shoah business is disgusting, debasing: it
is a disgraceful shame. No people in history have ever been wailing about its losses 50 – 70 years after a war, even
its true and real losses. Even if the 6-million-gas-chambers were true, it would be a dishonour to make such din and pump
up so much money everywhere.
We know that 6 million is a gross exaggeration and that the gas chambers are a technical
impossibility. (Degesh Trial in 1949). In fact, 150,000 or 200,000 Jews died in the German camps of typhus or starvation.
Many others died but as fighters against Germany to which we, the Jews, had declared war in 1933.
We know that after 1945 Americans and Russians killed and raped German communities all
over Europe from Lithuania to Albania. We know that 1,500,000 German war prisoners were starved to death after the war (a
quite famous book was published but is ignored (Other Losses, James Bacque).
We know that all German towns of more than 100,000 people have been destroyed during the
last war, with women and children: yet silence about this real holocaust. If we consider the turn taken by the Shoah business,
what you intend to do in Germany is actually the safest way to a heaping up of a huge amount of anti-Semitism the explosion
of which will be unique in history. Discretion and moderation must be our behaviour: all the rest is suicide.
Orwellian laws for ‘crime of thought’ cannot prevent anti-Semitism to explode:
only our behaviour can. What you do and all the whining and money pumping can only egg it on and it will increase out of
reasonable proportions. We must, at least, try to avoid such blunders as the one you intend to perform in Germany and which
would be appalling.
POINT 1: Do we know, in the course of History,
of any ethnic group which would not rejoice when learning that, in a war ended fifty years before, it had suffered many
less losses than it thought? Would the discovery of such good piece of news, not be rewarded, and celebrated? Would he be
overwhelmed with heavy fines, would he escape attempted murder, as such was the case with Professor Faurisson? Do such reactions
not belong to a heavy case of psychopathy?
POINT 2: Have the living
corpses which can be seen in such films as Night and Fog (by Alain Resnais), have anything to do with
gassing? Are they not instead of the result of famine in the camps because of the systematic bombing of German towns containing
more than 100,000 people, bringing a real holocaust to hundreds of thousands of women and children who are never mentioned?
POINT 3: Where would have been the 4 million Jews (if we consider
that 2 million were killed in battlefields), when it is well known that one camp could not contain more than 60,000 thousand
people and that except in Auschwitz, there was no Zyclon- B gas-chambers?
POINT 4: Are
witnesses worth anything, when you know that torture was the only way to squeeze out evidence. Such was the case of Commandant
Hoess whose ludicrous declaration has become a legend. What about the 100 witnesses of gassing in Dachau, when it is officially
recognised that there were no gas chambers situated in that camp either?
POINT 5: 130
kilos of coal are necessary for the cremation of just one corpse. We are told that the Germans cremated 1,300 corpses a
day. The USAAF took hundreds of pictures of Auschwitz, during the supposed period of the holocaust. (1943-44). Why is there
not a single heap of the essential coal? Why not a single column of smoke?
POINT 6: Why
do media continue daily to inflict upon us the myth of the six-million-gas-chambers, in a never-ending whining and moaning?
Why are the Jewish lobby chasing, nonagenarians who attempted to rescue Germany from the iniquity of the Versailles treaty,
from the joblessness of 6 million people, who, back to work could give bread to the 21,500,000 persons who were dependent
POINT 7: Why does the American Jewish Year Book,
issue 43, page 666, inform us that in 1941, there were 3.300.000 Jews in occupied Europe?
POINT 8: How is it possible that the gas chambers could be just near the crematoria, when
any chemist will tell you that Zyclon-B is hyper flammable?
POINT 9: Why
are revisionist historians persecuted when they demonstrate the hoax of the holocaust? A scientific dialogue, a court-ordered
appraisal have been demanded since 1980 about a problem specifically arithmetic and technical. It would seal the truth for
POINT 10: How could Zyclon-B gas 1,000 people at one time, when
it is well known that American gas chambers made for just one person, are of an unheard of complexity and cost? Why, at
the trial of the Degesh, which fabricated the Zyclon-B, was it declared in 1949, that gassing in such conditions is impossible
POINT 11: Why did Leuchter, who was in charge
of the maintenance of the US gas chambers, give the firm evidence that there was no gassing in Auschwitz? Why have Austrian
and Polish reports confirmed the Leuchter report? Why is the Rudolf report, which analyses all results, forbidden? Why are
those who divulge the Rudolf report, heavily sentenced by the law? And yet the slightest care of the quality and accuracy
of the report is not taken.
POINT 12: Why was, for the first
time in history, the doctor’s degree of Mr Roques, on the Gerstein report cancelled? And still, this report was not
accepted at the Nuremberg trial!
POINT 13: Why did
Raymond Aron and François Furet at a Sorbonne seminar, to which no revisionist was invited, (state) that there was
not the slightest trace of a written or oral order for the extermination of the Jews?
POINT 14: Why is it never spoken of the planning of the extermination of the Germans as expressed
in a book written by the Jew Kaufmann (Germany must perish), by sterilisation of German men? It is undoubtedly a small detail?
POINT 15: How could Zyclon-B, used by the Germans for hygiene since
1920, be used in the concentration camps for other purposes than delousing and protection against typhus?
POINT 16: Why do they harp on about the six-million and never mention 80 million non-Jews
exterminated in the USSR, by an entirely Jewish political regime, the executioners of which bore the names of Kaganovich,
Yagoda, Frenkel, Firine, Jejoff, Ourenski, Rappaport, and fifty other Jews?
POINT 17: Why,
during the Zundel trial in Canada, did the famous pro-holocaust Jews disgrace themselves by talking of ‘poetic licence’
in their holocaust assertions, and who never returned when summoned to do so by the judges?
Ernst Zündel, historian, holocaust fraud investigator
POINT 18: Why the Fabius-Gayssot law; the ludicrous fable of one illness stricken man dragging
along 200,000,000 corpses?
POINT 19: Is it not the supreme
proof of the fake? There is no need of Stalinist-Orwellian laws imposing prison sentences because of one’s beliefs
(thought crime of 1984) as stated by M. Toubon, before he became a Minister of Justice in France, to set up the truth.
This law is anti-constitutional, anti-democratic, against the rights of men. Facts, proofs,
pros and cons, are only what we need. Professor Faurisson besought for the granting of a forum with an unlimited number of
contradictors: he never obtained it. L’abbé Pierre did ask for it: they pretended to grant it but refused it
The forum did take place at the Lugarno television studios. It was
a complete success for the revisionists and was broadcast twice. Nobody knows it as the media, at the beck and call of the
Jewish lobby, move their little finger only when authorised by the Jewish lobby to do so.
POINT 20: Why is it that when a professor declares that the holocaust is an arithmetic and
technical impossibility, he is dismissed? This, for the first time in history, sets up the insane concept of religious historical
dogma, which in case of non-perennial worship, is doomed to be struck by the lightning of the inquisition of a secular state.
POINT 21: Why did the ‘Express’, a famous French newspaper,
in January 1995, assert that the gas-chamber shown for decades in Auschwitz I, was reconstructed after the war, and that
all that concerns it, is false?
POINT 22: There was actually
a holocaust of 60 million people in a war declared in 1933 by the Jews against Hitler. Hitler had given bread to six million
unemployed, he had rejected the dictatorship of the dollar and Jewish totalitarianism which pollute man and the planet and
which is called democracy by semantic mystification. Only two parties are left: the totalitarian Judeopathy, exterminating
man and the planet, and Nationalism for the non-Jews not yet poisoned by Capitalist-Marxist Jewish influence.”
NOTE: For reasons of space this open letter to movie producer Steven
Spielberg has been abridged from the French language original penned by R. Dommergue Polacco de Ménasce, a Jew who
strongly takes issue with the totalitarian Judeopathy.
Is There Life After Persecution?
The Botched Execution of Fred Leuchter
Presented at the Eleventh IHR Conference, October 1992.
by Fred A. Leuchter, Jr.
Many of you, I am sure, know who I am, where I've been, and what I've done. Today I'm here to tell you
what has happened to me since I addressed the Tenth International Revisionist Conference in Washington, DC, in October
One of my jobs as an engineer of execution technology
has been to "post mortem" executions from a technical standpoint, that is, to determine if anything
went wrong and, if so, to determine just how the execution was botched. This normally entails reviewing eyewitness
accounts of how the executees were tortured, mutilated, or otherwise dehumanized in society's name.
I will do that here today, except that, in this case, it is myself that I post
mortem -- and the cadaver isn't dead! Much to the dismay of my executioners, the execution was so badly botched
that I am able to stand here before you to speak the truth, and to tell the world that it is not myself, but the
Holocaust story that is dead. I repeat for the record: I was condemned for maintaining that there were no execution
gas chambers at Auschwitz, Birkenau, Majdanek, Dachau, Mauthausen, or Hartheim Castle. There's no proof for the
charge, only innuendo, lies, and half-truths. Robert Faurisson, Ernst Zündel and others said this first.
They, too, live as victims of botched executions, but nevertheless free to speak the truth in a strong and growing
voice that repeats: No gas chambers, no gas chambers, no damn gas chambers!
This address, then, is not a post mortem on my cadaver but rather a post mortem by my cadaver.
As you know, I was sent to Poland in 1988 by and for Mr. Ernst Zündel to investigate
the alleged execution gas chamber facilities at the three concentration camps of Auschwitz, Birkenau, and Majdanek.
I was chosen for this task from a field of experts numbering one, and recommended by those states in the USA where
lethal gas chambers are used to execute convicted criminals. My forensic analysis and subsequent report prove
beyond any shadow of a doubt that there were no gas execution facilities operated by the Nazis at these sites.
I also entered these findings (which are also detailed in my published report) into the court record in sworn
testimony in Toronto as a court-qualified expert.
I was somewhat naive at the time, I was not aware that by so testifying I was offending the organized world Jewish
community. By providing final, definitive proof that there were no execution gas chamber utilized for genocidal
purposes by the Germans at these wartime camps, I established the simple fact that the Holocaust story is not
true. What I did not know was that anyone expressing such beliefs is guilty of a capital crime: that of thinking
and telling the unspeakable truth about the greatest lie of the age.
I would have to pay for this crime. While I innocently told the truth in Toronto, plans were made, and
subsequently implemented, for a major effort to destroy me. If I could be destroyed and discredited -- so the
reasoning went -- no one would accept my professional findings, no matter how truthful.
1988, when I testified in the second Zündel trial in Toronto about my inspection of the alleged gas chambers in Poland,
my life has been turned upside down.
I have been
vilified both privately and publicly in all forms of the media. My clients have been cajoled and threatened into
not dealing with me. High-level law enforcement officials, acting for personal reasons, have lied about me and
have prevented clients from dealing with me. My person and reputation have been defiled by lies and innuendo. My
family and I have been repeatedly threatened.
campaign to punish me and suppress the truth about the gas chambers, have been several Jewish organizations, which
have publicly vowed to silence me by destroying my ability to make a living.
At the forefront of this effort has been Beate Klarsfeld of the Paris-based Klarsfeld
Foundation. In the United States, the campaign has been orchestrated through the US-based "Holocaust Survivors and
Friends in Pursuit of Justice." Associated with these two organizations have been the Anti-Defamation League
of the B'nai B'rith and the Jewish Defense League.
Fred A. Leuchter, Jr.
At Klarsfeld's initiative,
these groups first carried out an extensive one year investigation. After they were unable to turn up any impropriety
or wrongdoing on my part, they began to threaten prison wardens with political consequences if they dealt with
me. This first came to light when the ABC television news program, "Prime Time," decided to do a network
television piece on myself and my work. This involved filming at various prisons. Prison wardens advised the "Prime
Time" personnel of the threats and problems that resulted from my presence at the prisons for the filming.
ABC news was told not to air the program. It refused to succumb to the pressure, and consequently suffered vilification
by the organizations involved.
To sum up here, this campaign
has consisted of the following:
- Threats against prison
officials who dealt with me.
- False and slanderous vilification through private channels,
as well as publicly in newspapers and magazines.
- Legislation to prevent me from working at
- Criminal prosecution for working at my profession.
- Lies by public officials spread both officially and privately.
- Restriction of my personal
freedom and right to travel by effecting my illegal arrest and imprisonment in England, from where I was finally
- Interference with my right as an American citizen to help and protection
from the US State Department, which refused to assist me during my illegal imprisonment in England.
As a result of this campaign, my livelihood has been destroyed, and my career has been ruined. All this for telling
the truth under oath.
The organizations cited above
also interfered with the execution in Illinois of a certain Mr. Walker by threatening to pass legislation to prevent
that state from allowing me to complete an ongoing contract. As a result, Director McGinnis ultimately yielded
to this pressure and proceeded with the execution using equipment known to be defective. Under pressure from these
groups, and through the efforts of Alabama Deputy Attorney General, Ed Carnes, the State of Alabama did not purchase
a new electric chair. Carnes wrote a lying memorandum to all Departments of Corrections around the United States
claiming that I was dangerous and held unorthodox views on execution. He caused the State to breach its contract.
According to his office, this means I support only humane and painless executions. Carnes actually lied to me to
get me to testify that a prior execution was humane.
a direct result of interference by these groups, at least one man was tortured to death in Virginia. Purchasing
agents and wardens have been mendaciously told that my equipment failed during an execution, which is not true.
It has never failed. Delaware Deputy Attorney General Silverman breached my contract, which was already underway,
because I wrote the Zündel trial Leuchter Report. This contract was for maintenance on their lethal injection
machine and gallows, previously fabricated by me, and for training of their execution personnel. Delaware has
refused to pay me for the work I completed, and has instructed me to keep the control module of their lethal injection
machine. However, the protocol I wrote for execution by hanging was submitted by them and approved by the court
system. In Massachusetts, legislation specifically designed to put me out of business has been filed for four
Finally, and also at the insistence of these
same Jewish groups, a spurious criminal complaint was filed against me in the Massachusetts court system with
the intent of destroying my reputation by putting me in prison for three months.
I was charged with practicing as an engineer without a license. In point of fact, a license
is not required in Massachusetts, or any other state, unless the engineer is involved in construction of buildings,
and is certifying compliance with specifications. There is also a statutory exemption for engineers who do not
deal with the general public.
As confirmation of
the spurious nature of this charge, it should be pointed out there are more than fifty thousand practicing engineers
in Massachusetts, of whom only five thousand are licensed. Although the state's licensing law has been in effect
since 1940, there has been no record of any prosecution for this offense.
The charge was improperly brought. Nevertheless, if it had been successful, and I had been convicted, I would have
been imprisoned for three months.
state Engineering Board, under pressure from Klarsfeld and her "Holocaust Survivors and Friends in Pursuit
of Justice," filed this criminal complaint in Middlesex County. The name of the complainant was denied me,
and was not made available until the matter was brought before the court. Before the complaint was issued, and
several times thereafter, I was given the chance to recant in return for non-issuance or dismissal of the complaint.
I also would have been obliged to give up my profession, in order to discredit my Report. I refused,
and responded to the Board's threat with a denial that any law had been violated. The original clerk magistrate
who issued the complaint apologized for bowing to Jewish pressure in prosecuting me under a statute that was being
mis-applied. A representative of the ADL tried to force her testimony on the hearing, but was denied access because
she had no evidence to offer that was pertinent to the matter. The District Court judge, in an excellent imitation
of Pontius Pilate, summarily dismissed our motions for dismissal, allowed my court-appointed attorney to withdraw,
and instructed Kirk Lyons, Director of the Cause Foundation and my out-of-state attorney, to re-file our motions
for dismissal, because they all had merit. After it became clear that there would be no justice for us in the Malden
District Court, we moved the case to Superior Court for a jury trial.
With this charge hanging over my head, it was impossible for me to consult, supply equipment, or even act as an
expert witness in American courts, as I had often done.
district attorney's office, under heavy pressure from various Jewish organizations, selected its best prosecuting
attorney to handle my case. In the belief that he would be the person most likely to bring about a conviction,
he was pulled from a murder trial. In June, just prior to the trial, our motions for dismissal were heard. The
judge, also under heavy pressure from Jewish groups, told the district attorney that this case was not properly
a criminal matter, and strongly suggested that the case be resolved short of a trial. With the ever-present possibility
of conviction and jail (faced by most political prisoners) we negotiated a settlement.
A very special consent agreement was signed [on June 11, 1991] that made legal
history in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The agreement was not a promise by the defendant to the court, as
is normally the case, but an agreement between the State Engineering Board and myself. The board which, on two
previous occasions, had refused to accept my application for registration because they do not register people who
practice my discipline, was required to become a party to the agreement. [For more on this agreement, see the
IHR Newsletter, July-August 1991, p. 3.]
consent agreement requires the board to accept my application and process it with "due diligence." Until
the application is approved, or until two years are up, I have agreed not to use the title "engineer"
or issue an engineering opinion in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This is, in effect, a temporary gag order
imposed to satisfy the interested Jewish groups.
removing the case from consideration by criminal courts, the possibility of my imprisonment has been eliminated.
If the Engineering Board fails to process and issue a license to me within a reasonable period, and in due course,
the matter should then move to the civil courts. Attorney Lyons is presently preparing the necessary application.
However, a new problem has arisen. All applications must be accompanied by the recommendations of three state-licensed
engineers, but none is willing to risk the wrath of the Jews in my behalf.
The de facto gag order, imposed by the settlement, applies only within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
and I am free to pursue my profession anywhere else.
of the execution equipment in the United States is either worn out, obsolete, or improperly fabricated, and is
in need of repair or replacement. I am the only person who does this work, and states are being denied the right to deal
with me. Although wardens and commissioners are afraid to even speak with me, they often do so anyway through
intermediaries. One state has a leaking gas chamber, but will use it, endangering the lives of guards and witnesses,
rather than risk discovery in dealing with me. How many more inmates will be tortured, or lives lost, through
the callous interference of these Jewish groups?
to the successful conspiracy of these Jewish groups, I am completely out of business, unable to find work to feed
my family. In spite of everything, though, I am still here, and I am still telling the truth. Furthermore, I intend
to continue to tell the truth. If the organized Jewish community wants to stop me, it will have to try much harder.
Moreover, attempts to discredit the Leuchter Report have failed, most
notably with Pressac's inept analysis. Since the release of the Leuchter Report [in 1988], independent
evidence has shown that the six million death figure has been grossly exaggerated, and an investigation by the
Polish state forensic institute [among others] has corroborated that no gas was utilized in the alleged execution
chambers at Auschwitz.
In the spring of 1991, David Irving asked me if I would consider a speaking engagement
in England later that year. I said that I would, and I was advised in mid-summer that this would take place during
the second week of November.
announced the speech sometime later. This apparently enraged Jewish groups in London which protested to UK Home
Secretary Mr. Kenneth Baker in an effort to prevent me from traveling to London. This is a clear infringement
of the rights of British people to hear me speak. This certainly also curtails my right to travel to England as
any other American citizen.
As a result of pressure
by these Jewish groups, Mr. Baker apparently promised to take action. The Jewish Chronicle, a London weekly
paper, reported in its issue of October 4, 1991, that Home Secretary Baker had banned my travel to the United Kingdom.
This was the only mention of the ban in the British media, and was not a particularly reliable source.
A week or so later, my father, Fred A. Leuchter, Sr., received a letter, ostensibly
from the Immigration and Naturalization Department of Her Majesty's government, informing him that, by direction
of the Home Secretary, he was not permitted to travel to the United Kingdom. My father communicated this letter
Because my father had no such travel plans,
my first assumption was that this letter was meant for me. However, a closer reading of it suggested that it might be
a fraud. The signatory, Mr. "G.P.J. Catt," had no title, and part of the date was written by hand. Certainly,
the Home Secretary and Her Majesty's Immigration Office would not be so sloppy and unbusinesslike as to send off
an amateurishly prepared letter to the wrong person. My address is publicly known, and is easy to ascertain.
I turned the questionable document over to my attorney, Kirk Lyons, to authenticate.
He, in turn, formally protested the letter to the UK Consulates in both Houston and Boston. In each case, the Consulate
advised him that his protest was unfounded because there was no ban on travel to the UK by me (or my father, for
that matter). He was informed that the letter must be fraudulent, and that it did not prohibit my travel to Britain
in any way. Lyons was also informed that all Home Office documents must contain a reference number, which this
did not. Based on all this, I confirmed my travel plans to London.
Because I also had also arranged to visit Germany, I combined that trip with my visit to London. Accordingly,
my wife Carol and I left for Germany on November 2, 1991. We planned to drive to Calais and take the ferry to
Dover from there on or about November 11, 1991. We also planned to return to Germany on or about November 15, immediately
following my scheduled speech in London. Because our visit in Germany would be very hectic, we intended to arrive
in England several days prior to my speech, giving us a few days to relax and see some of that country.
As planned, we arrived in Dover on the ferry from Calais late on November 11,
and spent the night in Dover. The next morning we drove to London, where we met with Irving. We then left to see
the country, leisurely driving south to Salisbury to see Stonehenge. We returned to London by way of Wimbledon
on November 15.
