Tired of Hitler
- Thread starter White_Savage
- Start date
reclaimsocal
Guru
TheEnglishman said:
Englishman, this is just not factual. Every single one of the "Death Camps" were liberated by the Soviets. Every single concentration camp liberated by the Allied forces were "Work Camps". This is supported even by the most biased of WW2 sources. The allies came across camps that were basically forgotten by the Germans as they were scrambling to stave off the advancing armies. The prisoners that were liberated were starving and diseased, but not a single one of them was gassed, or otherwise part of an orchestrated extermination. They were simply poor souls who found themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time, extremely unfortunate.
Using the photographic evidence from these camps to support the holocaust is like taking a picture in an AIDS ward in a hospital and claiming that it is proof of a governmental conspiracy to infect people with the disease. It simply doesn't support what they claim occured. I think anyone who stumbled upon one of these prison work camps would have been disgusted and appalled, but you have to put it into context with what was happening in Germany at the time. They did not have the resources or competent central leadership at the time to care for the Prisoners, and releasing them would have created more chaos at a time when chaos ruled supreme.
I concur, if the Nazi government did attempt to systematically eliminate the Jews then they were absolutely evil. But if the Jewish leadership spun this tale (which they could have easily done to their own people, who would have no reason not to believe that their relatives killed in WW2 from "normal war" causes did not die in this official holocaust version) to gain the nation of Israel, then there will be a special place in Hell for them. My opinion is that they have not shown any evidence that the holocaust occured in the manner they claim, and the fact that they attack anyone who seeks said proof is a classic sign that they are hiding something.
Englishman,
I never disputed the number of Jewish dead in the Holocaust. I only put the Youtube links in , if you watched them, because history does not happen in a vacuum.
Through todays history books, we know white men are evil Nazis, whatever side they were on in the war, because they have "controlled and oppressed" other non-white peoples.
Because of this, I don't buy the whole Holocaust story as it has been turned into anti-white propaganda at ever turn. I would never say that normal everyday Jews that were rounded up, imprisoned and died most horrible deaths(yes, death by starvation is horrible)isn't a horrible event! IT IS
BUT, one groups suffering is not morally superior to others. Jewish political movements contributed to the slaughter of their own people. Just like America occupying Saudi Arabia and the middle east caused( I am being nastier by saying caused instead of contributed) to 9/11 and subsequently 7/7(BTW, I was in UK at that time)
If you would have watched the youtube links you would have understood the Germans disdain for the Jewish political influence that extended WWI by bringing the US into the war to save the Allies from defeat, or at the very least a stalemate. The US involvement then led to the subsequent defeat of Central Powers and the Treaty of Versailles,thus creating Hitler and WWII. We could go on with Jewish involvement in Communism/4m dead in Ukranian famine etc but this would turn into a book.
I lived in Newcastle Upon Tyne for 10 years and my wife is English and both kids are Geordies, but the English need to let go of the empire b.s. and "glory" days of Churchill, and stop the forces that are importing Africans and Arabs/Pakistanis/India so their ancestors , as you would say, aren't wogs. The forces that are doing this are the sames forces that put the holocaust in the center of your universe representing the immoral acts of mankind. Edited by: voice
I never disputed the number of Jewish dead in the Holocaust. I only put the Youtube links in , if you watched them, because history does not happen in a vacuum.
Through todays history books, we know white men are evil Nazis, whatever side they were on in the war, because they have "controlled and oppressed" other non-white peoples.
Because of this, I don't buy the whole Holocaust story as it has been turned into anti-white propaganda at ever turn. I would never say that normal everyday Jews that were rounded up, imprisoned and died most horrible deaths(yes, death by starvation is horrible)isn't a horrible event! IT IS
BUT, one groups suffering is not morally superior to others. Jewish political movements contributed to the slaughter of their own people. Just like America occupying Saudi Arabia and the middle east caused( I am being nastier by saying caused instead of contributed) to 9/11 and subsequently 7/7(BTW, I was in UK at that time)
If you would have watched the youtube links you would have understood the Germans disdain for the Jewish political influence that extended WWI by bringing the US into the war to save the Allies from defeat, or at the very least a stalemate. The US involvement then led to the subsequent defeat of Central Powers and the Treaty of Versailles,thus creating Hitler and WWII. We could go on with Jewish involvement in Communism/4m dead in Ukranian famine etc but this would turn into a book.
I lived in Newcastle Upon Tyne for 10 years and my wife is English and both kids are Geordies, but the English need to let go of the empire b.s. and "glory" days of Churchill, and stop the forces that are importing Africans and Arabs/Pakistanis/India so their ancestors , as you would say, aren't wogs. The forces that are doing this are the sames forces that put the holocaust in the center of your universe representing the immoral acts of mankind. Edited by: voice
Tom Iron
Mentor
Gentlemen,
I would suggest reading some of the reports of the Red Cross during the war. They had access to most of the camps and state they never saw any evidence of extermination of the Jews or anyone else. All you have to do is google this information.
Tom Iron...
I would suggest reading some of the reports of the Red Cross during the war. They had access to most of the camps and state they never saw any evidence of extermination of the Jews or anyone else. All you have to do is google this information.
Tom Iron...
Tom Iron said:
Yes, I remember reading about the Red Cross who kept detailed accounts of the numbers of prisoners, conditions, deaths and so forth. It was quite compelling. The oppostition answers by claiming they were hoodwinked by the clever Nazis.