On Friday evening, November 15,
we arrived at the Town Hall in Chelsea where I was to give my speech. After Irving opened the program, Dr. Robert
Faurisson spoke. I was then called to the podium, and began my presentation. At approximately 9:15 p.m., some five
minutes into my speech, I was interrupted by Irving, who told me that a "gentleman" wished to speak to me
in the anteroom to the stage. I did not know it then, but I would remain in illegal police custody, without interruption,
until I was expelled from England, and would not see my host, Dr. Faurisson, or the audience again.
In the anteroom I was greeted by Chief Inspector Philip Selwood and three metro police
officers. I was asked to identify myself, which I did by presenting my passport (which Selwood kept) and my driver's
license (which he returned). I was told that two male technicians with the Thames television news team had quietly
spoken with him outside, and had insisted (as citizens) that I be arrested as an illegal alien because I had sneaked
into the country contrary to a ban by the Home Secretary. I responded by pointing out that my passport was properly
stamped, and that, as the two British Consulates in the United States had indicated, there was no such ban.
I further informed Selwood that if it was indeed determined that was in the country
illegally, I would leave immediately. I told him that I had no wish to stay where I was not wanted, and that did
not want to violate the law. Selwood told me that Thames television was trying to make news instead of reporting
it, and that my cooperation would be very much appreciated. He asked me to accompany him to the Chelsea police
station, without talking to the media, whilst he made an investigation. If I refused, I would be arrested on suspicion
of illegal entry. I agreed. After he spirited me out of the building and into an unmarked van, away we went. Selwood
was also afraid of violent Jews, who might attempt to break up the speech, and that was the reason for the presence
of himself and his large contingent of men. I asked him to bring my wife, who was at the back of the hall. He
stopped the van, ordered his men to take me to the station, and personally returned to collect my wife. I arrived
at the station, and he soon followed with Carol. We were placed in a visitors' room.
Selwood advised me that I was not under arrest, and that if the Home Office determined
that I was in the country illegally I would be permitted to leave. I was told that I was free to call the American consul,
if I wished. I did not.
At this point I asked to
leave. I was informed that I would have to wait for my status to be determined, because it would be necessary to
escort me out of the country if I was there illegally. Selwood further told me that persons who were in the country
illegally must be permitted to leave, if they so wished, providing they had the means. (In fact, we had ferry
tickets.) Chief Inspector Selwood and the other police personnel were cordial and accommodating, providing us with
a toilet and refreshment. We advised the police that Carol was diabetic. After first introducing us to his second-incommand,
and leaving instructions as to our treatment, Selwood left before midnight.
At approximately 12:05 a.m., early Saturday morning, November 16, the Deputy Chief Inspector
received a call, apparently from the Home Office. We could not hear very much, but we did hear him say that we
should leave by way of Dover. A few minutes later, shortly before 12:15 a.m., he again received a call, to which
he replied "Yes sir." He then came to speak to me. "I'm sorry," he said. "I have been
ordered to arrest you." He informed me of my rights, and told me that I could talk with the US Consul, or
the Duty Solicitor (Public Defender), or both. When I asked if it had been determined that I was in the country
illegally, he said that he did not know for sure. I then asked to leave, and he told me that this was not possible.
At this point I asked to speak with the US Consul, and was told that this would be arranged. I was then searched,
booked, and locked in a detention room with someone else, also under arrest.
About an hour later I was removed from the detention room, and told that the American Consulate
was on the telephone. I spoke with Under Consul Christopher Randall who informed me that the Consular Corps was
not there to help US citizens. He totally refused to help. I asked to talk with the Duty Solicitor, and was told
he would be called. I was taken to a cell (instead of a detention room) for lock-up. When I asked why I was being
moved to a cell, I was told that the other occupant of the detention room was there for assault, and that I was
being moved for my own protection.
I now found myself in
an isolation cell with one other occupant who turned out to be there for theft. Because I make execution equipment
(and criminals know this), I should never have been put in a cell with others. To do so might put my life in danger.
Moreover, the cell was freezing, and I had no coat. The other inmate had a blanket
and mattress. In an effort to keep warm, I wrapped my arms around myself, but this didn't work. I was unable to
Some time later I was let out to accept a
phone call from the Duty solicitor, who told me he was unable to help because I had not committed a crime. He
told me that I should call my Consul, who ought to be able to help. When I told him that my consul had refused
to help, he urged me to call back and insist, because he was obliged by law to help. I was returned to my cell.
At approximately 3:00 a.m., I was removed from my cell for interrogation by two Immigration
Department personnel. I was taken to an interrogation room with recording equipment, and advised that my statement
would be taped. I was also advised that I did not have to make a statement if I chose not to. I agreed to speak
with them, but they first had to give me time to warm up so that my teeth would stop chattering and I would be
able to speak normally. I gave them the same information that I had given hours earlier to Chief Inspector Selwood.
I affirmed that I was a legal entrant, and once again requested permission to leave. I was refused. I was told
that I should call the American Consul and/or the Duty Solicitor. I was also informed that charges might be brought.
At this point I was served with Immigration form IS 151-A. I was also told that I would not be allowed to leave
by way of Dover, but would instead be sent out though Heathrow airport (where they were from), and that my wife
and our rental car would have to stay behind.
I asked about
my wife, concerned that she had not eaten in over twelve hours, which could be a problem because of her diabetes.
I was told that they would make a decision later about my legal status, and that in the meantime I would have
to remain in the cold cell. I asked to be allowed to warm up, and to see my wife. They agreed to this. Carol had
also asked to see me.
I met with Carol. After talking
with her, I once again asked to talk with my Consul. The Consulate official again gave me a hard time, but after
I told him of my discussion with the Duty Solicitor he said he would at least inquire into the matter. The guard rushed
me to complete my phone conversation. Carol subsequently found out that the Under Consul had inquired late that
morning. Carol had been removed while I was on the telephone, and I was rushed back to my cell. I froze again,
but at about 4:30 a.m. I was given a blanket.
day shift personnel who arrived at about seven o'clock proved more difficult to deal with. At 7:00 a.m., the other
inmates were awakened to be taken to court. They were given coffee; I was not. My cellmate asked the guard to
give me some coffee, which he did. By 7:45 a.m., all the inmates were gone, and new inmates began to arrive.
I repeatedly asked about my wife to make sure that she was well. I inquired
at 7:00, 8:00, 9:00, 10:00, 11:00, 12:00, and 1:00 o'clock, but no one would tell me how she was. Later I found
out that just one officer had checked on her. She likewise had been asking about me, and was told nothing. At
noon I was given a breakfast that consisted of cold eggs, sausage, and toast left over from hours earlier. It was
inedible. It certainly would have made my ulcer worse. Carol had been given nothing to eat, even though she had
been required to stay there by the Immigration officers who knew of her medical problem.
At about 1:20 p.m., I was again taken from my cell, this time to see Mr. Phillips of the
Immigration Department. He met with Carol and me together. Phillips told us that it had been determined that I was in
the country illegally, because I had entered in violation of the ban by the Home Secretary. I was told that I
would be held until I was deported.
that he could not understand why I had been arrested and imprisoned after I had asked on three occasions to leave.
Once again I asked to leave, but Mr. Phillips told me that this was now not possible because I had been formally
arrested. This should not have happened, he said, but, because it did, I would now have to be deported. Carol
asked how it was possible for me to be in the country illegally if I had entered legally at Dover and had a valid
passport stamp. Phillips replied that I was not actually in the country illegally, but that an official determination
had been made that I was, and that was the law. I asked why those immigration officials who had interviewed me
had made this determination, and Phillips responded that they had not. He further said that the "decision
has been made very high up in the Home Office," higher than he would ever reach in his career. He added that
I could legally be held for up to five days after my arrest, even though I wanted (and should have been allowed)
to leave earlier.
Phillips also told us that the Immigration
Department had contacted French immigration about my possible deportation to France, but that I had been refused
entry there. I responded by commenting that this is not surprising, because no country would want a deportee unless
it is one of its own citizens. Phillips agreed.
said that his next step would be to ask Belgium, and, if I was refused there, Germany. He did not expect Belgium
to accept, but if Germany did, I would be sent on the Hamburg Ferry that ran only twice a week, the next time
being on Tuesday [three days hence]. If I were to go this way, I would have to remain incarcerated until that time.
However, I was asked, in view of my desire to leave, would I consider going to the United
States? Phillips informed me that if I officially told him that I wished to return to the United States, he could
not stop me, and would put me on a flight that very evening. I then formally asked to be returned to the United
States, and Phillips said that he would begin making the necessary arrangements. We would have to leave the rental
car in England and make some arrangement for its return to Germany (other than by our driving it). Furthermore,
we would have to forego our remaining commitments in Germany because time would not permit our return.
After taking our airline tickets, he contacted Lufthansa to reschedule our flight.
The only available fight that day was at 3:30 p.m., which was too soon for us to get to the airport. He returned
our tickets, and promised to make arrangements at the UK government's expense. He booked us on a British Airways
flight to New York (not Boston) that departed at 6:30 p.m. We were escorted in two cars. Phillips' car went first,
and we followed in another police car, under guard. We stopped for our luggage at our car which was parked behind
Selfridge's [in London], at a parking meter, and proceeded to the airport in rush-hour traffic. If we did not
make it on time, they would have to return me to my cell.
a stop at the Immigration office to pick up the necessary forms, we arrived at the airport, passed through security,
and reached the gate just as the plane was being loaded. The police officer had left us at the entrance to the
terminal. After returning my passport (which noted my detention on form IS 151 A), Mr. Phillips watched us enplane. The
people at the ticket counter had been told that I was being deported, as were the gate attendants.
We took our seats, flew to New York, and arrived at about 9:45 p.m. We had to purchase
air tickets to Boston at our own expense. After barely making this flight, we arrived in Boston at approximately
11:45 p.m., exhausted and hungry.
In summary, I
was detained and held in custody for some twenty one and three-quarters hours, fourteen of them in an unheated
cell. I was given a breakfast at noon, and was given one cup of coffee only at my cellmate's insistence. I was
given no water, and there was none in the cell. My ulcer did not fare well under these circumstances, particularly
because of my anxious concern for Carol.
For her part, Carol
fared even less well that I did. After my arrest, she was given no food or water, even though she was not free
to leave, and the police knew that she was a diabetic. After my arrest, she was allowed to see me only once. By
the time we left, we were both cold and ill. The conduct of both Chief Inspector Selwood and Mr. Phillips, as
well as that of the police personnel on the evening shift, was exemplary. By contrast, the conduct of the day shift
personnel was poor and careless.
During the time
that I was being held, Dr. Robert Faurisson went to the US Embassy in London to see if he could obtain help for
me. He was informed that neither I, nor any other American, had been arrested that evening. That the US Embassy would
lie about the illegal arrest and imprisonment of an American citizen is inexcusable. Faurisson also went to the
police station where I was being held. He was told there I had been arrested and was being held in a cell in the
station, but that I was not permitted any visitors. The police later told Faurisson that I had been deported on
Saturday at 6:30 p.m.
As shown by the statements of the two
British consular officials in the United States, and the fact that my name was not on any list and was legally
permitted to enter at Dover, it is clear that no order barring me from entering the UK was ever officially given.
It is likewise clear that the difficulty started only when the Thames television
people lied about me to Chief Inspector Selwood, apparently in order to make a "better" news story.
It is also clear that the Home Secretary (or someone acting for him) illegally
ordered my arrest, imprisonment and deportation, knowing full well that I had entered the country legally and should
have been left alone or, if later determined to be there illegally, at least permitted to leave. This plain violation
of international law by the Home Secretary's Office was undoubtedly done to please the complaining Jewish groups
which bear the ultimate responsibility.
to uphold one of the prime responsibilities of the Consular Corps -- that is, to protect the rights of Americans
abroad -- the United States Embassy in London, and Under Consul Christopher Randall in particular, clearly failed
in their responsibility to me as an American citizen, as well as their responsibility to the nation as a whole.
It is a shameful disgrace that the British duty solicitor and UK Immigration Officer Phillips cared more for my rights
than my own embassy.
A formal protest to State Department,
and requests for help from our Senators and Representatives, have resulted in nothing but lip service.
my clients -- the state governments -- are still intimidated by my Jewish persecutors. This continues to deprive
me of my income, and it is not at all clear whether this will ever end.
I have been unable to apply for my state engineering license because no engineers have been willing to
sign papers recommending me (which is a requirement), out of fear of retaliation. Without some official change
in my status, such as a license, even the friendly state governments are afraid to deal with me. The major lawsuit
we had planned against my persecutors is stalled, perhaps permanently, because of a lack of funds.
And, although my findings will ultimately be accepted by all, I still have
no contracts, have been unable to find work and have no income. It does not seem that this will improve in the near
From The Journal of Historical Review, Winter 1992 (Vol. 12,
No. 4), pages 429-444.
Censored History: Britain put Jews in Concentration Camp During WWII
The Balfour Declaration of 1917 was a letter from Britain’s
Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour to Walter Rothschild to be read before the Zionist Federation of Great Britain
British support for Jewish immigration into the Palestinian Mandate. The Zionist Federation had promised the British
government they could mobilize Hollywood and other assets to push America into WWI on the side of the Axis. America
entered WWI on April 6, 1917. The Balfour Declaration was made on November 2, 1917. It was widely viewed in Europe
as a thank you for American Jewish support for America’s entry into WWI.
The Balfour Declaration was considered a major step towards the
creation of the Jewish state of Israel.
The fallout however, was not good for European Jews. Germany had been a safe haven for Jews for hundreds
of years. Jews were thriving so much so, that the average Jewish income was significantly higher than that of
the average German. Germans felt the Jewish community as a whole had betrayed them. German Jews quickly became
stigmatized as disloyal, draft dodgers, war profiteers, and more.
If that wasn’t enough, European Jews soon felt the sting of betrayal
from Britain. In the 1930′s the German government offered to move European Jews to the Palestinian Mandate.
The National Socialist regime encouraged Jews to obtain Palestinian passports and argued that Jews would be much
happier living in a country of their own in the Middle East. The German government promised the Arabs in the Palestinian
Mandate free Volkwagon trucks and construction supplies to pacify them. Ideological Zionists living in the Mandate
embraced the idea and some even openly supported the National Socialist regime.
Britain immediately capped the number of Jews who could move to
the Palestinian Mandate to only 15,000 a year, so they would not change the balance of power.
In 1940, the National Socialist regime sent the first wave of Jews to
the Palestinian Mandate. The first convoy was three ships full of Jews from Prague, Danzig, Vienna, and Tulcea,
Romania. The British immediately blockaded the ports and declared that the Jews were illegal immigrants. The Jews
were all arrested by the British army and placed in quickly erected concentration camps. Once WWII started many
Jews tried to reach the territory to avoid being sent to Nazi run concentration camps. Britain captured tens of
thousands and imprisoned them in concentration camps in the Palestinian Mandate, Cyprus, and Mauritius. The British
concentration camps looked the same as the dreaded camps run by Germany, Croatia, and Romania. When inmates arrived
at the British camps they were forced to strip naked and then sprayed with DDT.
In 1944, the government of Hungary collapsed. The arrow cross party seized control of Hungary
to keep the Hungarian army fighting on the Eastern front. To pay for the Hungarian army, Jewish owned property
in Hungary was seized. The National Socialist regime made another major attempt to send Jews to the Palestinian
Mandate. They had Turkish cooperation to transport Jews to the territory by train. One train was even filled up
with Hungarian Jews and ready to leave, but the British said the Hungarian Jews would be refused. The passengers
were ordered to switch trains to be sent to concentration camps in Poland. At that time Britain knew full well
that the IRC was the sole provider of food and supplies to the camps and it was only a matter of time until access
would be cut off due to the advancing red army.
What is even more shocking is that after the Allies and the IRC began liberating the concentration camps,
Britain continued to imprison Jewish refugees who tried to enter the Palestinian Mandate. Many survived WWII in
concentration camps, only to be imprisoned by the British.
The main British concentration camp was in Atlit, north of Haifa. Many Jews were
imprisoned in Atlit before being transported to Cyprus or Mauritius. Over 70,000 Jews were imprisoned there between
1940 and 1945. The camp was shut down when it was attacked by Zionist guerrillas in 1945. Yitzhak Rabin allegedly
masterminded the operation, but he did not lead it.
It took a very violent guerrilla war and major acts of terrorism to convince the British to
give up the Palestinian Mandate after WWII was over.
by Jason Swartz
____________________HERE IS AN ACTUAL PURPOSEFUL HOLOCAUST____________________________
The Rhine meadow camps in summer 1945
In 1945 and 1946 London Satanist Zionist Committee
of 300 presented German dead bodies as Jewish dead bodies - dead body plays are typical for Satanist behavior:
The Rhine meadow
camps in summer 1945 (part 4)
Part 4: German bodies
shown as Jewish bodies for Hitchcock's films about German concentration camps: wrong bodies from Rhine meadow camps, wrong
lorries, showers and crematories etc.
Hitchcock, portrait 1956, he likes betraying and laughing
Liberation of Bergen Belsen, well nourished
Jewish detainees with German striped detainee suits and caps on a cold day in wet and cold April 1945, April 15,
1945 ; other web sites state that this photo would be from Dachau.
Dead bodies torn by SS men on the way to the mass
grave 01, the clothes are NO striped uniforms of detainees in German ccs, and there are NO tattooed numbers, and there are
NO remnants of earth on the bodies
Part 4: German bodies shown as Jewish bodies for Hitchcock's films about German concentration
camps: wrong bodies from Rhine meadow camps, wrong lorries, showers and crematories etc.
Master liar Hitchcock was in Germany together with mass murderer and Zionist Eisenhower.
Mass murderer Eisenhower had organized the Rhine meadow camps with 5 million German prisoners of war, and within 6 months
1 million died (750,000 on the "American" side and 250,000 on the French side). Since 1942 Zionists made propaganda
on and on in the whole world that Jews would be "gassed" in German concentration camps. Well, but all this was
a big lie because the German concentration camps were under control of the Red Cross AND of the Zionists themselves who
could move freely everywhere! But Eisenhower wanted a "confirmation" for the propaganda. Eisenhower gave the order
to Hitchcock: Make some films thus people will believe that the rumors about the German mass murder against the Jews are
right. They should believe it really. This was simple: Hitchcock was filming in the Rhine meadow camps and simply said in
the films that the emaciated Germans and the German bodies would be Jewish bodies - and the film was ready. They were also
driving piles of German bodies from the Rhine meadow camps through Germany showing the bodies in German concentration camps
stating that these would be Jewish bodies. And these lies were established by force of arms and were spread in the whole
Well, the principle faults one can detect these lies of Eisenhower
and Hitchcock are the following ones:
-- German dead bodies from the Rhine meadow camps - when they wear clothes -
are NOT wearing the German striped "zebra" prison uniforms but are mostly wearing remnants of the German gray soldier
uniforms of the German army "Wehrmacht"
-- German bodies have no tattooed number of detainees
there are no remnants of earth on the bodies and thus these bodies never were excavated before but these bodies are "fresh"
Journalists were never watching precisely and since 1945 they mean that the
NS regime had murdered millions of Jews. But it was just the other way round: Criminal allied murdered 1 million German soldiers
in the Rhine meadow camps and then were presenting the dead bodies as Jewish dead bodies. And for making the lie even more
perfect the allies also invented epidemics in the German concentration camps having been the "cause" for the bodies.
Point 1: Rhine meadow camps with emaciated German soldiers
and with piles of German bodies
The Rhine meadow camps of 1945 with 5 million
detained German soldiers in Germany were deliberately concealed. Eisenhower - a hater of the Germans - had not enough having
murdered in Dresden over 230,000 Germans. In the Rhine meadow camps Eisenhower let die deliberately 750,000 German soldiers,
and 250,000 more were murdered by hunger in the French zone which was installed in July 1945 taking over Eisenhower's death
camps there. But this was not published because there were no newspapers in Germany in 1945 and the Red Cross had no good
press spokesman as it seems. Even "U.S." president Truman was not informed what was going on in Germany in the
"American" zone but the Morgenthau plan was fulfilled killing as many Germans as possible after the war - and
the Rhine meadow camps were only the beginning because the deliberately installed starvation which was installed by Zionist
Eisenhower was killing even 5 million more Germans in remaining Germany from 1945 to 1950. During 1945 "American"
soldiers had a paradise life and were making holidays in criminal Nazi Switzerland and Swiss press - whereas the International
Red Cross has it's seat in Switzerland in Geneva - is concealing until today (2013) the mass murder in the Rhine meadow
camps under mass murderer Eisenhower...
Point 2: Hitchcock presenting
emaciated German soldiers and piles with German bodies as Jewish victims
was a racist Zionist and Bible Jehova racist. His bosses were the Zionists Baruch (financier and stock exchange guru) and
Zionist Morgenthau. Morgenthau wanted to have all Germans killed having a powerless or even a Germany without population.
Zionist Eisenhower wanted to kill as many Germans as possible, and he had a "friend" with him, film maker Hitchcock.
There should be films made supporting the claim "Germans" had gassed "6 million Jews". Now German dead
bodies in the Rhine meadow camps were filmed and the German dead bodies were driven around in whole Germany and they were
presented in the German concentration camps claiming that the dead bodies would be dead Jews.
Analysis of Hitchcock's films: some
fakes and some proofs
Controlling the Hitchcock films one can detect the fake,
see the following details. German helmets had an ear protection and a neck protection, but "American" helmets
were round like a circle without protection of ear and neck.
|Different forms of helmets of the Wehrmacht and the "U.S." Army |
Helmets of the Wehrmacht with the protection of ears and neck, example during Barbarossa campaign 
German helmets of the Wehrmacht with the protection of ears and neck, example of a hand grenade course 
"American" soldiers with round "American" helmets and with rows of German bodies in a
Rhine meadow camp 
Eisenhower and Hitchcock were bringing the fake to a head. German bodies were partly driven
around in whole Germany, were shown on the trailers or piled on the ground and presented to the population as "Jewish
bodies". But the mass fraud was clear
"American" soldiers with round "American" helmets piling German bodies on
a trailer in a Rhine meadow camp 
-- there were no tattooed numbers of detainees
on the bodies
-- when the bodies had clothes on then these were German uniforms and not striped zebra uniforms from
German concentration camps which had Jewish detainees
-- and the bodies could not be digged out either because the
bodies were so clean and new that there were no rests of earth on them.
occupation forces claimed that Auschwitz had been the "center" of the murder of the Jews whereas NEVER ANY "American"
soldier was in Auschwitz in the concentration camp. Well, Eisenhower just copied the cc of Auschwitz in a Rhine meadow camp
and thus Hitchcock made his Auschwitz films. But all these fakes can be detected easily with the "American" helmets.
Examples of fakes from Bergen Belsen
Liberation of Bergen Belsen, well nourished Jewish detainees with German
striped detainee suits and caps on a cold day in wet and cold April 1945, April 15, 1945 ; other web sites state that
this photo would be from Dachau.
|Photos from the faked cc film by Hitchcock: "An Alfred Hitchcock Documentary On The Nazi Holocaust"
When the links are not working, go to http://www.youtube.com looking for the title "An Alfred Hitchcock Documentary On The Nazi Holocaust", so you get the
actual links of the film. Always look for the film of 53 min. 1 sec.
Let's see the fakes about Bergen-Belsen
<There were more than
200 children under 12 years old still alive in Belsen camp.>
Hitchcock made some little mistakes: In the film he is saying himself that the prisoners are
"soldiers". And there are also women greeting the detainees -
thus German women greeting German soldiers - and these are not women greeting Jews. And there are allied lorries with a five
pointed star of the "American" army on the hood. And all detainees have dark gray clothes.
Thus these are GERMAN PRISONERS OF WAR, above all those with a white "turban" on the head. These are white massive head
bandages after having suffered head injuries in the fight. In Bergen Belsen there were allegedly dead
bodies by typhus and these bodies are said having been buried only 9 days after the liberation,
and these dead bodies of typhus only partly show irregular dark spots, but often no one. In the film
is also a medical doctor presented without medical white coat calling himself
Mr. Little (Mr. Klein). And at the end the English are claiming that there had been typhus in Bergen Belsen concentration
camp installing a warning sign in English "Typhus" and the film is inventing
a laboratory of "London students". Hitchcock is inventing that typhus came from getting
too less soup and too less water - word by word. Well, when there had been a typhus epidemic in Bergen Belsen then the German
camp leadership had installed an own warning sign - in German - and in coordination with the Red Cross!
According to the Baron of the Lies Hitchcock even Jewish children survived Bergen-Belsen in
a good estate of health, even a new born baby.:
Bergen-Belsen (22min.37sek.) 
New born baby
in Bergen-Belsen (22min.5sek.) 
Some children were born in the camp.
camp (11min.1sek.) 
Here the mass murderer Eisenhower and film maker Hitchcock were organizing a huge fraud and calumny
"American" lorries with a five pointed star on the hood coming with German prisoners of war
(1min. 49sec.) 
Thus this is not a German lorry but an "American" or British lorry. And here do not come Jews but here
come German detainees being greeted by German women and children.
Such people are NOT Jewish detainees but GERMAN soldiers in gray coats and with head injuries with
white head bandages. Here they are standing allegedly around a "water lorry". (2min. 9sec.) 
This is NO Jew but this is a German soldier in his gray army uniform of the Wehrmacht. He is eating
bread at a barbed wire fence (2min. 23sec.) 
German soldiers under the
allied command had to "arrange" themselves on a meadow.
Women sector, women meadow (4min. 22sec.) 
Also these women are NOT wearing the striped German zebra uniform
for detainees in German ccs as Jewish detainees had, but these are German assistant staff members from the camp being forced
under allied command to arrange on the meadow. Additionally there were no "women's meadows" in German concentrations
camps but there were "women's camps". "Women's meadows" only existed under mass murderer Eisenhower from
1945 to 1946...
German prisoners of war in a queue (11min. 6sec.), many have white bandages
on their head because of head injuries . Jews in German concentration camps had NO head bandages for sure.
Thus here are NO Jews but
GERMAN soldiers - in the concentration camp of Bergen-Belsen under allied English administration.
pipes and in the back ground a car of the Red Cross can be seen (11min. 50sec.) 
A car of the Red Cross is closed (18min. 37sec.) 
pictures with a car from the Red Cross are shown then it can be admitted that the camp was well managed and there were no
or hardly any epidemics, but all cases of illnesses were brought to hospitals as long it was possible.
supply in the camp (11min. 33sec.) 
When films are claiming that German administration had blocked the water supply leaving Jewish detainees
suffering without water then this is just a normal propaganda fake to destroy the reputation of the Germans.
Water supply in the camp 03 with washing possibility (11min. 39sec.) 
there cannot be seen any striped Jewish zebra detainee's uniform in this film, but these detainees are women from SS.
Here is a
German prisoner of war topless in summer 1945 searching clothes on the ground, and in the background there is a dead German
detainee in a gray uniform (3min. 7sec.) 
This scenery cannot be from
April 145 because April 1945 was cold and wet with much rain and even snow. Nobody was walking topless in April 1945. But
liar Hitchcock claims this would be a Jewish detainee during the liberation of the camp in April 1945...
The ground is full of German bodies or full of helpless dying German prisoners of war in gray uniforms starving
and suffering in their own excrements (3min. 23sec.) 
There CANNOT BE
SEEN ANY striped zebra uniform of German concentration camps. All clothes come from dead German soldiers. These are NO Jews
Male emaciated dead bodies without clothes and without spots and without tattooed numbers of detainees
(4min. 54sec.) .
These dead bodies are German bodies from the Rhine meadow camps.
dead body with big breast and with irregular spots on her body with an open mouth (4min. 8sec.) 
The irregular spots are never explained.
Some bodies have spots, others not. Nothing is clear about it. Thus there is the suspicion that the spots are painted.
of Bergen-Belsen: SS has to dig out a mass grave and allies are helping with a bulldozer (6min. 48sec.) 
When a mass grave is digged out
with sun shine and dry earth this scenery cannot be from cold and wet April 1945 but this scene was taken more at the end
of May or in June 1945.
Faked board in English with the claim "Typhus" at the concentration camp of Bergen-Belsen
AFTER the liberation (18min. 4sec.) 
When an "occupation power" claims that there had been an epidemic in a German concentration
camp this is mostly a lie. In the case of Bergen-Belsen a board in English was installed. But when Bergen-Belsen had had
typhus then the German administration had installed an own board with a warning in German. Thus the English occupation power
has invented this epidemic justifying the masses of dead bodies which were brought to the camp later. Inventing an epidemic
concealing the own crimes is a standard maneuver of the Anglo-Saxon psychological warfare...
Bergen-Belsen: task force with an alleged action on April 24, 1945, dead bodies arriving in a trailer
(12min. 33sec.) 
German bodies from a Rhine meadow camp were brought to Bergen-Belsen in a trailer and German SS men have to push
Bergen-Belsen, hips of dead bodies on a trailer (12min. 54sec.) 
The dead bodies
on the trailer have NO tattooed numbers of detainees and the bodies are absolutely clean and have NO remnants of earth or
other contamination by earth. Thus these are German bodies from Rhine meadow camps. But the British occupation power with
it's weapons is ordering here in Bergen-Belsen that these would be Jews...
Corpse pit in the region of Bergen-Belsen (13min. 30sec.) 
The bodies in the mass grave have - when they have
clothes yet - no striped German detainee's uniform as Jews had in German concentration camps but they mostly have remnants
of German gray Wehrmacht uniforms. And not one single body has a detainee's number which would have been shown at once
by the journalists. Thus these bodies are German bodies from the Rhine meadow camps being buried here in Bergen-Belsen.
Public with emotions watching the lorry full of emaciated dead bodies coming probably from the Rhine
meadow camps (12min. 48sec.) 
British occupation power organized a public
booing SS men. By force of arms SS men were ordered to believe that these bodies would be Jewish bodies. And the local German
public cannot detect the lie that these are German bodies because they don't know that the Rhine meadow camps exist...
A cameraman filming SS men how they take dead bodies to the pit (15min. 12sec.) 
When there had been tattooed numbers
then the media staff had shown these tattoos with zooms at once.
SS men have to take the dead bodies from the trailer to the pit, the bodies have no spots (14min. 30sec.)
Not one single dead body has got a tattooed number as Jewish captives had in German concentration camps.
These dead bodies are totally clean and there is no earth on them, thus these
bodies NEVER were buried and NEVER have been digged out
Not one single body has got a tattooed number as Jewish detainees
had in German concentration camps. There is no striped German zebra uniform for detainees in German concentration camps
as Jews had. And the dead bodies show no remnants of earth or other contamination by earth. Thus these bodies were not buried
and not digged out. These bodies mostly have dark clothes and remnants of German army uniforms. Thus these are German dead
bodies in Bergen-Belsen being taken to the mass grave by force of arms of the criminal occupation forces. Hitchcock simply
indicates that these would be Jewish bodies. And the stupid journalists are not aware of the fraud spreading it in the whole
world, also in "neutral" Switzerland where the Red Cross has got it's seat and where the documents show how the
German concentration camps really were...
Dead bodies torn by SS men on the way to the mass grave 01, the clothes are NO striped uniforms of
detainees in German ccs, and there are NO tattooed numbers, and there are NO remnants of earth on the bodies (23min. 14sec.)
Thus these dead bodies are NOT Jewish detainees but very probably German
victims from Eisenhower's Rhine meadow camps.
Dead bodies torn by SS men on the way to the mass grave 02, the clothes are NO striped uniforms of
detainees in German ccs, and there are NO tattooed numbers, and there are NO remnants of earth on the bodies (23min.21sec.)
Thus these dead bodies are NOT Jewish detainees but very probably German
victims from Eisenhower's Rhine meadow camps.
An SS group in a mass grave under the order of British machine guns (23min. 55sec.) 
The machine gun of the criminal allies is dictating the allied
meaning here. In Germany there is developing a submissive mentality concerning the persecution of the Jews and at the end
any free research is prohibited.
with a medical doctor in white (5min. 31sec.) 
Medical doctors of the allies also have got the white dress as one can see here in this scene.
Here a person is speaking presenting himself as a medical doctor Mister Fed Little (Fritz Klein),
and he says that this day would be April 24, 1945 standing before the mass grave (15min. 54sec.) 
This person is speaking German perfectly claiming to be a "medical doctor" from
Romania being working in concentration camps since 1 1/2 years already. But he does not even have a doctor's white dress
on and he is not stating any cause of death in his speech. Thus this is probably no doctor but is is a background artist
making a statement in this film for a pocket money stating being a medical doctor and stating that this day would be April
24, 1945 (but April 1945 was very cold and wet...
mayors and pastors have to see the piles of bodies (13min. 9sec.) 
Also these mayors are going into the trap that these would be
Jewish bodies. British occupation force is operating with force of arms and personal meanings contradicting the official
one is punished by shooting.
telling-off at the mass grave with wards with machine guns (17min. 35sec.) 
With the constant extortion of being shot the criminal occupation
forces (here the British) are asserting the meaning that the bodies would be Jews...
The commander of Bergen-Belsen, Josef Kramer, portrait (6min. 19sec.) 
He was the victim
of the criminal Western Allies - in his case by the British occupation forces - they made the calumny blaming Mr. Kramer
for being responsible for 70,000 Jewish deads which have never been...
wards in Bergen-Belsen (6min. 5sec.) 
They were also victims of the criminal Western allies, in this case of the British occupation forces.
They were blamed for having caused the death of 70,000 Jews...
An English operations manager speaking with revolver to the camera "We
actually don't know what has been going on in these camps" (24min. 6sec.) 
At the end of his speech he is confessing that he
did not know what was going on precisely in this camp. He only knew what he was fighting for: <We actually don't know,
what has been going on in these camps. I know personally what I am fighting for.> (24min.28-35sek.)
An English reporter with Hebrew accent
is installed before the mass grave from allegedly April 24, 1945 filled with dead bodies (24min. 44sec.) - stating he "does
not know where the dead bodies are coming from"... 
Thus the reporter
does not know where the bodies are coming from, and there is no medical investigation either!!!
Here is the statement of the English Hebrew reporter:
<I am T. D. Tredges, attached as partway to controlling this camp. [...] I have been here 8 days. And never in my life
I have seen such damnable gustiness. This morning they brought about 5,000 bodies. We don't know from where they are. Behind
me you can see the pit which contain another 5,000. There were two others like it in preparation. All these deaths have
been caused by systematic starvation and typhus and disease - it has been splead - because of the treatment meeted out for
this poor people by the SS guards and their SS chief.> (24min.35sek.-25min.23sek.)
Hitchcock also lying about typhus
And another lie is spread by Hitchcock stating that there were lice in Bergen Belsen and not enough soup
and water causing typhus [?!] (18min. 16-19sec.).
Quotation of the lies:
<Lack of soup and water brought lice to the inmates, and lice carried typhus.>
Well, typhus does not come from lice, and lice do not come from too less soup or water,
but typhus is a fever with belly aches and constipation caused by intestine bacteria when people are not washing their hands
after the toilet having remnants of excrements under their finger nails eating these remnants by food or otherwise entering
their mouth. Wikipedia says:
of fever, belly aches, constipation and higher body temperature, slower heart beat. Cause of typhus is the bacterium Salmonella
Typhi (Salmonella enterica ssp. enterica Serovar Typhi) [...] There is paratyphus with not so strong symptoms than typhus,
not caused by Salmonella Typhi but by Salmonella Paratyphi. [...] The agent is a typhus bacterium (Salmonella enterica subsp.
enterica Serovar Typhi), a feces bacteria transmitted orally for example by contaminated food or water. Today typhus is
more the problem of development countries. In industrial countries it's an exception. Big parts of typhus illnesses is in
connection with journeys to far countries with low hygienic standard. Immunization should be done for journeys to tropical
areas like India also when it's only a partial protection. World wide typhus disease is affecting 32 million people every
orig. in English: <[...]
fever, abdominal pain, constipation and for the high body temperature rather slow heartbeat (relative bradycardia ) is characterized. The disease is caused by the bacterium Salmonella Typhi ( Salmonella enterica ssp. Enterica serovar
typhi ). [...] Paratyphoid is an attenuated disease of typhoid fever, not Salmonella
typhi , but Salmonella paratyphi . [...]The causative agent is the typhoid bacterium ( Salmonella enterica subsp. Enterica serovar
typhi), a Gram-negative , flagellated bacterium that is transmitted fecal - orally , for example, through contaminated food or contaminated water . Typhus is a problem of developing countriestoday . Cases in industrial nations are the exception; a large proportion of the typhoid diseases
that occur here are associated with long-distance travel of those affected to countries with low hygienic standards. When traveling to tropical areas (eg India ), immunization should be considered, even if it provides only partial protection. Worldwide,
about 32 million people fall ill each year>
(from Wikipedia: Typhus: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typhus)
Divine service at
the mass grave - and the text of Hitchcock - the German text is not permitted
A pastor speaking the divine service at the mass grave (25min. 38sec.) 
A pastor speaking the divine service at the mass grave, view on the book (25min. 42sec.)
Hitchcock is saying his own
sarcastic text not allowing the speech of the German pastor:
should never know who they were, or for pot holms [?] they were torn, whether they were catholics, Lutherans, or Jews: We
only know they were born, they suffered, and they died - in agony in Belsen camp.> (25min.30sek.-26min.12sek.)
The mass graves of Bergen-Belsen are marked with boards but there is not written if there
are Jews, Germans, English or French buried.
This data of 26 April
1945 for the mass grave is not probable because April 1945 was wet and cold in Germany even with snow. Therefore installing
this mass grave could have been in June 1945.
Alleged mass grave in Bergen
Belsen Nº 6 with about 800 deads 
When a camp is even burnt down by the
allies then it's clear that any proof is destroyed which could be a proof for the German side.
British allies invented a typhus epidemic and by this invented reason they burnt down the Bergen Belsen
camp (26min. 50sec.) 
And then the whole camp was flattened and
nothing was left of it. Thus there is even a bigger suspicion that the allies have to conceal something. And just in this
procedure the only real striped German detainee's uniform is shown in the film. Thus it's clear what ware the dead bodies
in the film: German bodies, most probably from the Rhine meadow camps.
A bulldozer flattening Bergen Belsen camp cutting the barbed wire fence (27min. 58sec.) 
A bulldozer "taking" a striped
detainee's uniform of German concentration camps which was NEVER seen in the film before (28min. 4sec.) 
photos from the faked Hitchcock film about German concentration camps "An Alfred Hitchcock Documentary On The Nazi
When the links are not working, go to http://www.youtube.com looking for the title "An Alfred Hitchcock Documentary On The Nazi Holocaust", so you get the
actual links of the film. Always look for the film of 53 min. 1 sec.
Faked scenes about cc Dachau
lies about undernourished detainees
Most of the detainees in German concentration
camps were well nourished considering the testimonies of original detainees after the war. Here are some examples from the
German concentration camp of Dachau:
Detainees in the concentration camp of Dachau 01 sitting in the window (30min. 30sec.) 
Concentration camp of Dachau, portrait of a detainee 02 830min. 40sec.) 
And one has to know: German concentration camps were under the control of the Red Cross like herein Bergen Belsen (11min.
German concentration camps were under the control of the Red Cross AND of the Zionists.
People affected by heavy illnesses were brought to hospitals by cars of the Red Cross or to military hospitals.
Lies of Hitchcock about shower rooms as "gas chambers"
Washer nozzle in a shower room in the concentration camp
of Dachau (34min. 25sec.) 
There is this clear proof: granulate of "Cyclone B" cannot pass the little holes of this washer nozzle.
All gassing in shower rooms is a criminal fantasy of Zionist mass murderers Eisenhower, Baruch, Morgenthau, Roosevelt, and
Hitchcock. It's a normal war propaganda with a giant calumny against the enemy.
The lies of Hitchcock about crematories: single muffle furnaces
are not made for masses of bodies
This crematory is shown in the film to be in Dachau, with
single muffle furnaces (35min. 20sec.) 
There is the following
principle: Such single muffler furnaces in crematories are made for single burning of dead bodies getting the ashes for
the family of the dead. When there would be masses of dead bodies then a bigger oven had been built for burning about 20
bodies in one. Obviously such a mass death has NOT happened ant there were only some singular burnings of deads bodies. Additionally
one has to know that in these German cc - as investigations by Faurisson showed - many crematories were built only AFTER
the war by the criminal Zionists - as a propaganda and nothing more!
A train with detainees at the cc Dachau in February 1945
There was this train with detainees allegedly at the cc
Dachau in February 1945 about (36min. 20sec.) 
At the end
of the Third Reich the whole infrastructure was collapsing. The remaining camps were overcrowded and the trains with the
detainees had last priority. Thus a transport was not 3 days but 30 days. Such trains with detainees came to Dachau and
the SS leadership of the cc Dachau had not the spirit any more to build a military hospital for the deads and half deads
of this train and had not the spirit to install a cemetery. This omission was exploited by the criminal "Americans".
Instead of helping and helping the survivors and honoring the many 1,000s surviving detainees in the concentration camp
of Dachau the SS leadership was killed and executed because of this neglected train with detainees.
Point 3: The principle of the cut in the films of criminal Mr. Hitchcock
First one can see well nourished detainees, mostly with striped zebra detainee's uniforms,
and then comes the cut showing the emaciated German prisoners of war from summer 1945 on the meadows or in the mud of the
Rhine meadow camps in the contaminated gray uniforms WITHOUT the typical striped zebra uniforms of detainees from German
concentrations camps in the Third Reich. The title of the film "Documentary" sounds well but this is a film where
practically everything is a fake:
Gas chamber scenery has been
taken after May 1945 for presenting this fantasy to the whole world provoking a bad mood against Germans. And in this way
the English "American" and Zionist propaganda hast manipulated the brains in the world during more than 50 years
and placed their Zionist slaves in the media in the whole world spreading this propaganda on and on. The truth about the
German concentrations camps can be seen here for example:
4: Jews telling from German concentration camps: music, theater, soccer
Jewish testimonies from German concentration camps report regularly about work and music and theater and even soccer in the
camps. Here are examples from Shoa Foundation "Survivors who tell the truth":
Point 5: Effect of the faked Hitchcock films about
German concentration camps on the Nuremberg Process - where is the war tribunal for criminal "U.S.A."?
And now one has to know that the regime of Eisenhower against Germans was not only with the Rhine meadow camps causing
1 million Germans deads and the hunger regime during the post-war era in Germany from 1945 to 1950 provoking 5 million more
German deads - but by these faked Hitchcock films the "U.S.A." have influenced the Nuremberg Process in a way
so Germany was convicted with a faked 6 million murder against Jews and had to pay for this, and the allies were exempted
from any guilt and the mass murderer Eisenhower was not detected until 1989 when historian James Bacque came with his research.
These criminal "U.S.A." have to be torn to a war tribunal for being convicted for their wars, fakes and manipulations
not only concerning the "American" war crimes in Germany 1943-1950 (also the destruction of towns had not to be
and the war could have been finished in 1943 already), but also concerning Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Iraq, Afghanistan etc.
"U.S.A." are the most destructive state in the world destroying all other states by bombs and propaganda - and
the proofs are very distinct concerning Germany of 1945 here on this web site. And perhaps the criminal Zionists have to
pay money back which was payed for a mass murder of millions which was NEVER COMMITTED - pay money back to Germany.
Point 6: No mass murder against the Jews in German concentration camps - but other
sites with mass death
With all these data there is absolutely safe: There
was no mass murder in German concentration camps against the Jews in the dimension of 100,000s or millions. The real sites
with many deads in the persecution of the Jews were
-- Auschwitz with epidemics because
the camps was in a marsh and bodies were buried contaminating the ground and the drinking water
-- behind the
Eastern Front the remaining Jews who were not deported by Stalin to Russia in 1940 and 1941 and who were not taken by industries
or the Red Army in 1941 were shot partly from 1941 to 1943 in mass shootings partly by the Wehrmacht or by SS commands
(with Germans, Ukrainians, Baltic people and Belorussians etc.) or also by local anti-Semitic population themselves. Zionists
did not protect the Jews from Eastern Europe because they did not want them to have in Palestine for the colonization in
-- the same mass murder for Jews counts for the Red Army where Stalin and
his commanders let fight many Jews in the first rows as "cannon fodder"
-- since 1943 detainees were
taken back from Eastern Europe to the Reich to building sites of the tunnel constructioning and fell sick and died there
-- at the same time Hitler and Stalin organized in common the clandestine deportation
of European Jews to the GULAG
-- in 1944 and in 1945 there were some 1,000 Jewish victims in the remaining overcrowded
camps because of hunger and epidemics, in trains and in death marches as a "penalty" for the defeat of Germany
in the war
-- since 1945 many Jewish women who had suffered hunger a long time during years could not recover
well and had no fertility any more
-- Jewish children being safe on "Christian" farms were often not
given back because nobody knew where the Jewish parents were and because many men were missing on the farms and there was
a general lack of staff
-- many Jews also separated from Jewry in general for not being persecuted any more.
-- from 1945 to 1946 Stalin let come back 100,000s of Jews from central Russia to Eastern
Europe and this provoked new pogroms in Poland. Kiev in the Ukraine became a broad Jewish center and in 1946 Kiev had more
Jews than in 1939. At the same time the "American" President Truman was bribed by the Zionists with 2 million
Dollars permitting a racist "Jewish State" in Palestine against all Muslims...
-- and when in 1948 this bribed and criminal "U.S.A." bribed by Zionists was "opening" the new "satellite"
of Israel in the Middle East, Stalin felt encircled and betrayed and he shut the Iron Curtain for Jews and all Jews in Russia
could not leave the country until Gorbachev until 1986. Stalin let russify the Jews by discriminations in professions
-- and Stalin's direct answer to the foundation of the racist Zionist state of Israel under the patronage of the
criminal racist "U.S.A." was the blockage of Berlin.
We thank to the criminal
Zionist bribed and undermined "U.S.A." for their destructive and terrorist "cultural contribution".
Mainstream Holocaust Narrative 'Substantially, if not Entirely, False'
- Editor of Top US Conservative Site (Ron Unz)
The author spends a few weeks perusing the literature, which he summarizes in this 18,000 word article, and
concludes that the Holocaust story relentlessly hammered into the public consciousness by Jewish-owned Hollywood and media
is a load of baloney. He suspects that when the lie comes crashing down, a political earthquake will ensue.
"I wouldn’t be surprised if our
current Holocaust narrative eventually suffers that same fate (total collapse), perhaps with unfortunate consequences for
those too closely associated with having maintained it."
"Once I realized to my dismay that I couldn’t believe a word of what our media and
political leaders said about major events in the here and now, their credibility on controversial happenings so long ago
and far away entirely disappeared."
Reason Magazine and Holocaust Denial
A few years ago I somehow heard about a ferocious online dispute involving a left-leaning journalist named Mark
Ames and the editors of Reason magazine, the glossy flagship publication of America’s burgeoning
libertarian movement. Although I was deep in my difficult programming work, curiosity got the better of me, so I decided
to take a look.
Immigration Wars of the 1990s, I’d become quite friendly with the Reasonpeople, frequently visiting their
offices, especially during my “English” campaign of 1998, when I’d located my own political headquarters
in the same small Westside LA office building they used.
my content-archiving software project began absorbing more and more of my time during the early 2000s, I’d gradually
lost touch with them, but even so, the 40-odd years of their magazine archives had become the first publication I’d
incorporated into my system, and I was now pleased to discover that both sides in the ongoing feud had put my system to
good use in exploring those old Reason issues.
Apparently, the libertarians
grouped around Reason had successfully been making political inroads into Silicon Valley’s enormously
wealthy technology industry, and had now organized a major conference in San Francisco to gather together their supporters.
Their left-leaning rivals decided to nip that project in the bud by highlighting some of the
more unsavory ideological positions that mainstream libertarian leaders had once regularly espoused. Perhaps Ron Paul and
other libertarians might oppose overseas wars and drug laws, and support cutting taxes and regulations, but they and their
Republican Party allies were unspeakably vile on all sorts of other issues, and all “good thinkers” should therefore
stay very far away.
began in rather mundane fashion with an article by Ames entitled “Homophobia, Racism, and the Kochs” denouncing Reason for sharing a platform with a high-ranking Republican Congresswoman of Christian
conservative views, as well as the magazine’s reliance upon Koch funding and its alleged support for Apartheid South
Africa during the 1970s and 1980s.
The response by the Reasoneditor seemed quite persuasive, and he rightfully dismissed the guilt-by-association attacks.
He also outlined the gross errors and omissions in the charges regarding South Africa, and ridiculed Ames as a notoriously
error-prone “conspiracy theorist.” Surely few outsiders would have paid any attention to such a typical exchange
of mudslinging between rival ideological camps.
then things took a very different turn, and a week later Ames returned with a 5,000 word article bearing a title sure to grab attention: “Holocaust Denial.” He claimed that in 1976 Reason had
published an entire special issue devoted to that explosive topic.
Surely everyone on the Internet has encountered numerous instances of Holocaust Denial
over the years, but for a respectable magazine to have allotted a full issue to promoting that doctrine was something else
entirely. For decades, Hollywood has sanctified the Holocaust, and in our deeply secular society accusations of Holocaust
Denial are a bit like shouting “Witch!” in Old Salem or leveling accusations of Trotskyism in the Court of the
Progressive Sam Seder’s Majority
Reportradio show devoted a full half-hour segment to the charges against Reason, and Googling “Reason Magazine”+”Holocaust Denial”
today yields thousands of hits. This substantial explosion of Internet controversy was what caught my own attention at the
My initial reaction was
one of puzzlement. Reason had been the first periodical I had digitized in my system a dozen years earlier,
and surely I would have noticed an entire issue promoting Holocaust Denial. However, I soon discovered that February 1976
had been excluded from the supposedly complete set the magazine had shipped me for processing, an omission that itself raises
serious suspicions. But Ames had somehow located a copy in a research library and produced a full PDF, which he conveniently placed on the Internet to support his accusations.
reading his article and then glancing through the contents, I decided that his accusation was technically false but substantially
true. Apparently the actual theme of the issue was “Historical Revisionism” and except for a couple of paragraphs
buried here and there among the 76 pages, Holocaust Denial never came up, so characterizing it as a Holocaust Denial issue
was obviously a grotesque exaggeration.
on the other hand, although few of the authors were familiar to me, it seemed undeniably true that they were numbered among
America’s more prominent Holocaust Deniers, and most of them were deeply associated with organizations situated in
that same camp.
there were strong indications that their positions on that topic must certainly have been known to the Reasoneditors
who commissioned their pieces.
clearest case comes when Ames quoted the explicit statements of Dr. Gary North, a prominent libertarian thinker who had served
as one of Ron Paul’s earliest Congressional aides and later became his longtime partner in politics and business:
Probably the most far-out
materials on World War II revisionism have been the seemingly endless scholarly studies of the supposed execution of 6 million
Jews by Hitler. The anonymous author [Hoggan] of ‘The Myth of the Six Million’ has presented a solid case against
the Establishment’s favorite horror story—the supposed moral justification for our entry into the war…The
untranslated books by the former Buchenwald inmate Prof. Paul Rassinier, have seriously challenged the story…A recent
and very inexpensive book in magazine form, Did Six Million Really Die?, appeared in 1973, written by Richard
A later issue
carried a thousand word letter by Prof. Adam Reed of Rockefeller University, a past Reason contributor,
strongly affirming the mainstream Holocaust narrative by quoting from standard works, and taking Dr. North to task for his
citation of Holocaust Denial works of doubtful quality. But North firmly stood his ground:
“The second point, that about 6 million Jews really
did die in the concentration camps, is one that will be open until the records of the period become fully available. I am
not convinced yet, one way or the other. I am happy to have Dr. Reed’s interpretation of the data, but until the publishing
companies and academic guild encourage the re-examination of the data, I shall continue to recommend that those interested
in revisionist questions read The Myth of the Six Million and Did Six Million Really Die? as
reasonable (though not necessarily irrefutable) pieces of historical revisionism. If a person can’t make up his mind,
he should do more reading.”
Dr. James J. Martin was the lead contributor to the February Revisionism issue, and the preceding January issue
had featured an extended Q&A by the editors, with one of the queries directly addressing the controversial topic:
REASON: Dr. Martin, do
you believe (1) that the specific charge against the Nazis of having a mass extermination program of several million Jews
is true, and (2) that the Allied atrocities were as great or greater than those of the Germans, from your study of the question?
MARTIN: Well, I never made a head count of all who lost their lives in the War-we’ve seen a wide
variety of statistical materials, some of which have been pulled out of thin air. As a consequence, it’s hard to make
any kind of estimate of this sort, whether ten more were killed on the one side or the other is not a particularly entrancing
subject as far as I’m concerned.
Whether allegations can be proven it remains
to be seen. I don’t believe that the evidence of a planned extermination of the entire Jewish population of Europe
is holding up. I have been influenced over the years by the works of Paul Rassinier, and he still has to be reckoned with.
His works have been ignored for a long time, and sooner or later somebody’s going to have to do a decent job of coping
with what he has presented. I think Rassinier’s general case is sound at the moment and I haven’t seen any strong
evidence to upset his allegations or his assertions that there was no planned program for the extermination of European
His other main case is that there were no gas chamber extermination programs.
The fact that a great many people lost their lives is incontrovertible—that the German concentration camps weren’t
health centers is well known-but they appear to have been far smaller and much less lethal than the Russian ones.
Another major contributor to the issue was Dr.
Austin J. App, and just three years earlier he had published a short book bearing the lurid title The Six Million
Swindle: Blackmailing the German People for Hard Marks with Fabricated Corpses.
In a follow-up column by Ames’ own editor, the stunned reactions of various journalists are listed, with one of them Tweeting out “I
had no idea that Reason Magazine was once a haven for Holocaust Revisionism. Holy Moly.” Despite the angry obfuscations of present-day Reason staffers, this description seems quite correct.
Indeed, there seems considerable circumstantial evidence that around that
time “Holocaust Skepticism” extended rather broadly within the entire nascent libertarian movement. Aside from
the sharp critique of the aforementioned Prof.
Reed, the overwhelming majority of the reader responses seemed totally favorable, with Samuel Konkin III, editor
of New Libertarian Weekly and various similar publications, suggesting that the February issue was one
of the best they had ever published. David Nolan, founder of America’s Libertarian Party, also praised the issue as
two editors of the issue in question even today remain quite prominent figures at Reason and within American
libertarianism, while the masthead then carried names such as David Brudnoy and Alan Reynolds, who both later became influential figures in conservative
and libertarian politics.
seems no evidence of any resignations or angry recriminations following the issue’s publication, which seems to have
been digested with total equanimity, apparently arousing less rancor than might have been generated by a dispute over monetary
I’d never paid
much attention to Holocaust discussions over the years, but the name of Murray Rothbard on the 1976 Reason masthead
prompted a memory. Rothbard is widely regarded as the founder of modern libertarianism, and I recalled in the 1990s reading
somewhere that he had often ridiculed the Holocaust as being total nonsense, which had stuck in my mind as a typical example
of libertarian eccentricity. A quick Google search seemed to confirm my recollection that Rothbard was an avowed Holocaust Denier.
Although the whole controversy regarding Reason’s editorial line of the mid-1970s soon died
down, it remained a nagging puzzle in the back of my mind. I’d always been quite skeptical of libertarian ideology,
but my Reason friends from the 1990s had certainly seemed like smart and rational people to me, hardly
raving lunatics of any sort, and two of the ones I’d known best had been the co-editors of the controversial issue
I could easily
understand how zealous libertarian ideologues might be swept past the point of rationality on certain matters—perhaps
arguing that the police and the army should be abolished as statist institutions—but the factual question of what
had or had not happened to the Jews of Europe during World War II hardly fell into that sort of category.
Furthermore, libertarianism had always attracted a very large Jewish contingent,
especially in its upper ranks, and one of the issue editors came from that background, as did Rothbard and numerous others
featured on the masthead. While deranged anti-Semitism is not impossible among Jews, I would think that it is somewhat less
likely. Clearly something very odd must have been going on.
I was then too busy with my work to focus on the matter, but some months later I had more time,
and began a detailed investigation. My first step was to carefully read the Reason articles produced
by those controversial writers previously unknown to me. Although those pieces were not Holocaust-related, I thought they
might give me a sense of their thinking.
To my surprise, the historiography seemed outstandingly good, and almost certainly accurate based on what I had
picked up over the years from perfectly mainstream sources.
Dr. Martin’s long article on the notorious framing of “Tokyo Rose”was probably the best and most comprehensive treatment I had ever encountered on that topic, and Dr. App’s analysis
of the tragedy of the Sudeten-Germans was equally strong, raising several points I had previously not known. Percy Greaves effectively summarized many of the very suspicious aspects of the Pearl Harbor attack, and although his case for the prosecution against FDR was certainly not airtight, it accorded with the views presented
by numerous scholars in other books on the subject.
Moreover, his position was seconded by a young Bruce Bartlett, later a prominent Reagan and Bush official, and still later a strong Republican opponent
of George W. Bush, routinely feted by the New York Times. Most of the other writings also seemed of very high
quality, including Dr. North’s summary of World War II Revisionism.
In general, the academic
scholarship of those articles greatly surpassed anything found in opinion magazines of more recent decades, Reason itself
included. Those so interested can click on the above links, read the articles in question, and decide for themselves.
Back then, Reason was
a young and struggling magazine, with a shoestring staff and budget. Publishing articles of such obvious quality was surely
a remarkable achievement for which the editors could feel justifiably proud, and the overwhelmingly positive letters they
received seemed absolutely warranted.
Meanwhile, the nasty attacks by Ames appeared to be those of a mere political hack who may not have even bothered
actually reading the articles whose authors he vilified.
As a further sign of Ames’ dishonesty, he flung the epithet “Nazi” some two
dozen times in his hack-job, along with numerous uses of “anti-Semitic” as well, and Greaves was certainly the
subject of many of those slurs.
although Greaves and Bartlett wrote back-to-back articles on exactly the same Pearl Harbor topic, and according to Wikipedia, the former was the academic advisor to the latter on that subject, Bartlett’s name appears nowhere in Ames’s
hit-piece, presumably because denouncing a prominent policy expert much beloved by the New York Times as
an “anti-Semitic Neo-Nazi” might prove self-defeating.
Even leaving that aside, accusing the Jewish libertarians running Reason of
being Nazi propagandists must surely be the sort of charge that would strain the credulity of even the most gullible.
Deborah Lipstadt and Holocaust Denial
With Ames’ credibility totally shredded, I decided to carefully
reread his article again, looking for what clues I could find to the whole bizarre situation. Academic scholars who publish
very good history on certain subjects might still have totally irrational views on others, but normally one would assume
It appeared that
much of Ames’ understanding of the issue had come from a certain Deborah Lipstadt, whom he characterized as a great
Holocaust expert. Her name was very vaguely familiar to me as some sort of academic activist, who years before had won a
major legal victory over a rightwing British historian named David Irving, and Irving himself received further denunciations
in the Ames article.
one name did stick out. Apparently based on Lipstadt’s information, Ames described Harry Elmer Barnes as “the
godfather of American Holocaust denial literature” and Martin’s “Holocaust denial guru.”
A dozen years earlier, the name “Barnes”
would have meant almost nothing to me. But as I produced my content-archiving system and digitized so many of America’s
most influential publications of the last 150 years, I had soon discovered that many of our most illustrious public intellectuals—Left,
Right, and Center—had been suddenly purged and “disappeared” around 1940 because of their stalwart opposition to FDR’s extremely aggressive foreign policy, and Barnes, an eminent historian
and sociologist, had been among the most prominent of those.
He had been one of the earliest editors at Foreign Affairs and for many years
afterward his important articles had graced the pages of The New Republic and The Nation,
while even after his fall, he had edited Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace, an important 1953 collection of essays by himself and other once-prominent figures. But to have a figure of such intellectual
stature accused of being a Holocaust Denier, let alone the “godfather” of the entire movement, seemed rather
bizarre to me.
Since Ames was
merely an ignorant political hack transmitting the opinions of others, I moved on Lipstadt, his key source. Anyone who has
spent much time on the comment-threads of relatively unfiltered websites has certainly encountered the controversial topic
of Holocaust Denial, but I now decided to try to investigate the issue in much more serious fashion.
A few clicks on the Amazon.com website, and her 1993 book Denying the Holocaust arrived in my mailbox a couple of days later, providing
me an entrance into the mysterious world.
Reading the book was certainly a tremendous revelation to me. Lipstadt is a professor of Holocaust Studies with
an appointment in Emory University’s Department of Theology, and once I read the opening paragraph of her first chapter,
I decided that her academic specialty might certainly be described as “Holocaust Theology.”
The producer was incredulous. She found it hard to believe
that I was turning down an opportunity to appear on her nationally televised show. “But you are writing a book on this
topic. It will be great publicity.” I explained repeatedly that I would not participate in a debate with a Holocaust
denier. The existence of the Holocaust was not a matter of debate.
I would analyze and illustrate who they were and what they tried to do, but I would
not appear with them…Unwilling to accept my no as final, she vigorously condemned Holocaust denial and all it represented.
Then, in one last attempt to get me to change my mind, she asked me a question: “I certainly don’t agree with
them, but don’t you think our viewers should hear the other side?”
Lipstadt’s absolute horror at having someone actually dispute the tenets of
her academic doctrine could not have been more blatant. Surely no zealous theologian of the European Dark Ages would have
reacted any differently.
The second chapter
of her book supported that impression. Since many of the individuals she castigates as Holocaust Deniers also supported
the Revisionist perspective of the underlying causes of the First and Second World Wars, she harshly attacked those schools,
but in rather strange fashion.
recent years, blogger Steve Sailer and others have ridiculed what they describe as the “point-and-sputter” style of debate, in which a “politically-incorrect”
narrative is merely described and then automatically treated as self-evidently false without any accompanying need for actual
refutation. This seemed to be the approach that Lipstadt took throughout her rather short book.
For example, she provided a very long list of leading academic
scholars, prominent political figures, and influential journalists who had championed Revisionist history, noted that their
views disagree with the more mainstream perspective she had presumably imbibed from her History 101 textbooks, and thereby
regarded them as fully debunked.
a Christian preacher attempting to refute the evolutionary theories of Harvard’s E.O. Wilson by quoting a passage of
Bible verse might take much the same approach. But few evangelical activists would be so foolish as to provide a very long
list of eminent scientists who all took the same Darwinist position and then attempt to sweep them aside by citing a single
verse from Genesis.
seems to approach history much like a Bible-thumper, but a particularly dim-witted one. Moreover, many of the authors she
attacked had already become familiar to me after a decade of my content-archiving work, and I had found their numerous books
quite scholarly and persuasive.
in particular, figured quite prominently in Lipstadt’s chapter and throughout her book. The index listed his name on
more than two dozen pages, and he is repeatedly described as the “godfather” of Holocaust Denial, and its seminal
figure. Given such heavy coverage, I eagerly examined all those references and the accompanying footnotes to uncover the
shocking statements he must have made during his very long scholarly career.
I was quite disappointed. There is not a single reference I could find
to his supposed Holocaust Denial views until just the year before his death at age 79, and even that item is hardly what
I had been led to believe.
a 9,300 word article on Revisionism for a libertarian publication, he ridicules a leading Holocaust source for claiming that
Hitler had killed 25 million Jews, noting that total was nearly twice their entire worldwide population at the time. In
addition, Barnes several times applied the word “allegedly” to the stories of the Nazi extermination scheme,
an sacrilegious attitude that appears to have horrified a theologian such as Lipstadt.
Finally, in a short, posthumously published review of a book by French
scholar Paul Rassiner, Barnes found his estimate of just 1 million to 1.5 million Jewish deaths quite convincing, but his
tone suggested that he had never previously investigated the matter himself.
So although that last item technically validated Lipstadt’s accusation
that Barnes was a Holocaust Denier, her evidence-free claims that he was the founder and leader of the field hardly enhances
her scholarly credibility. Meanwhile, all the many tens of thousands of words I have read by Barnes has suggested that he
was a careful and dispassionate historian.
A notorious incident that occurred soon after the Bolshevik Revolution came to my mind. Eminent philologist Timofei
Florinsky, one of Russia’s most internationally renowned academic scholars, was hauled before a revolutionary tribunal
for a public interrogation about his ideas, and one of the judges, a drunken Jewish former prostitute, found his answers
so irritating that she drew her revolver and shot him dead right there and then.
Given Lipstadt’s obvious emotional state, I have a strong suspicion
that she might have wished she could deal in a similar fashion with Barnes and the numerous other scholars she denounced.
Among other things, she noted with horror that more than two decades after his 1940 purge from public life, Barnes’
books were still required reading at both Harvard and Columbia.
All of us reasonably extrapolate what we already know or can easily check against what is more
difficult to verify, and the remaining chapters of Lipstadt’s book left me very doubtful about the reliability of
her work, all of which was written in a similar near-hysterical style.
Since she had already been vaguely known to me from her well-publicized legal battle
against historian David Irving more than a dozen years earlier, I was hardly surprised to discover that many pages were
devoted to vilifying and insulting him in much the same manner as Barnes, so I decided to investigate that case.
I was only slightly surprised to discover
that Irving had been one of the world’s most successful World War II historians, whose remarkable documentary findings had completely upended our knowledge of that conflict and its origins, with his
books selling in the many millions.
His entire approach to controversial historical issues was to rely as much as possible upon hard documentary evidence,
and his total inability to locate any such documents relating to the Holocaust drove Lipstadt and her fellow ethnic-activists
into a frenzy of outrage, so after many years of effort they finally managed to wreck his career.
Out of curiosity, I read a couple of his shorter books, which seemed absolutely
outstanding historiography, written in a very measured tone, quite different from that of Lipstadt, whose own 2005 account
of her legal triumph over Irving, History on Trial, merely confirmed my opinion of her incompetence.
Lipstadt’s first book Beyond
Belief, published in 1986, tells an interesting story as well, with her descriptive subtitle being “The American
Press and the Coming of the Holocaust, 1933-1945.” Much of the volume consists of press clippings from the American
print media of that era interspersed with her running rather hysterical commentary, but providing little analysis or judgment.
Some of the journalists reported horrifying
conditions for Jews in pre-war Germany while others claim that such stories were wildly exaggerated, and Lipstadt automatically
praised the former and denounced the latter without providing any serious explanation.
Lenni Brenner’s remarkable book Zionism in the Age of the Dictators had been published three years earlier. Although I only discovered it very recently, surely any half-competent specialist
in her own topic would have noticed it, yet Lipstadt provided no hint of its existence.
Perhaps the reality of the important Nazi-Zionist economic partnership
of the 1930s, with Nazi officials traveling to Palestine as honored Zionist guests and leading Nazi newspapers praising the
Zionist enterprise might have complicated her simple story of fanatic German Jew-hatred under Hitler steadily rising towards
an exterminationist pitch. Her faculty appointment in a Department of Theology seems very apt.
Lipstadt’s wartime coverage is just as bad, perhaps worse. She catalogs
perhaps a couple of hundred print news reports, each describing the massacre of hundreds of thousands or even millions of
Jews by the Nazis.
expresses her outrage that so many of these reports were buried deep within the inside pages of newspapers, a placement
suggesting that they were regarded as hysterical wartime atrocity propaganda and probably fictional, with the editors sometimes
explicitly stating that opinion. Indeed, among these under-emphasized stories was the claim that the Germans had recently
killed 1.5 million Jews by individually injecting each one of them in the heart with a lethal drug.
And although I don’t see any mention of it, around that same time
America’s top Jewish leader Rabbi Stephen Wise was peddling the absurd report that the Nazis had slaughtered millions
of Jews, turning their skins into lampshades and rendering their bodies into soap. Obviously, separating truth from falsehood
during a blizzard of wartime propaganda is not nearly as easy as Lipstadt seems to assume.
Ordinary Americans were apparently even more skeptical than newspaper editors.
According to Lipstadt:
Writing in the Sunday New York Times Magazine, [Arthur] Koestler cited public opinion polls in the
United States in which nine of ten average Americans dismissed the accusations against the Nazis as propaganda lies and
flatly stated that they did not believe a word of them.
Lipstadt convincingly demonstrates that very few Americans seem to have believed in the reality
of the Holocaust during the Second World War itself, despite considerable efforts by agitated Jewish activists to persuade
them. Over the years, I have seen mention of numerous other books making this same basic point, and therefore harshly condemning
the American political leaders of the time for having failed “to save the Jews.”
Explicit and Implicit Holocaust Denial After World War II
Yet as I began further investigating the history of Holocaust Denial in
the wake of the Reason contretemps, I was very surprised to discover that this same pattern of widespread
disbelief in the Holocaust seems to have continued unabated after the end of the war and throughout the
1950s, being especially strong among high-ranking American military figures, especially top generals and individuals with
an Intelligence background, who seemingly would have had the best knowledge of the true events.
Some years ago, I came across a totally obscure 1951 book entitled Iron Curtain Over America by
John Beaty, a well-regarded university professor. Beaty had spent his wartime years in Military Intelligence, being tasked
with preparing the daily briefing reports distributed to all top American officials summarizing available intelligence information
acquired during the previous 24 hours, which was obviously a position of considerable responsibility.
As a zealous anti-Communist, he regarded much of America’s
Jewish population as deeply implicated in subversive activity, therefore constituting a serious threat to traditional American
freedoms. In particular, the growing Jewish stranglehold over publishing and the media was making it increasingly difficult
for discordant views to reach the American people, with this regime of censorship constituting the “Iron Curtain”
described in his title.
blamed Jewish interests for the totally unnecessary war with Hitler’s Germany, which had long sought good relations
with America, but instead had suffered total destruction for its strong opposition to Europe’s Jewish-backed Communist
Beaty also sharply
denounced American support for the new state of Israel, which was potentially costing us the goodwill of so many millions
of Muslims and Arabs.
a very minor aside, he also criticized the Israelis for continuing to claim that Hitler had killed six million Jews, a highly
implausible accusation that had no apparent basis in reality and seemed to be just a fraud concocted by Jews and Communists,
aimed at poisoning our relations with postwar Germany and extracting money for the Jewish State from the long-suffering
He was scathing
toward the Nuremberg Trials, which he described as a “major indelible blot” upon America and “a travesty
of justice.” According to him, the proceedings were dominated by vengeful German Jews, many of whom engaged in falsification
of testimony or even had criminal backgrounds. As a result, this “foul fiasco” merely taught Germans that “our
government had no sense of justice.” Sen.
Robert Taft, the Republican leader of the immediate postwar era took a very similar position, which later won him
the praise of John F. Kennedy in Profiles in Courage.
The fact that the chief Soviet prosecutor at Nuremberg had played the same role
during the notorious Stalinist show trials of the late 1930s, during which numerous Old Bolsheviks confessed to all sorts
of absurd and ridiculous things, hardly enhanced the credibility of the proceedings to many outside observers.
Then as now, a book taking such controversial
positions stood little chance of finding a mainstream New York publisher, but it was soon released by a small Dallas firm,
and then became enormously successful, going through some seventeen printings over the next few years. According to Scott
McConnell, founding editor of The American Conservative, Beaty’s book became the second most popular
conservative text of the 1950s, ranking only behind Russell Kirk’s iconic classic, The Conservative Mind.
Moreover, although Jewish groups including
the ADL harshly condemned the book, especially in their private lobbying, those efforts provoked a backlash, and numerous
top American generals, both serving and retired, wholeheartedly endorsed Beaty’s work, denouncing the ADL efforts
at censorship and urging all Americans to read the volume.
Although Beaty’s quite explicit Holocaust Denial might shock tender modern sensibilities,
at the time it seems to have caused barely a ripple of concern and was almost totally ignored even by the vocal Jewish critics
of the work.
Much of this very interesting
story is told by Joseph Bendersky, an expert in Holocaust Studies, who devoted ten years of archival research to his 2000
book The “Jewish Threat.” His work chronicles the extremely widespread anti-Semitism found
within the U.S. Army and Military Intelligence throughout the first half of the twentieth century, with Jews being widely
regarded as posing a serious security risk.
book runs well over 500 pages, but when I consulted the index I found no mention of the Rosenbergs nor Harry Dexter White
nor any of the other very numerous Jewish spies revealed by the Venona Decrypts, and the term “Venona” itself
is also missing from the index. Reports of the overwhelmingly Jewish leadership of the Russian Bolsheviks are mostly treated
as bigotry and paranoia, as are descriptions of the similar ethnic skew of America’s own Communist Party, let alone
the heavy financial support of the Bolsheviks by Jewish international bankers.
At one point, he dismisses the link between Jews and Communism in Germany
by noting that “less than half” of the Communist Party leadership was Jewish; but since fewer than one in a hundred
Germans came from that ethnic background, Jews were obviously over-represented among Communist leaders by as much as 5,000%.
This seems to typify the sort of dishonesty and innumeracy I have regularly encountered among Jewish Holocaust experts.
Meanwhile, with the copyright having long
lapsed, I’m pleased to add Beaty’s work to my Controversial HTML Books selection, so individuals interested
can read it and decide for themselves:
Beaty’s very brief 1951 discussion has been the earliest instance
of explicit Holocaust Denial I have managed to locate, but the immediate postwar years seem absolutely rife with what might
be described as “implicit Holocaust Denial,” especially within the highest political circles.
Over the years, Holocaust scholars and activists have very rightfully
emphasized the absolutely unprecedented nature of the historical events they have studied.
They describe how some six million innocent Jewish civilians were deliberately
exterminated, mostly in gas chambers, by one of Europe’s most highly cultured nations, and emphasize that monstrous
project was often accorded greater priority than Germany’s own wartime military needs during the country’s desperate
struggle for survival. Furthermore, the Germans also undertook enormous efforts to totally eliminate all possible traces
of their horrifying deed, with huge resources expended to cremate all those millions of bodies and scatter the ashes.
This same disappearance technique was even
sometimes applied to the contents of their mass graves, which were dug up long after initial burial, so that the rotting
corpses could then be totally incinerated and all evidence eliminated.
And although Germans are notorious for their extreme bureaucratic precision, this
immense wartime project was apparently implemented without benefit of a single written document, or at least no such document
has ever been located.
entitled her first book “Beyond Belief,” and I think that all of us can agree that the historical event she and
so many others in academia and Hollywood have made the centerpiece of their lives and careers is certainly one of the most
very remarkable occurrences in all of human history. Indeed, perhaps only a Martian Invasion would have been more worthy
of historical study, but Orson Welles’s famous War of the Worlds radio-play which terrified so many
millions of Americans in 1938 turned out to be a hoax rather than real.
The six million Jews who died in the Holocaust certainly constituted a very substantial
fraction of all the wartime casualties in the European Theater, outnumbering by a factor of 100 all the British who died
during the Blitz, and being dozens of times more numerous than all the Americans who fell there in battle.
Furthermore, the sheer monstrosity of the
crime against innocent civilians would surely have provided the best possible justification for the Allied war effort. Yet
for many, many years after the war, a very strange sort of amnesia seems to have gripped most of the leading political protagonists
in that regard.
a French academic who became a prominent Holocaust Denier in the 1970s, once made an extremely interesting observation regarding
the memoirs of Eisenhower, Churchill, and De Gaulle:
Three of the best known works on the Second World War are General Eisenhower’s Crusade in Europe (New
York: Doubleday [Country Life Press], 1948), Winston Churchill’s The Second World War (London: Cassell,
6 vols., 1948-1954), and the Mémoires de guerre of General de Gaulle (Paris: Plon, 3 vols., 1954-1959).
In these three works not the least mention of Nazi gas chambers is to be found.
in Europe is a book of 559 pages; the six volumes of Churchill’s Second World War total
4,448 pages; and de Gaulle’s three-volume Mémoires de guerre is 2,054 pages. In this mass
of writing, which altogether totals 7,061 pages (not including the introductory parts), published from 1948 to 1959, one
will find no mention either of Nazi “gas chambers,” a “genocide” of the Jews, or of “six million”
Jewish victims of the war.
that the Holocaust would reasonably rank as the single most remarkable episode of the Second World War, such striking omissions
must almost force us to place Eisenhower, Churchill, and De Gaulle among the ranks of “implicit Holocaust Deniers.”
Many others seem to fall into
that same category. In 1981, Lucy S. Dawidowicz, a leading Holocaust scholar, published a short book entitled The
Holocaust and the Historians, in which she denounced so many prominent historians for having so totally ignored the
reality of the Holocaust for many years following World War II.
Indeed, discussion of that topic was almost entirely confined to the Jewish Studies programs which Jewish ethnic
activists had newly established at numerous universities throughout the country. Although Lipstadt’s poor scholarly
habits and hysterical style hardly impressed me, she appears to have been among the most successful academics who began
a career in those ethnic studies departments, which suggests that their average quality was far below her own.
Meanwhile, Dawidowicz emphasizes that mainstream
histories often entirely omitted the Holocaust from their presentations:
But it is plain from the most cursory review of textbooks and scholarly works
by English and American historians that the awesome events of the Holocaust have not been given their historic due. For
over two decades some secondary school and college texts never mentioned the subject at all, while others treated it so summarily
or vaguely as to fail to convey sufficient information about the events themselves or their historical significance.
With regard to serious scholarship, she notes
that when Friedrich Meinecke, universally acknowledged as Germany’s most eminent historian, published The
German Catastrophe in 1946, he harshly denounced Hitler as the leader of “a band of criminals” but
made absolutely no mention of the Holocaust, which surely would have represented the height of such criminality.
Major British accounts of Hitler and World
War II by leading historians such as A.J.P. Taylor, H.R. Trevor-Roper, and Alan Bullock were almost as silent. A similar
situation occurred in America as late as 1972 when the massive 1,237 page Columbia History of the World, having
a Jewish co-editor, devoted a full chapter to World War II but confined its discussion of the Holocaust to just two short
and somewhat ambiguous sentences.
almost gets a sense that many of these experienced professional historians treated discussion of the Holocaust as a considerable
embarrassment, a subject that they sought to avoid or at least completely minimize.
Dawidowicz even castigates Slaughterhouse-Five, the 1969
fictional masterpiece by Kurt Vonnegut, for its bald assertion that the firebombing of Dresden was “the greatest massacre
in European history,” a claim that seems to reduce the Holocaust to non-existence.
I myself had noticed something similar just a couple of years before Dawidowicz’s
book appeared. The English translation of German journalist Joachim Fest’s widely praised Hitler had
been published in 1974 and I had read it a few years later, finding it just as excellent as the critics had indicated.
But I remember being a little puzzled that
the 800 page book contained no more than a couple of pages discussing the Nazi death camps and the word “Jews”
never even appeared in the index.
vast majority of Hitler’s Jewish victims came from Russia and the Eastern European nations included in the Soviet Bloc.
That was also the location of all the extermination camps that are the central focus of Holocaust scholars, and therefore
the Soviets were the source of most of the key evidence used at the Nuremberg Trials.
Yet Dawidowicz notes that after Stalin grew increasingly suspicious of
Jews and Israel a few years after the end of the war, virtually all mention of the Holocaust and German wartime atrocities
against Jews vanished from the Soviet media and history books.
A similar process occurred in the Warsaw Pact satellites, even while the top Communist Party
leadership of many of those countries often remained very heavily Jewish for some years. Indeed, I recall reading quite
a number of newspaper articles mentioning that after the Berlin Wall fell and the sundered halves of Europe were finally
reunited, most Eastern Europeans had never even heard of the Holocaust.
These days, my morning newspapers seem to carry Holocaust-related stories with astonishing
frequency, and probably no event of the twentieth century looms so large in our public consciousness.
According to public survey data, even as far back as 1995, some 97% of
Americans knew of the Holocaust, far more than were aware of the Pearl Harbor attack or America’s use of the atomic
bombs against Japan, while less than half our citizenry were aware that the Soviet Union had been our wartime ally.
But I’d suspect that anyone who drew
his knowledge from the mainstream newspapers and history books during the first couple of decades after the end of the Second
World War might never have even been aware that any Holocaust had actually occurred.
In 1999 Peter
Novick published a book on this general theme entitled The Holocaust in American Life, citing that survey,
and his introduction began by noting the very strange pattern the Holocaust exhibited in its cultural influence, which seems
quite unique among all major historical events.
the case of almost all other searing historical occurrences such as the massive bloodshed of the Somme or the bitter Vietnam
War, their greatest impact upon popular consciousness and media came soon afterward, with the major books and films often
appearing within the first five or ten years when memories were fresh, and the influence peaking within a couple of decades,
after which they were gradually forgotten.
Yet in the case of the Holocaust, this pattern was completely reversed. Hardly anyone discussed it for the first
twenty years after the end of the World War II, while it gradually moved to the center of American life in the 1970s, just
as wartime memories were fading and many of the most prominent and knowledgeable figures from that era had departed the
Novick cites numerous
studies and surveys demonstrating that this lack of interest and visibility certainly included the Jewish community itself,
which had seemingly suffered so greatly under those events, yet apparently had almost completely forgotten about them during
the 1950s and much of the 1960s.
can certainly confirm that impression from my personal experience. Prior to the mid- or late-1970s, I had had only the vaguest
impression that virtually all the Jews and Gypsies of Europe had been exterminated during the Second World War, and although
the term “Holocaust” was in widespread use, it invariably referred to a “Nuclear Holocaust,” a term
long-since supplanted and scarcely used today.
Then, after the Berlin Wall fell, I was quite surprised to discover that Eastern Europe was still filled with vast
numbers of unexterminated Gypsies, who quickly flooded into the West and provoked all sorts of political controversies.
The Rediscovery of the Holocaust
The late scholar Raul Hilberg is universally acknowledged as the founder
of modern Holocaust studies, which began with the 1961 publication of his massive volume The Destruction of the
European Jews. In his very interesting 2007 Hilberg obituary, historian Norman Finkelstein emphasizes that prior to Hilberg’s work, there had been virtually no writing on the
Holocaust, and discussion of the topic was considered almost “taboo.”
For a recent event of such apparent enormity
to have been so completely wiped away from public discussion and the consciousness of historians and political scientists
can be explained in several different ways. But once I began to investigate the circumstances behind Hilberg’s ground-breaking
work, I encountered all sorts of strange ironies.
According to Wikipedia, Hilberg’s family of Austrian Jews coincidentally arrived in the United States on the exact day in 1939 that war
broke out, and in his early teens he was soon horrified to read all the news reports of the ongoing extermination of his
fellow Jews in the continent his family had left behind, even telephoning Jewish leaders asking why they were doing so little
to save their kinsmen from annihilation.
He subsequently served in the U.S. military in Europe, then majored in Political Science at Brooklyn College after
the end of the conflict. The inspiration for his future scholarly focus seems to have come when he was shocked by a remark
made by one of his lecturers, Hans Rosenberg:
The most wicked atrocities perpetrated on a civilian population in modern times occurred during the Napoleonic
occupation of Spain.
Hilberg asked how Rosenberg, himself a German-Jewish refugee, could have so totally ignored the murder of 6 million Jews,
a monstrous crime committed just a couple of years earlier, Rosenberg sought to deflect the question, saying that “it
was a complicated matter” and “history doesn’t teach down into the present age.”
Since Rosenberg was a student of Meinecke, whom Lipstadt has bitterly
denounced as an implicit Holocaust Denier, one wonders whether Rosenberg may have shared the beliefs of his mentor but was
reluctant to admit that fact to his overwhelmingly Jewish students in emotionally-charged postwar Brooklyn.
Later, Hilberg conducted his doctoral research
at Columbia under Franz Neumann, another German-Jewish refugee scholar. But when Hilberg indicated he wanted his research
to focus on the extermination of Europe’s Jews, Neumann strongly discouraged that topic, warning Hilberg that doing
so would be professionally imprudent and might become “his academic funeral.”
When he attempted to publish his research in book form, it received numerous
negative reviews, with Israel’s Yad Vashem fearing it would encounter “hostile criticism,” and over a six
year period, it was rejected by several major publishing houses along with Princeton University, based on the advice of
the influential Jewish intellectual Hannah Arendt.
One naturally wonders whether all these established scholars may have quietly known something that a naive young
doctoral candidate such as Hilberg did not. His book only appeared in print because a Jewish immigrant whose business had
suffered under the Nazis funded the entire publication.
I’d never paid much attention to Holocaust issues, but the supporters of my local Palo
Alto Library operate a monthly book sale, and with serious nonfiction hardcovers often priced at just a quarter each, my
personal library has grown by hundreds of volumes over the years, now including several of the thickest and most influential
Hilberg’s classic volume, these include Nora Levin’s The Holocaust (1968), Lucy Dawidowicz’s The
War Against the Jews, 1933-1945 (1975), Martin Gilbert’s The Holocaust (1985), and Daniel
Goldhagen’s Hitler’s Willing Executioners (1996).
I claim absolutely no expertise in Holocaust issues, and analyzing the
evidence and argumentation these voluminous works offer is entirely beyond my ability. But I decided to attempt to assess
their overall credibility by exploring a few particular items, without actually bothering to read the thousands of pages
of text they provided.
the interesting case of Field Marshal Erhard Milch, Hermann Goering’s very powerful number-two in the German Luftwaffe.
His father was certainly a Jew, and according to researchers Robert Wistrich and Louis Snyder, there is archival evidence
that his mother was Jewish as well.
Now is it certainly not impossible that a Third Reich supposedly dedicated with grim fanaticism to the extermination
of each and every Jew might have spent the entire war with a full- or half-Jew near the absolute top of its military hierarchy,
but surely that puzzling anomaly would warrant careful explanation, and Milch’s apparent Jewish background was certainly
known during the Nuremberg Trials.
when I carefully consulted the very comprehensive indexes of those five books, totaling over 3,500 pages, there is virtually
no discussion of Milch, except a few very brief mentions of his name in connection with various military operations.
Either the authors were unaware of Milch’s
Jewish background, or perhaps they hoped to keep that fact away from their readers lest it cause “confusion.”
Neither of these possibilities enhances the trust we should place in their research skills or their scholarly objectivity.
Indeed, the fascinating and widely-praised
2002 book Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers by Bryan Mark Rigg notes that aside from Milch, Hitler’s
military contained over a dozen half-Jewish generals and admirals and another dozen quarter-Jews of that same high rank,
plus a total of roughly 150,000 additional half- or quarter-Jewish soldiers, with a large fraction of these being officers.
All of these individuals would have had
some fully-Jewish parents or grand-parents, which seems decidedly odd behavior for a regime supposedly so focused on the
total eradication of the Jewish race.
Another obvious matter casts further doubt upon the historical quality of those five immensely thick volumes of
standard Holocaust narrative, which together occupy nearly a linear foot on my bookshelves. For prosecutors of any crime,
establishing a plausible motive is certainly an important goal, and in the case of the Jewish Holocaust, these authors would
seem to have an easy task at hand.
and his German colleagues had always claimed that the Jews overwhelmingly dominated Bolshevik Communism, and much of their
struggle against the former was in order to prevent further bloody deeds of the latter. So surely devoting an early chapter
or so to describing this central Nazi doctrine would provide an airtight explanation of what drove the Nazis to their fiendish
slaughters, rendering fully explicable the horrifying events that would occupy the remainder of their text.
Yet oddly enough, an examination of their
indexes for “Bolsheviks,” “Communism,” and all variants reveals almost no discussion of this important
issue. Goldhagen’s 1996 book provides just a couple of short sentences spread across his 600 pages, and the other works
seem to contain virtually nothing at all.
Since all of these Holocaust books almost totally avoid Hitler’s self-declared motive for his anti-Jewish
actions, they are forced to desperately search for alternative explanations, seeking clues buried deep within the German
past or turning to psychanalytical speculations or perhaps deciding that what they describe as the greatest massacre in
all human history was undertaken out of sheer Nazi wickedness.
The obvious reason for this glaring omission is that the authors are constructing a morality-play
in which the Jews must be portrayed as absolutely blameless victims, and even hinting at their role in the numerous Communist
atrocities that long preceded the rise of the Third Reich might cause readers to consider both sides of the issue.
When purported historians go to absurd lengths
to hide such glaring facts, they unmask themselves as propagandists, and we must be very cautious about trusting their reliability
and candor in all other matters, whether great or small.
Indeed, the issue of Communism raises a far larger matter, one having rather touchy implications.
Sometimes two simple compounds are separately inert, but when combined together may possess tremendous explosive force.
From my introductory history classes and
readings in high school, certain things had always seemed glaringly obvious to me even if the conclusions remained unmentionable,
and I once assumed they were just as apparent to most others as well. But over the years I have begun to wonder whether
perhaps this might not be correct.
in those late Cold War days, the death toll of innocent civilians from the Bolshevik Revolution and the first two decades
of the Soviet Regime was generally reckoned at running well into the tens of millions when we include the casualties of
the Russian Civil War, the government-induced famines, the Gulag, and the executions.
I’ve heard that these numbers have been substantially revised downwards
to perhaps as little as twenty million or so, but no matter. Although determined Soviet apologists may dispute such very
large figures, they have always been part of the standard narrative history taught within the West.
Meanwhile, all historians know perfectly well that the Bolshevik leaders
were overwhelmingly Jewish, with three of the five revolutionaries Lenin named as his plausible successors coming from that
background. Although only around 4% of Russia’s population was Jewish, a few years ago Vladimir Putin stated that Jews constituted perhaps 80-85% of the early Soviet government, an estimate fully consistent with the contemporaneous claims of Winston Churchill, Times of London correspondent Robert Wilton, and the officers of American Military Intelligence. Recent books by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Yuri Slezkine, and others have all painted a very similar picture. And prior to World War II, Jews remained enormously over-represented in the
Communist leadership, especially dominating the Gulag administration and the top ranks of the dreaded NKVD.
Both of these simple facts have been widely
accepted in America throughout my entire lifetime. But combine them together with the relatively tiny size of worldwide
Jewry, around 16 million prior to World War II, and the inescapable conclusion is that in per capita terms Jews were the
greatest mass-murderers of the twentieth century, holding that unfortunate distinction by an enormous margin and with no
other nationality coming even remotely close.
And yet, by the astonishing alchemy of Hollywood, the greatest killers of the last one hundred years have somehow
been transmuted into being seen as the greatest victims, a transformation so seemingly implausible that future generations
will surely be left gasping in awe.
Today’s American Neocons are just as heavily Jewish as were the Bolsheviks of a hundred years ago, and they
have greatly benefited from the political immunity provided by this totally bizarre inversion of historical reality.
Partly as a consequence of their media-fabricated
victimhood status, they have managed to seize control over much of our political system, especially our foreign policy,
and have spent the last few years doing their utmost to foment an absolutely insane war with nuclear-armed Russia.
If they do manage to achieve that unfortunate
goal, they will surely outdo the very impressive human body-count racked up by their ethnic ancestors, perhaps even by an
order-of-magnitude or more.
Frauds and Confusions
Since the Holocaust
only became a major public topic after wartime memories had grown dim, the story has always seemed to suffer from the problems
traditionally associated with “recovered memory syndrome.” Truths and falsehoods were often mixed together in
strange ways, and the door was opened wide to an astonishing number of outright frauds and liars.
For example, in the late 1970s I remember many of my high school classmates
devouring The Painted Bird by Jerzy Kosinski, perhaps the first widely popular Holocaust memoir. But
then a few years later, the media revealed that Kosinski’s national best-seller was simply fraudulent, and the plagiarizing
author eventually committed suicide. Indeed, there have been so many fake Holocaust memoirs over the years that they nearly constitute a literary genre of their own.
Probably the most world’s most famous Holocaust survivor was Elie Wiesel, who parlayed
the stories of his wartime suffering into becoming an enormous political celebrity. His career was capped with a Nobel Peace
Prize in 1986, and the announcement declared him “a messenger to mankind.” Yet journalist Alexander Cockburn has persuasively argued that Wiesel was simply a fraud, and his famous autobiographical work Night just another literary
Although the iconic figure
of “the Six Million” has been endlessly repeated by our media, the estimated numbers of the dead have actually
been shockingly variable over the years. Although I never paid much attention to Holocaust issues, I have closely read my
major newspapers and magazines for decades, and had regularly seen the statement that the Nazi death machine had brutally
exterminated five million Gentiles along with the six million Jews.
But just last year, I was stunned to discover that former total was simply a whole-cloth
invention by prominent Holocaust-activist Simon Wiesenthal, who simply made the figure up one day with the intent of giving non-Jews more of a stake in the Holocaust story.
And despite being based on absolutely no evidence or research, his casual
claim was never effectively refuted by actual Holocaust scholars, who knew it to be total nonsense, and therefore it was
so regularly repeated in the media that I probably read it hundreds of times over the years, always assuming it had some
firm grounding in proven reality.
for decades I had always read the undeniable fact that the Nazis had exterminated 4 million inmates at Auschwitz, with most
of the victims being Jews, and Lipstadt certainly treated that number as absolutely rock-solid historical reality. But in
the early 1990s after the fall of Communism, the official total was quietly revised downwards to as little as 1.1 million.
The fact that a sudden reduction
in the official Holocaust body-count by 3 million has had so little impact upon our public Holocaust media narrative hardly
seems to inspire great confidence in either the total figures or the media reporting of them.
Over the last couple of generations,
our media has engraved that figure of Six Million so deeply onto the minds of every Western citizen that the meaning of
the iconic number is universally understood, and those who question it risk a prison sentence in many European countries.
Yet its actual origin is somewhat obscure.
According to some accounts, Jewish groups lobbied President Truman into casually inserting it into one of his speeches,
and thereafter it has endlessly echoed in the media down to the present day. Some angry Internet activist has put together
a graphic displaying extracts from dozens of New York Times stories between 1869 and 1941 all citing
the figure of 6 million Eastern European Jews as being threatened with death, suggesting that our official Holocaust body-count
actually predated World War II by as much as three generations.
I really wouldn’t be surprised if that might be the original source of the number.
Sometimes the creation of a new Holocaust
hoax was only narrowly averted. Throughout most of the twentieth century, Jews and blacks had been close political allies
in America, with the top leadership of the NAACP almost invariably being Jewish, as were nearly all of Martin Luther King,
Jr.’s top white advisors and a very large fraction of the key white activists involved in the black Civil Rights movement
of the 1950s and 1960s.
by the late 1960s, a schism had erupted, with many younger black activists becoming deeply hostile to what they perceived
as overwhelming Jewish influence, while more militant blacks, whether Muslim or otherwise, began siding with the Palestinians
against Zionist Israel. This growing conflict became especially bitter during Jesse Jackson’s presidential campaign
of 1988 and reached a flash-point in the New York City of the early 1990s.
A couple of film-makers sought to help heal this rift by producing a major 1992 PBS
documentary entitled The Liberators, recounting how black American troops had been among the first units that
captured the Buchenwald and Dachau concentration camps, thereby freeing the tens of thousands of Jewish inmates from Nazi
A historical narrative
of such deep symbolic resonance quickly attracted overwhelming support from both black leaders and Jewish ones, with Jesse
Jackson sharing the stage with Holocaust survivors and numerous Jewish luminaries at the Harlem premiere, and the film received
an Oscar nomination.
in early Febuary 1993 Jeffrey Goldberg took to the pages of The New Republic to reveal that the story was merely a hoax, based on falsified history. Although the film’s Jewish co-producer angrily denounced her critics as racists and
Holocaust Deniers, those charges stuck, and were eventually reported in the New York Times and other major media outlets.
The leading Jewish organizations and Holocaust centers that had been heavily promoting the film soon distanced themselves,
and in 2013 The Times of Israel even marked the twenty-year anniversary of what it described as a notorious hoax. But I suspect that if matters had gone a little differently, the story might
soon have become so deeply embedded in the canonical Holocaust narrative that anyone questioning the facts would have been
vilified as a racist.
years earlier, The New Republic had actually been in the forefront of promoting a different hoax also
relating to Jewish issues, one which might have had far greater international political significance when Joan Peters, an
obscure Jewish writer, published a major historical work in 1984.
She claimed that her extensive archival research had revealed that the bulk of the
present-day Palestinians were actually not native to Palestine, but instead were recently-arrived immigrants, drawn there
by the heavy economic development produced by the Zionist settlers who had actually preceded them.
Her shocking findings received hundreds of glowing reviews and academic
endorsements across the entire spectrum of the mainstream and elite American media, and her book quickly became a huge bestseller.
Leading Jewish Holocaust luminaries such as Dawidowicz and Wiesel took center stage in praising her remarkable scholarship,
which seemed likely to completely demolish the claims of the expelled Palestinians, thereby reshaping the nature of the
Middle East conflict to Israel’s great advantage.
However, a young graduate student in History at Princeton named Norman Finkelstein
had considerable interest in the history of Zionism, and being very much surprised by her findings, decided to investigate
he began carefully checking her footnotes and her alleged sources, he discovered they were entirely fraudulent, and her
groundbreaking research merely amounted to a hoax, which some later suggested had been concocted by an intelligence organization
and merely published under her name.
Although Finkelstein widely distributed his important findings, they were totally ignored by
all the American journalists, scholars, and media organizations he contacted, with the sole exception of Noam Chomsky, and the growing Joan Peters Hoax might have destroyed the legal basis of the international Palestinian claims to their
own Palestine homeland.
But some independent-minded British publications eventually picked up his information, and the resulting wave of
media embarrassment caused the Peters claims to fade into oblivion. Meanwhile, Finkelstein himself suffered severe retaliation
as a consequence, and according to Chomsky was completely blacklisted by his Princeton department and the wider academic
More than a dozen years later, Finkelstein’s work became the focus of a second
major controversy. In the late 1990s, international Jewish organizations launched a major effort to extract many billions
of dollars from the largest Swiss banks, arguing that such funds were the rightful property of European Jews who had died
in the Holocaust.
the banks initially resisted, arguing that no solid evidence was being presented for such enormous claims, they were harshly
denounced by America’s Jewish-dominated media, and Jewish lobbying led the American government to threaten them with
severe financial sanctions that could have destroyed their businesses.
Faced with such serious extortionate pressure, the banks finally gave
way and paid out the bulk of the funds being demanded, with those billions mostly retained by the Jewish organizations leading
the campaign and spent on their own projects since the purported Jewish heirs were impossible to locate.
This situation led historian Finkelstein to publish a short book in 2000
entitled The Holocaust Industry, in which he harshly critiqued what he characterized as a global Jewish money-making
enterprise aimed at unfairly extracting wealth on behalf of the supposed Holocaust victims, often with little regard for
truth or fairness.
almost entirely ignored by the American media, it became a major bestseller in Europe, which eventually forced American
publications to give it some attention. Among other things, Finkelstein noted that more than a half-century after the end
of the Holocaust, the number of officially designated Holocaust survivors had grown so large that simple mortality considerations
seemed to imply that huge numbers of European Jews must have survived the war.
This obviously raised serious questions about how many might have actually
died during that conflict and its accompanying Holocaust.
Over the years, I had noticed the same sorts of media reports claiming enormous totals of Holocaust
survivors still alive now six or seven decades after the event.
For example, even as late as 2009 an official at Israel’s Jewish Agency justified laws
criminalizing Holocaust Denial by explaining that almost 65 years after the end of the war “there are still hundreds of thousands of living Holocaust survivors,”
a statement which itself seems to constitute rather explicit Holocaust Denial.
Indeed, a very noticeable number of all the New York Times obituaries
I read these days in my morning newspapers seem to include Holocaust survivors still expiring in their eighties and nineties.
Anyone who reads serious history books knows that Jews have generally enjoyed a reputation for producing many of the world’s greatest swindlers and
frauds, hardly surprising given their notorious tendency to lie and dissemble. Meanwhile, the Jewish community also seems to contain far more than its fair share of the emotionally disturbed and the
mentally ill, and perhaps as a consequence has served as a launching-pad for many of the world’s religious cults and
fanatic ideological movements. Any exploration of the Holocaust certainly tends to support this rather negative appraisal.
Although the Holocaust
began to enter American consciousness during the 1960s and 1970s with the publication of major books by Hilberg, Levin,
Dawidowicz, and others, together with the resulting articles and reviews that these generated, the initial social impact
was probably not substantial, at least outside the Jewish community.
Even highly successful books selling in the many tens of thousands of copies would
have little impact in a population of more than 200 million.
Our media completely shapes our perceived reality of the world, and although intellectuals
and many of the highly educated are greatly influenced by books and other forms of printed content, the vast majority of
the population understands the world through electronic media, especially that of popular entertainment.
Consider, for example, the 1974 publication of Time on the Cross:
The Economics of American Negro Slavery, a magisterial two volume analysis by economists Robert William Fogel and Stanley
By applying quantitative
methods, the study overturned generations of assumptions about the American social institution, demonstrating that black
slaves in the South were encouraged to marry and maintain their households, while having diets and medical care comparable
to that of the free white population and often superior to that of Northern industrial wage-earners.
Moreover, following emancipation the life expectancy of freedmen declined
by ten percent and their illnesses increased by twenty per cent. All of this is summarized in the extensive Wikipedia entry.
Although their results were
controversial, the authors had the strongest possible academic credentials, with Fogel, an eminent scholar, being a leading
figure in a school of economics who went on to win a Nobel Prize. And Fogel’s ideological credentials were even more
robust, given that he had had a lifelong commitment to black Civil Rights starting with the eight years he had spent as
a young Communist Party organizer, while his 1949 marriage to a black woman had often subjected the couple to the indignities
of the anti-miscegenation laws of that era.
Consequently, their findings received unprecedented coverage in the mainstream media for an academic study and surely
influenced numerous historians and journalists. Yet I think the long-term impact upon popular perceptions about slavery
has been almost nil.
in 1976 the ABC television network ran the prime-time miniseries Roots, a multi-generational
account of a slave family. The story closely adhered to the traditionally harsh slavery narrative, while supposedly being
based upon the recorded family history of Alex Haley, the author of the best-selling book of that same title.
But although his work was later found to
be fraudulent and apparently plagiarized, the ratings were stellar and the social impact enormous due to the audience of
100 million Americans who watched those episodes. Thus, even the most impressive written scholarship had absolutely no chance
of competing with fictionalized television drama.
All three of America’s television networks were under Jewish ownership or control, so it was hardly surprising
that two years later ABC decided to repeat this process with the 1978 television miniseries Holocaust,
which also achieved an audience of 100 million and generated enormous profits. It seems quite possible this may have been
the first time many American families discovered that colossal but almost entirely invisible event of World War II.
The following year, William Styron published Sophie’s
Choice, a heart-rending tale involving deeply buried memories of the extermination of Christian Polish children in
the Auschwitz gas chambers.
such an occurrence was absolutely contrary to the doctrines of all Jewish Holocaust scholars, the novel became a huge national
best-seller anyway, and a 1982 film of the same name soon followed, with Meryl Streep winning an Oscar for Best Actress.
A decade later, Steven Spielberg’s 1993 Schindler’s List won a remarkable seven Oscars, while
grossing nearly $100 million.
With Hollywood so overwhelmingly Jewish, the consequences were hardly surprising, and a huge cinematic genre soon developed. According to Finkelstein, Hollywood
produced some 180 Holocaust films just during the years 1989-2004.
Even the very partial subset of Holocaust films listed on Wikipedia has grown enormously long, but fortunately the Movie Database has winnowed down the catalog by providing a list of the 50 Most Moving Holocaust Films.
Many billions of dollars
have surely been invested over the years on the total production costs of this ongoing business enterprise. For most ordinary
people, “seeing is believing,” and how could anyone seriously doubt the reality of the Holocaust after having
seen all the gas chambers and mounds of murdered Jewish corpses constructed by highly-paid Hollywood set designers? Doubting
the existence of Spiderman and the Incredible Hulk would be almost as absurd.
Some 2% of Americans have a Jewish background, while perhaps 95% possess
Christian roots, but the Wikipedia list of Christian films seems rather scanty and rudimentary by comparison. Very few of those films were ever widely released, and the selection
is stretched to even include The Chronicles of Narnia, which contains no mention of Christianity whatsoever.
One of the very few prominent exceptions
on the list is Mel Gibson’s 2004 The Passion of the Christ, which he was forced to personally self-fund.
And despite the enormous financial success of that movie, one of the most highly profitable domestic releases of all time,
the project rendered Gibson a hugely vilified pariah in the industry over which he had once reigned as its biggest star,
especially after word got around that his own father was a Holocaust Denier.
In many respects, Hollywood
and the broader entertainment media today provide the unifying spiritual basis of our deeply secular society, and the overwhelming
predominance of Holocaust-themed films over Christian ones has obvious implications.
Meanwhile, in our globalized world, the American entertainment-media complex
totally dominates Europe and the rest of the West, so that the ideas generated here effectively shape the minds of many hundreds
of millions of people living elsewhere, whether or not they fully recognize that fact.
In 2009, Pope Benedict XVI sought to heal the long-standing Vatican II
rift within the Catholic Church and reconcile with the breakaway Society of St. Pius X faction. But this became a major media
controversy when it was discovered that Bishop Richard Williamson, one of the leading members of that latter organization,
had long been a Holocaust Denier and also believed that Jews should convert to Christianity.
Although the many other differences
in Catholic doctrinal faith were fully negotiable, apparently refusing to accept the reality of the Holocaust was not, and
Williamson remained estranged from the Catholic Church. Soon afterward he was even prosecuted for heresy by the German government.
critics have suggested that over the last couple of generations, energetic Jewish activists have successfully lobbied Western
nations into replacing their traditional religion of Christianity with the new religion of Holocaustianity, and the Williamson
Affair certainly seems to support that conclusion.
the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. Funded by Jewish interests, it spent years launching vicious
attacks against Christianity, sometimes in crudely pornographic fashion, and also periodically vilified Islam. Such activities
were hailed by French politicians as proof of the total freedom of thought allowed in the land of Voltaire.
But the moment that one of its leading cartoonists made a very
mild joke related to Jews, he was immediately fired, and if the publication had ever ridiculed the Holocaust, it surely
would have been immediately shut down, and its entire staff possibly thrown into prison.
Western journalists and human rights advocates have often expressed support
for the boldly transgressive activities of the Jewish-funded Femen activists when they desecrate Christian churches all around the world. But such pundits would certainly be in an uproar if anyone
were to act in similar fashion toward the growing international network of Holocaust Museums, most of them built at public
Indeed, one of the
underlying sources of bitter Western conflict with Vladimir Putin’s Russia seems to be that he has restored Christianity
to a favored place in a society where the early Bolsheviks had once dynamited churches and massacred many thousands of priests.
Western intellectual elites held far more positive feelings toward the USSR while its leaders retained a stridently anti-Christian
Rise and Suppression of Holocaust Denial
Since the Holocaust had been almost unknown in America until the mid-1960s, explicit Holocaust Denial was equally
non-existent, but as the former grew in visibility following the publication of Hilberg’s 1961 book, the latter soon
began to awaken as well.
vilification of Barnes as the “godfather” of Holocaust Denial does contain a nugget of truth. His posthumously-published
1968 review endorsing Rassinier’s denialist analysis seems to be the first such substantial statement published anywhere
in America, at least if we exclude Beaty’s very casual 1951 dismissal of the Jewish claims, which seem to have attracted
negligible public attention.
the end of the 1960s, a right-wing publisher named Willis Carto came across a short and unpolished Holocaust Denial manuscript,
apparently produced some years earlier, and he ignored legal niceties by simply putting it into print.
The purported author then sued for plagiarism, and although the case was
eventually settled, his identity eventually leaked out as being that of David L. Hoggan, a Barnes protege with a Harvard
Ph.D. in history serving as a junior faculty member at Stanford. His desire for anonymity was aimed at preventing the destruction
of his career, but he failed in that effort, and further academic appointments quickly dried up.
Meanwhile, Murray Rothbard, the founding father of modern libertarianism,
had always been a strong supporter of historical Revisionism, and greatly admired Barnes, who for decades had been the leading
figure in that field.
had also briefly hinted at his general skepticism about the Holocaust in a lengthy 1967 articleappearing in the Rampart Journal, a short-lived libertarian publication, and this may have been noticed within
those ideological circles. It appears that by the early 1970s, Holocaust Denial had become a topic of some discussion within
America’s heavily Jewish but fiercely free-thinking libertarian community, and this was to have an important consequence.
A professor of Electrical Engineering at
Northwestern named Arthur R. Butz was casually visiting some libertarian gathering during this period when he happened to
notice a pamphlet denouncing the Holocaust as a fraud.
He had never previously given any thought to the issue, but such a shocking claim captured his attention, and he
began looking into the matter early in 1972. He soon decided that the accusation was probably correct, but found the supporting
evidence, including that presented in the unfinished and anonymous Hoggan book, far too sketchy, and decided it needed to
be fleshed out in much more detailed and comprehensive fashion.
He proceeded to undertake this project over the next few years, working with the methodical
diligence of a trained academic engineer.
work, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, first appeared in print late in 1976, and immediately became the central text of the Holocaust Denial community, a position
it still seems to retain down to this present day, while with all the updates and appendices, the length has grown to well
over 200,000 words. Although no mention of this forthcoming book appeared in the February 1976 issue of Reason,
it is possible that word of the pending publication had gotten around within libertarian circles, prompting the sudden new
focus upon historical Revisionism.
a respectable tenured professor at Northwestern, and the release of his book laying out the Holocaust Denial case soon became
a minor sensation, covered by the New York Times and other media outlets in January 1977.
In one of her books, Lipstadt devotes a
full chapter entitled “Entering the Mainstream” to Butz’s work. According to a December 1980 Commentary article
by Dawidowicz, Jewish donors and Jewish activists quickly mobilized, attempting to have Butz fired for his heretical views,
but back then academic tenure still held firm and Butz survived, an outcome that seems to have greatly irritated Dawidowicz.
Such a detailed and comprehensive book laying
out the Holocaust Denial case naturally had a considerable impact on the national debate, especially since the author was
a mainstream and apparently apolitical academic, and an American edition of Butz’s book soon appeared in 1977. I’m
very pleased to have made arrangements to include the volume in my collection of Controversial HTML Books, so those interested
can easily read it and decide for themselves.
The following year, these Holocaust Denial trends seemed to gain further
momentum as Carto opened a small new publishing enterprise in California called the Institute for Historical Review (IHR),
which launched a quarterly periodical entitled The Journal of Historical Review in 1980.
Both the IHR and its JHR publication
centered their efforts around Revisionism in general, but with Holocaust Denial being their major focus. Lipstadt devotes
an entire chapter to the IHR, later noting that most of the main authors of the February 1976 Reason issue
soon became affiliated with that project or with other Carto enterprises, as did Butz, while the editorial board of the JHR was
soon well-stocked with numerous Ph.D.’s, often earned at highly-reputable universities.
For the next quarter century or so, the IHR would hold small conferences
every year or two, with David Irving eventually becoming a regular presenter, and even fully mainstream figures such as Pulitzer
Prize-winning historian John Toland occasionally appearing as speakers.
As an important
example of IHR efforts, in 1983 the organization published The Dissolution of Eastern Europe Jewry, a very detailed quantitative analysis of the underlying demographics and population movements around the period encompassed
by World War II, apparently the first such study undertaken. The author, writing under the pen-name Walter N. Sanning, sought
to revise the extremely simplistic population analysis casually assumed by Holocaust historians.
Before the war, millions of Jews had lived in Eastern Europe, and after the war, those communities
had mostly vanished. This undeniable fact has long stood as an implicit central pillar of the traditional Holocaust narrative.
But drawing upon entirely mainstream sources, Sanning persuasively demonstrates that the situation was actually far more
complicated than it might seem.
example, it was widely reported at the time that vast numbers of Polish Jews had been transported by the Soviets to locations
deep within their territory, on both voluntary and involuntary terms, with future Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin
being including in those transfers. In addition, huge numbers of heavily urbanized Soviet Jews were similarly evacuated
ahead of the advancing German forces in 1941.
The exact size of these population movements has long been uncertain and disputed, but Sanning’s careful analysis
of postwar Soviet census data and other sources suggests that the totals were likely towards the upper end of most estimates.
Sanning makes no claim that his findings are definitive, but even if they are only partially correct, such results would
certainly preclude the reality of traditional Holocaust numbers.
Another regular IHR participant was Robert Faurisson. As a professor of literature at the University of Lyons-2, he began expressing his public skepticism about the Holocaust during the 1970s, and the resulting media uproar led to efforts to remove him from his position, while a petition
was signed on his behalf by 200 international scholars, including famed MIT professor Noam Chomsky.
Faurisson stuck to his opinions, but attacks persisted, including a brutal
beating by Jewish militants that hospitalized him, while a French political candidate espousing similar views was assassinated.
Jewish activist organizations began lobbying for laws to broadly outlaw the activities of Faurisson and others, and in 1990,
soon after the Berlin Wall fell and research at Auschwitz and other Holocaust sites suddenly became far easier, France passed
a statute criminalizing Holocaust Denial, apparently the first nation after defeated Germany to do so.
During the years that followed, large numbers of other Western countries
did the same, setting the disturbing precedent of resolving scholarly disputes via prison sentences, a softer form of the
same policy followed in Stalinist Russia.
Since Faurisson was a literary scholar, it is not entirely surprising that one of his major interests was The
Diary of Anne Frank, generally regarded as the Holocaust’s iconic literary classic, telling the story of a young
Jewish girl who died after being deported from Holland to Auschwitz. He argued that the text was substantially fraudulent,
written by someone else after the end of the war, and for decades various determined individuals have argued the case back
and forth. I cannot properly evaluate any of their complex arguments, which apparently involve questions of ballpoint pen
technology and textual emendations, nor have I ever read the book itself.
But for me, the most striking aspect of the story is the girl’s actual fate
under the official narrative, as recounted in the thoroughly establishmentarian Wikipedia entry.
Apparently disease was raging
in her camp despite the best efforts of the Germans to control it, and she soon became quite ill, mostly remaining bedridden
in the infirmary, before eventually dying from typhus in Spring 1945 at a different camp about six months after her initial
arrival. It seems rather odd to me that a young Jewish girl who fell severely ill at Auschwitz would have spent so much time
in camp hospitals and eventually die there, given that we are told the primary purpose of Auschwitz and other such camps
was the efficient extermination of its Jewish inmates.
By the mid-1990s the Holocaust Denial movement seemed to be gaining in public visibility, presumably aided by the
doubts raised after the official 1992 announcement that the estimated deaths at Auschwitz had been reduced by around 3 million.
For example, the February
1995 issue of Marco Polo, a glossy Japanese magazine with a circulation of 250,000, carried a long article
declaring that the gas chambers of the Holocaust were a propaganda hoax.
Israel and Jewish-activist groups quickly responded, organizing a widespread advertising
boycott of all the publications of the parent company, one of Japan’s most respected publishers, which quickly folded
in the face of that serious threat. All copies of the issue were recalled from the newspapers, the staffers were dismissed,
and the entire magazine was soon shut down, while the president of the parent company was forced to resign.
In exploring the history of Holocaust Denial,
I have noticed this same sort of recurrent pattern, most typically involving individuals rather than institutions. Someone
highly-regarded and fully mainstream decides to investigate the controversial topic, and soon comes to conclusions that
sharply deviate from the official truth of the last two generations.
For various reasons, those views become public, and he is immediately demonized
by the Jewish-dominated media as a horrible extremist, perhaps mentally-deranged, while being relentlessly hounded by a
ravenous pack of fanatic Jewish-activists. This usually brings about the destruction of his career.
In the early 1960s Stanford historian David Hoggan produced his anonymous
manuscript The Myth of the Six Million, but once it got into circulation and his identity became known, his
academic career was destroyed. A dozen years later, something along the same lines happened with Northwestern Electrical
Engineering professor Arthur Butz, and only his academic tenure saved him from a similar fate.
Fred Leuchter was widely regarded as one of America’s leading expert
specialists on the technology of executions, and a long article in The Atlantic treated him as such. During the 1980s, Ernst Zundel, a prominent Canadian Holocaust
Denier, was facing trial for his disbelief in the Auschwitz gas chambers, and one of his expert witnesses was an American
prison warden with some experience in such systems, who recommended involving Leuchter, one of the foremost figures in the
Leuchter soon took a
trip to Poland and closely inspected the purported Auschwitz gas chambers, then published the Leuchter Report, concluding that they were obviously a fraud and could not possibly have worked in the manner Holocaust scholars had always
claimed. The ferocious attacks which followed soon cost him his entire business career and destroyed his marriage.
David Irving had ranked as the world’s
most successful World War II historian, with his books selling in the millions amid glowing coverage in the top British
newspapers when he agreed to appear as an expert witness at the Zundel trial.
He had always previously accepted the conventional Holocaust narrative,
but reading the Leuchter Report changed his mind, and he concluded that the Auschwitz gas chambers were
just a myth. He was quickly subjected to unrelenting media attacks, which first severely damaged and then ultimately destroyed his very illustrious publishing career, and he later even served time in an Austrian prison for his unacceptable views.
Dr. Germar Rudolf was a successful young German chemist working at the
prestigious Max Planck Institute when he heard of the controversy regarding the Leuchter Report, which
he found reasonably persuasive but containing some weaknesses.
Therefore, he repeated the analysis on a more thorough basis, and published the results as the Chemistry of Auschwitz, which came to the same conclusions as Leuchter. And just like Leuchter before him, Rudolf suffered the destruction of
his career and his marriage, and since Germany treats these matters in harsher fashion, he eventually served five years
in prison for his scientific impudence.
Dr. Nicholas Kollerstrom, who had spent eleven years as a historian of science on the staff of University College, London,
suffered this same fate in 2008. His scientific interests in the Holocaust provoked a media firestorm of vilification, and
he was fired with a single day’s notice, becoming the first member of his research institution ever expelled for ideological
He had previously provided the Isaac
Newton entry for a massive biographical encyclopedia of astronomers, and America’s most prestigious science journal
demanded that the entire work be pulped, destroying the work of over 100 writers, because it had been fatally tainted by
having such a villainous contributor. He recounted this unfortunate personal history as an introduction to his 2014 book Breaking the Spell, which I highly recommend.
text effectively summarizes much of the more recent Holocaust Denial evidence, including the official Auschwitz death books
returned by Gorbachev after the end of the Cold War, which indicate that Jewish fatalities were some 99% lower than the
widely-believed total. Furthermore, Jewish deaths actually showed a sharp decline once plentiful supplies of Zyklon B arrived,
exactly contrary to what might have been expected under the conventional account.
He also discusses the interesting new evidence contained in the British
wartime decrypts of all German communications between the various concentration camps and the Berlin headquarters. Much of
this material is presented in an interesting two hour interview on Red Ice Radio, conveniently available on
and careers of a very sizable number of other individuals have followed this same unfortunate sequence, which in much of
Europe often ends in criminal prosecution and imprisonment. Most notably, a German lawyer who became a bit too bold in her
legal arguments soon joined her client behind bars, and as a consequence, it has become increasingly difficult for accused
Holocaust Deniers to secure effective legal representation. By Kollerstrom’s estimates, many thousands of individuals
are currently serving time across Europe for Holocaust Denial.
impression is that by the late 1960s, the old Soviet Bloc countries had mostly stopped imprisoning people merely for questioning
Marxist-Leninist dogma, and reserved their political prisons only for those actively organizing against the regime, while
Holocaust Denial is treated today in far harsher fashion.
One clear difference is that actual belief in Communist doctrine had entirely faded away to
almost nothing even among the Communist leadership itself, while these days Holocaustianity is still a young and deeply
held faith, at least within a small slice of the population that exerts enormously disproportionate leverage over our public
factor is the many billions of dollars currently at stake in what Finkelstein has aptly characterized as “the Holocaust
Industry.” For example, potentially enormous new claims are now being reopened against Poland for Jewish property that was lost or confiscated during the World War II era.
In America, the situation is somewhat different, and our First Amendment
still protects Holocaust Deniers against imprisonment, though the efforts of the ADL and various other groups to criminalize
“hate speech” are clearly aimed at eventually removing that obstacle. But in the meantime, crippling social
and economic sanctions are often used to pursue the same objectives.
Furthermore, various Internet monopolies have been gradually persuaded or co-opted
into preventing the easy distribution of dissenting information. There have been stories in the media over the last few
years that Google has been censoring or redirecting its Holocaust search results away from those disputing the official
Even more ominously,
Amazon, our current near-monopolistic retailer of books, last year took the unprecedented step of banning thousands of Holocaust Denial works, presumably lest they “confuse” curious readers, so it is fortunate that I had purchased mine a couple of years
earlier. These parallels with George Orwell’s 1984 are really quite striking, and the “Iron
Curtain Over America” that Beaty had warned about in his 1951 book of that title seems much closer to becoming a full
Various figures in
the Holocaust Denial community have attempted to mitigate this informational blacklist, and Dr. Rudolf some time ago established
a website HolocaustHandbooks.com, which allows a large number of the key volumes to be purchased or easily read on-line in a variety of different formats.
But the growing censorship by Amazon, Google,
and other Internet monopolies greatly reduces the likelihood that anyone will readily encounter the information.
Obviously, most supporters of the conventional
Holocaust narrative would prefer to win their battles on the level playing fields of analysis rather than by utilizing economic
or administrative means to incapacitate their opponents. But I have seen little evidence that they have enjoyed any serious
success in this regard.
from the various books by Lipstadt, which I found to be of poor quality and quite unpersuasive, one of the most energetic
Holocaust supporters of the last couple of decades seems to have been Michael Shermer, the editor of Skeptic magazine,
who had earned his degrees in psychology and the history of science.
he published Why People Believe Weird Things, seeking to debunk all sorts of irrational beliefs popular in
certain circles, with the book’s subtitle describing these as “pseudo-science” and “superstition.”
His cover text focused on ESP, alien abductions, and witchcraft, but rebutting Holocaust Denial was the single largest portion
of that book, encompassing three full chapters.
discussion of this latter subject was rather superficial, and he probably undercut his credibility by grouping it together
with his debunking of the scientific reality of “race” as a similar right-wing fallacy, one also long since
disproved by mainstream scientists.
Regarding the latter issue, he went on to argue that the alleged black-white differences claimed in works such as The
Bell Curveby Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray was entirely pseudo-scientific nonsense, and he emphasized
that book and similar ones had been promoted by the same pro-Nazi groups who advocated Holocaust Denial, with those two
pernicious doctrines being closely linked together.
Shermer had recruited Harvard professor Stephen Jay Gould to write the Foreword for his book and that raises serious
questions about his knowledge or his judgment since Gould is widely regarded as one of the most notorious scientific frauds
of the late twentieth century.
Shermer returned to the battle, publishing Denying History, entirely focused on refuting Holocaust Denial.
This time he recruited Holocaust scholar Alex Grobman as his co-author and acknowledged the generous financial support he
had received from various Jewish organizations.
large portion of the text seemed to focus on the psychology and sociology of Holocaust Deniers, trying to explain why people
could believe in such patently absurd nonsense. Indeed, so much space was devoted to those issues that he was forced to
entirely skip over the official reduction of the Auschwitz body-count by 3 million just a few years earlier, thus avoiding
any need to explain why this large shift had had no impact on the canonical Holocaust figure of Six Million.
Although various writers such as Shermer
may have been encouraged by generous financial subsidies to make fools of themselves, their more violent allies on the extreme
fringe have probably had a greater impact on the Holocaust debate. Although judicial and economic sanctions may deter the
vast majority of Holocaust Deniers from showing their face, extra-legal violence has also often been deployed against those
hardy souls who remain undeterred.
For example, during the 1980s the offices and warehouse storage facilities of the IHR in Southern California were
fire-bombed and totally destroyed by Jewish militants.
And although Canada has traditionally had little political violence, in 1995 the large, ramshackle house that served
as the residence and business office of Canada’s Ernst Zundel, one of the world’s leading publishers and distributers
of Holocaust Denial literature, was similarly fire-bombed and burned to the ground.
Zundel had already faced several criminal prosecutions on charges of spreading
“false news,” and eventually served years in prison, before being deported back to his native Germany, where
he served additional imprisonment. Various other prominent Holocaust Deniers have even faced threats of assassination.
Most historians and other academic scholars
are quiet souls, and surely the looming threat of such serious terroristic violence must have dissuaded many of them from
involving themselves in such obviously controversial issues. Meanwhile, relentless financial and social pressure may gradually
wear down both individuals and organizations, causing them to eventually either abandon the field or become far less active,
with their places sometimes taken by newcomers.
The year after the 9/11 attacks, the JHR ceased print publication. The growth of the Internet
was probably an important contributing factor, and with the national focus shifting so sharply toward foreign policy and
the Middle East, its IHR parent organization became much less active, while much of the ongoing debate in Revisionism and
Holocaust Denial shifted to various other online venues.
But at some point over the years, the JHR digitized many hundreds of its
articles and posted them on its website, providing over three million words of generally very high-quality historical content.
Over the last couple of months, I have been
repeatedly surprised to discover that the historians associated with the IHR had long ago published articles on topics quite
parallel to some of my own.
example, after I published an article on the Suvorov Hypothesis that Germany’s Barbarossa attack had preempted Stalin’s planned attack and conquest of Europe, someone
informed me that a reviewer had extensively discussed the same Suvorov book twenty years earlier in an issue of JHR. I also discovered several pieces by CIA defector Victor Marchetti, a important figure for JFK assassination researchers, who had received little attention in the mainstream media. There
were also articles on the fate of the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, a topic almost entirely excluded from the mainstream media.
Casually browsing some of the archives, I was quite impressed with their quality, and since
the archives were freely available for anyone to republish, I went ahead and incorporated them, making the millions of words
of their Revisionist and Holocaust Denial content much more conveniently available to interested readers. The material is
fully searchable, and also organized by Author, Topic, and Time Period, with a few sample links included below:
The Journal of Historical Review, 1980-2002 Issues
So for those particularly interested
in Holocaust Denial, well over a million words of such discussion may now be conveniently available, including works by
many of the authors once so highly regarded by the early editors of Reason magazine.
Secretive Holocaust Denial
The steadily growing economic and political power of organized Jewish groups, backed by Hollywood
image-making, eventually won the visible war and crushed the Holocaust Denial movement in the public arena, enforcing a
particular historical narrative by criminal prosecutions across most of Europe and severe social and economic sanctions
in America. But a stubborn underground resistance still exists, with its size being difficult to estimate.
Although my interest in the Holocaust had always been rather minimal,
once the Internet came into being and my circle of friends and acquaintances greatly expanded, the topic would very occasionally
Over the years, a
considerable number of seemingly rational people at one time or another privately let slip their extreme skepticism about
various elements of the canonical Holocaust narrative, and such doubts seemed to represent merely the tip of the iceberg.
Every now and then someone in that category
spoke a little too freely or became a target for retaliation on a different matter, and our media went into a feeding frenzy
of Holocaust Denial accusations and counter-accusations.
For example, during the impeachment battles of the late 1990s, Clinton partisans believed that
prominent liberal pundit Christopher Hitchens had betrayed the personal confidences of presidential aide Sidney Blumenthal,
and journalist Edward Jay Epstein decided to retaliate in kind, widely circulating a memo to the media accusing Hitchens
of secretly being a Holocaust Denier.
He alleged that at a 1995 dinner gathering following a New Yorker anniversary celebration, Hitchens
had drunk a little too much wine and began expounding to his table-mates that the Holocaust was simply a hoax. Epstein backed
his claim by saying he had been so shocked at such statements that he had entered them into his personal diary.
That telling detail and the fact that most
of the other witnesses seemed suspiciously vague in their recollections persuaded me that Epstein was probably being truthful.
A bitter feud between Hitchens and Epstein soon erupted.
In 2005 Hitchens denounced various opponents of Bush’s Iraq War as anti-Semites, and
in retaliation Alexander Cockburn published a couple of Counterpunchcolumns resurrecting that 1999 controversy, which is when I first discovered it. As a regular reader of Counterpunch,
I was intrigued and Googling around a bit, quickly located media accounts of Epstein’s explicit accusations.
Numerous reports of the the incident still
survive on the web, including one from the NY Daily News as well as a portion of an MSNBC piece, and although some of the more extensive ones have disappeared over the last dozen years, the media text I remember reading
in 2005 has been preserved on the static HTML pages of several websites:
told MSNBC that Hitchens had misspoken himself on the Holocaust on Feb. 12, 1995 – in fact, practically four years
ago – as the two of them, along with some other friends, were dining in New York.
Epstein was so shocked, he says, and considered Hitchens doubts so grave, that he went home and noted them in his
According to the Epstein diary: “Once seated in a booth, and freely
sipping his free red wine, Hitchens advanced a theory more revealing than anything going on at the Hudson theater. His thesis,
to the shock of everyone at the table, was that the Holocaust was a fiction developed by a conspiracy of interests bent
on ‘criminalizing the German Nation’”
“He explained that
no evidence of German mass murder had ever been found – and what gruesome artifacts had been found had been fabricated
after the event,” Epstein confided to his diary.
“What of the testimony
of Nazi generals at Nuremberg about the death camps,” he asked.
according to the Epstein diary notation, explained “. . . without missing a beat, that such admissions were obtained
under Anglo-American torture.” Epstein then asked, as noted in his diary: “‘But what happened to the Jews
in Europe?’ Hitch shrugged and said, ‘Many were killed by local villagers when they ran away, others died natural
deaths, and the remainder made it to Israel.”
After reading these interesting columns, I began noticing that Cockburn himself sometimes provided
hints suggesting that his own personal opinion on the Holocaust might be somewhat heretical, including his cryptical remarks
that huge hoaxes were actually much easier to create and maintain than most people realized.
Just a few months after his attack on Hitchens, Cockburn published a two-part
article strongly arguing that Nobel Peace Prize Winner Elie Wiesel, the most famous of all Holocaust survivors, was simply a fraud.
I had always been taught
that Zyklon B was the deadly agent used by the Nazis to exterminate the Jews of Auschwitz and I had vaguely become aware
that Holocaust Deniers absurdly claimed the compound had instead been employed as a delousing agent in the camps, aimed at
preventing the spread of Typhus; but then the following year, I was shocked to discover in one of Cockburn’s columns that for decades the U.S. government had itself used Zyklon B as the primary delousing agent for immigrants entering
at its Mexican border.
several other columns from the mid-2000s dancing around Holocaust issues, but I now seem unable to locate them within the Counterpunch archives.
My growing realization 15-odd years ago
that substantial numbers of knowledgeable people appeared to be secret adherents of Holocaust Denial certainly reshaped
my own unquestioning assumptions on that subject.
The occasional newspaper account of a Holocaust Denier being discovered and then flayed and destroyed by the media
easily explained why the public positions on that subject remained so unanimous. Being busy with other things, I don’t
think I ever had a conversation with anyone on that controversial subject or even so much as an email exchange, but I did
keep my eyes and ears open, and huge doubts had certainly entered my mind many years before I ever bothered reading my first
book on the subject.
the concurrent collapse of my belief in our official American Pravda narrative on so many other controversial topics played a major role as well. Once I realized to my dismay that I couldn’t
believe a word of what our media and political leaders said about major events in the here and now, their credibility on
controversial happenings so long ago and far away entirely disappeared.
For these reasons, I had grown quite suspicious and held a very open mind on Holocaust
matters as I eventually began reading books on both sides of the issue in the wake of the Reasoncontroversy.
The Future of Holocaust Denial
For many years following the end of World War II very little seems to
have been written about the momentous topic now known as the Holocaust. But from the 1960s onward, interest surged so enormously
that many thousands or even tens of thousands of volumes on that once-ignored event have been produced. Therefore, the fifteen
or twenty books that I have personally read is merely a sliver of that total.
I have invested only a few weeks of reading and research in studying this
large and complex subject, and my knowledge is obviously dwarfed by that of the considerable number of individuals who have
devoted many years or decades of their lives to such activity.
For these reasons, the analysis I have presented above must surely contain numerous gaping
errors that others could easily correct. But sometimes a newcomer may notice things that deeply-involved professionals might
normally miss, and may also better understand the perspectives of those who have likewise never paid much attention to the
Any conclusions I
have drawn are obviously preliminary ones, and the weight others should attach to these must absolutely reflect my strictly
an outsider exploring this contentious topic I think it far more likely than not that the standard Holocaust narrative is
at least substantially false, and quite possibly, almost entirely so.
Despite this situation, the powerful media focus in support of the Holocaust over
the last few decades has elevated it to a central position in Western culture. I wouldn’t be surprised if it currently
occupies a larger place in the minds of most ordinary folk than does the Second World War that encompassed it, and therefore
possesses greater apparent reality.
However, some forms of shared beliefs may be a mile wide but an inch deep, and the casual assumptions of individuals
who have never actually investigated a given subject may rapidly change. Also, the popular strength of doctrines that have
long been maintained in place by severe social and economic sanctions, often coupled by criminal ones, may possibly be much
weaker than anyone realizes.
thirty years ago, Communist rule over the USSR and its Warsaw Pact allies seemed absolutely permanent and unshakeable, but
the roots of that belief had totally rotted away, leaving behind nothing more than a hollow facade.
Then one day, a gust of wind came along, and the entire gigantic structure
collapsed. I wouldn’t be surprised if our current Holocaust narrative eventually suffers that same fate, perhaps with
unfortunate consequences for those too closely associated with having maintained it.
Holocaust Revisionism Articles Redux
The Anne Frank Diary Fraud
Frank’s Diary – Some Honest Questions
Many as 90% of Those Claiming to Be Holocaust Survivors May Be Frauds
Man’s Holocaust Story Labelled a ‘Lie’
Beach Holocaust Fund Scammer Jailed for Neary Two Years
Photographs Proving the National Socialist Persecution of the Jews?
Gets Eight Years in $57 Million Holocaust Scheme
Trauma Affects Grandchildren of Survivors
Britain Tortured Nazi PoW’s
How the British Obtained the Confessions of Rudolf
Illustrated Auschwitz Lie
Prominent False Witness: Elie Wiesel
in Russia: The Holocaust
Running Out for Needy Holocaust Survivors
Peer’s Astounding Holy Shoah Tale
The Most Famous Holocaust Photo a Fraud
Nuremberg Trials and the Holocaust
Trial Proceedings Volume 1
>The Tribunal shall not be bound by technical rules of evidence. It shall adopt and apply to the greatest possible
extent expeditious and nontechnical procedure, and shall admit any evidence which it deems to
be of probative value.
Nuremberg Trial Proceedings Volume 1
>The Tribunal shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge but shall take judicial notice thereof.
It shall also take judicial notice of official governmental documents and reports of the United
Nations, including the acts and documents of the committees set up in the various allied countries
for the investigation of war crimes, and of records and findings of military or other Tribunals
of any of the United Nations.
The Origin of the ’6 Million Jews’ Figure
Manipulations in the USSR
“Six Million” Myth
Your Holocaust Knowledge
and the German Delousing Chambers
02) Holocaust Revisionism Documentaries and Videos
Auschwitz – Why the Gas Chambers are a
a Dumb Dumb Portrayal of Evil
Irving The Holocaust Truth, The Whole Truth ~ And Nothing but the Truth
Stein on the Holocaust
Zundel – Holocaust Debunked
vs. Zionist – Truth vs. Lies
Holocaust Big Lie
Faker Explains Himself
Holocaust Lie by David Irving
Revisionism: The Truth by Thomas Dalton, PhD
Holocaust Testimonies You Didn’t Hear
Jewish Gas Chamber Hoax, The
in Russia: The Holocaust – Carlos W. Porter
Montel Williams Show – David Cole and Mark Weber
of the Holocaust
Million Jews 1915-1938
Stolz – Lawyer Who Was Jailed for Presenting Evidence in the Zundel Trial
Hoax – The Last Days of the Big Lie
Phil Donahue Show – Holocaust Denial
Truth Behind the Gates of Auschwitz
Truth is No Defense
the Holocaust as a Legend
03) Holocaust Revisionism Websites
Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust
for Open Debate on the Holocaust – Holocaust Revisionism Books
the Holocaust™ Hoax
Handbooks & Movies
Holocaust Historiography Project
for Historical Review
Revisionism – Holocaust Revisionism Books
List of Holocaust Lie films - Incessant Propaganda
Holocaust as Myth: Betraying the Public Trust
As a school of historical research and writing, revisionism has been around
probably as long as people have been writing history. The idea is history has importance beyond the simple recording of events.
Political interests push to shape the record of what happened to place those in power in the best light. It is therefore
possible to deduce who has power by looking at how they are portrayed in popular history. Popular history is not necessarily
accurate. The 20th Century industrialist, Henry Ford has
been quoted as having said "History is more or less bunk". While before him, Napoleon Bonaparte said "History
is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon."
So, history is more than an objective record of events. History is myth. In this context, myth
doesn’t necessarily mean a fiction. Myth can be true. In fact, it is better that way because the purpose of myth is
explain and illustrate a deeper, underlying lesson about the world around us, and our place in it. History can therefore
be a used as means for a deeper understanding of the human condition since the laws of nature and human behavior remain
constant. History as myth is a tool through which the distillation of universals truths can be achieved.
If the model is false, the lessons from it will also be false. When the recording
of events is warped to support political goals, the only lesson to be learned is not to trust either history or those who
This is where historical revisionism
makes itself useful. As new facts are discovered and old information is reevaluated, new interpretations replace the old.
The idea is revisionist history is more accurate history because research uncovers what was previously lost, hidden, or
suppressed. Those served by the old interpretations, therefore, see revisionism as a threat and attack revisionists - branding
them as liars with evil motives.
There is no question
that the Holocaust is a myth. It is the founding myth of the rogue state of Israel. Oswald Spengler, the German philosopher,
believed civilizations are super organisms that form around a central myth. The Nazi writer, Alfred Rosenberg wrote The
Myth of the Twentieth Century in the hope it would become the myth for a new Germany. Ironically, Nazi Germany
provided a myth for Israel instead. Additionally, Zionists commonly promote the idea that there are lessons to be learned
from the Holocaust. So, like other fables, or parables, the Holocaust is supposed to have something to teach those who take
time to study it.
The major lesson for Jews is one
of a paranoid view of world. The Holocaust has become a metaphor for modern Jewish identity. It is just one in a long list
of events where Jewish existence was threatened. It is commonly said that Jewish holidays can be described as "They
tried to kill us. They failed. Let’s eat!" This is an attitude that predates Nazi Germany, but is reinforced
by the story of the Nazi extermination. Fear is a powerful motivator. Zionists exploit and encourage the belief that Jews
are a besieged people in a hostile world while offering the refuge of the Zionist homeland as the only chance for survival.
The bogey-man specter of an ascendant anti-Semitism is repeatedly raised to try to get Jews to move to Zionist Israel. There
is always another Hitler out there desirous of finishing what the first one failed to do, so the only safe place for Jews
The fact that the German image suffers
from this situation is purely circumstantial. The Holocaust myth and Jewish identity require an antagonist. Hitler is one
who has been preserved on celluloid. He can be to be trotted out, with appropriate narration, any time a particular popular
mood needs to be created. For the most part, it is those outside Germany who are being influenced, but Germans too are manipulated
by continuous W.W. II agitprop. The libertarian economics writer, Gary North recently observed: "When people feel guilty,
they are more likely to let the state tax them and spend the money to make things better . . . for the state." Though
he made this statement in another context, it gives us a clue as to what the German state gets out of its enforcement of
the Holocaust myth, and perpetual apologizing for twelve years in the last century.
The utility of the Holocaust fable goes beyond Jewish mental conditioning, or Zionist
and German state interests. Nazi Germany also plays a prominent role in American domestic politics. Nazi Germany is always
the example given for why U.S. foreign policy has to be aggressive. As Anti-War.com
columnist Justin Raimondo recently wrote: " The neocons, with their Churchillian pretensions, like to pretend
it is 1938 all over again: any negotiation is a reenactment of Munich, and the goal is nothing less than unconditional surrender."
Up until December 1941, the American people did not support participation in a foreign war, and especially not after the
disaster of World War I. The foreign policy the vast majority of the American people supported was the same as that of President
John Q. Adams who in 1821 wrote that America " goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy." Since the end
of W.W.II, however, that attitude has been altered by a uniformly pro-war mass media. In repudiation of Adams, Hitler’s
Nazi Germany has been made the prototypical monster America needs to go abroad to destroy. Going abroad in search of monsters
to destroy is now the American way.
be no surprise to anyone. It is the nature of government to gather power to itself at the price of the liberty of those it
claims to rule. America is no exception to this behavior. The most common way government does this is by promising security
in exchange for its new authority. People don’t need security if there is no threat to their safety. Government, always
desirous to steal what others have, will manufacture a threat to encourage acceptance of loss of liberty among the governed.
German Reichsmarshall Hermann Goering, while in captivity after the death of Germany as a country stated:
"Of course the people don't
want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag
the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or
no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them
they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
Threats that are imaginary, real, and manufactured all
serve the same purpose in promoting group cohesion and herd behavior. The group can be ethnic, religious, or political.
It doesn’t matter because people behave the same when they believe they are in danger. Belief influences and governs
human behavior: It dictates how people behave in the situations they encounter in their lives.
As noted before, the Holocaust is a myth. It is a belief that is used to influence
the behavior of Jews and Gentiles alike. The two major emotions it is design to evoke are fear and guilt.
Whether the myth is historically or factually accurate is beside the point.
The Holocaust is used in this manner by both church and state to manipulate people and tie this fable to some of the most
powerful human emotions.
This is what Holocaust
revisionists find themselves confronting. Often, revisionists are compared to "flat-Earthers" in the corporate
media. If such people actually exist, the comparison is only valid in that the belief in the Holocaust is as fundamental
to the way the Earth is shaped to many people. The Holocaust is a deeply anchored belief even in people who know very little
about it. We can see that not only does disbelief in the Holocaust myth threaten modern Jewish identity as shaped by political
Zionism, but for others it brings into question the credibility of those in authority who told everyone it was true: the
state, the churches, the schools, and media of every kind. These sources are the same ones people trust and depend on every
day for information. If these trusted authorities are wrong about the Holocaust, what else are they wrong about? What other
dishonesties are they promoting?
who no longer believe the Holocaust story have told me that when they first discovered revisionist literature they at first
felt guilty reading it. This is testimony to the nature of the emotional conditioning nearly everyone in America has undergone
in relation to the Holocaust myth. It takes courage to test a belief – particularly one connected to many important,
authoritative social, religious, and political institutions – and find it flawed. It is not easy, but - as Robert
Frost wrote about the road not taken – it has made all the difference.
What people need to realize is these institutions operate on lies. The Holocaust story is only
one example of many. The lie is their stock in trade. They use lies on a credulous public to their advantage. The problem
is not who is in power. The problem is systemic. In his 1891 book, Thus Spake Zarathustra, Friedrich Nietzsche
state, is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also; and this lie creepeth from its mouth: 'I, the state,
am the people.'"
It is a lie! Creators were they who created peoples,
and hung a faith and a love over them: thus they served life.
are they who lay snares for many, and call it the state: they hang a sword and a hundred cravings over them.
Where there is still a people, there the state is not understood, but hated as the evil eye, and
as sin against laws and customs.
This sign I give unto you: every people
speaketh its language of good and evil: this its neighbour understandeth not. Its language hath it devised for itself in
laws and customs.
But the state lieth in all languages of good and evil;
and whatever it saith it lieth; and whatever it hath it hath stolen.
is everything in it; with stolen teeth it biteth, the biting one. False are even its bowels."
Since revisionists have been inept at getting the mass of people to believe
the obvious or even test their beliefs by taking the time to examine what revisionists have to say, I feel only pity for
those sitting back hoping revisionists free them from the guilt and fear inducing story of the Holocaust which is warping
culture, religion, and politics today. Germans do not deserve the destruction heaped upon them during the war or the burden
of guilt draped upon them for twelve years of Nazi government. A dozen years in the first half of the last century does not
constitute the bulk of German history. Nor does it define the German character. Regrettably, for as long as people find
government pronouncements credible despite that institutions long history of lying, Germans will have to suffer. The suffering
will continue for as long as there is utility in this lie. In any case, with the long history of failure to make headway
in expanding the acceptance of revisionist research, a re-examination of methods and tactics used by revisionists is long
overdue. As the saying goes, repetition of actions with the expectation of a different outcome is sign of insanity. Or "If
you do what you always did you get what you always got." If they want greater success, revisionist will have do what
they do differently.
Holocaust revisionism, for
the time being, will have to be a personal vision quest. Each of us will have to take the journey from belief to disbelief
alone. Germans, Jews, Americans, everyone! Revisionists are not going to force governments, or anyone dining out on the
Holocaust story, to admit the Holocaust is, in most of its particulars, a lie. Salvation from this emotional conditioning
- this brain washing – lies not in the power of revisionists, but within yourselves. The roadmap to freedom is on
the internet. Revisionist websites are packed with the tools break the mental chains that bind you to liars and thieves who
have preyed upon your credulity for so long. Take them up. Freedom beckons.
There is security in servitude, as the fable of the Wolf and the Dog illustrates. So, taking and
keeping freedom always involves personal risk. The choice ultimately is a very personal one.
There is no question that the Holocaust is used for political purposes by a
wide range of governments and other institutions. It is not simply another historical event like invention of the telephone
or the light bulb, or the relocation of the French from Canada to Louisiana. Unlike these events, it is being used to influence
behavior. Belief in it is enforced by law in a growing number of countries.
There is also no question that the Holocaust myth, in most of its essential claims, is a fiction.
The evidence is piled and heaped on shelves all around me. It inhabits my computer hard drive. The research is scattered
in a growing number of places on the Internet and in a growing number of languages. The facts lie in archives, libraries,
and in rotting Nazi concentration camps. If you are satisfied with what you believe, then don’t fear testing it with
new information. If you are dissatisfied, start reading and build a better model of the world around you.