Jurgen Graf has been imprisoned and persecuted for having the audacity to research and examine the historical truths pertaining to the most TABOO of all subjects. He wrote, " Holocaust or Hoax? If he is considered ignorant, we should all be so fortunate.
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/hoh/jgbio.html
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=5 width=600>
<T>
<TR>
<TD width=600 bgColor=#910000>
Jürgen Graf, a true Swiss hero, a multitalented intellectual. A Swiss school teacher and language genius. Graf speaks seventeen languages fluently, among them the most exotic ones such as Russian, Chinese. He is also one of the most succesful authors of revisionism. His most popular book "The Holocaust Under The Scanner" has been translated into Russian, Bulgarian, Italian, Romanian, Danish, English, French, Spanish and Swedish. He has been charged, tried and convicted in Switzerland. He has been dismissed for the second time from his teaching post. He went recently to Russia where he researched Russian archives for months. The Swiss government, under pressure, charged, tried and convicted Graf in September 1998 to 15 months in jail under the new anti-racist law. His German-born, 80-year-old wheel chair-bound publisher, Gerhard Förster, was likewise dragged into court and convicted to 1 year in prison. Four weeks after the sentence was pronounced, Mr. Förster died.</TD></TR></T></TABLE>
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/hoh/jgbio.html
White Shogun
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 6,285
It's ridiculous that even mentioning the idea that perhaps there weren't millions killed, or that there weren't 'as many' killed as claimed, can have someone labeled as anti-semitic, white supremacist, and kook conspiracy theorist.
If the evidence is as overwhelming as they say it is, then why do they care that a bunch of kook conspiracy theorist white supremacist anti-semites claim it didn't happen? Why keep the archives hidden from the public?
Me thinks the lady doth protesteth too much.
If the evidence is as overwhelming as they say it is, then why do they care that a bunch of kook conspiracy theorist white supremacist anti-semites claim it didn't happen? Why keep the archives hidden from the public?
Me thinks the lady doth protesteth too much.
White Shogun
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 6,285
If anti-racist laws such as those on the books in Switzerland and other parts of Europe don't scare the hell out of you, nothing will. It's not out of the realm of possibility that one day we could all be prosecuted and jailed just for posting here.
And that's what's scary about those who want to shut down holocaust research and other un-PC ideas. They don't want to debate, they want to shut you up and put you in jail for even just THINKING differently. Edited by: White Shogun
And that's what's scary about those who want to shut down holocaust research and other un-PC ideas. They don't want to debate, they want to shut you up and put you in jail for even just THINKING differently. Edited by: White Shogun
screamingeagle
Mentor
The neo-nazis claim that these were work camps not death camps. They concede that the administrators were incompetent and/or corrupt and that more people died than should have. What they do not realize that for most people, that is just as bad!
I, myself, have been questioning the "Death Camp" idea in recent years. Ironically, the person who started this was, of all people, Anne Frank!
I, myself, have been questioning the "Death Camp" idea in recent years. Ironically, the person who started this was, of all people, Anne Frank!
screamingeagle said:
So all people who claim they are were ordinary work camps are coined "neo-nazis." Sounds like a term used to stifle debate. Since you are now questioning idea of Death Camps does that make you a neo-nazi? How bout me? We could turn this into a real name-calling affair if you would like, but I think that you would end up on the short end of the stick on this site. So, choose your words wisely.
"They concede that the administrators were incompetent and/or corrupt and that more people died than should have."
I don't concede that at all. They were concentration camps not extended stays at the Holiday Inn. More people dying than should have? The same could be said of any wartime concentration camp particularly of the losing side - check your history (start with Andersonville and end with Stalin's gulags).
"Ironically, the person who started this was, of all people, Anne Frank!"
Ironic that no one in the entire Frank family was gassed or otherwise executed. Anne herself, died of typhus. Why should one group of people's suffering be more important than others?
Most people have been taught by our schools and media their entire life about the Jewish suffering in WWII. Meanwhile about 60 million other people died. How many people know (and it's a fact) that AFTER Germany had surrendered that millions of German people were put into slave labor camps by the Allies years after the war? Many never returned.
One final thought, as a young boy, I asked my father why the Germans hated the Jews so much. To me it just didn't make sense. My dad, who was not an anti-semite, responded by telling me about how he once worked at IBM with a German who had moved here after WWII and he asked him the same question. The old German said "If you had seen how they treated us you wouldn't have blamed us one bit." There is always more to the story than what we are told.
1. Why did Elie Wiesel and countless other Jews survive the Holocaust if it was the intention of the Third Reich to eliminate every Jew they got their hands on? Elie was a prisoner for several years; other Jews survived even longer. Most of these "survivors" were ordinary people who did not have any unique expertise that the Germans could have exploited for their war effort. There was no logical reason for them to be kept alive. The very existence of more than a million survivors even today, some sixty years later, contradicts one of the basic components of the Holocaust, i.e., that the Germans had a policy to eliminate every Jew they got their hands on.
2. Why is there no mention of the Holocaust in Churchill's six-volume History of the Second World War or the wartime memoirs of either De Gaulle or Eisenhower or any other lesser luminaries who wrote about the Second World War? Keep in mind all these were written years after the war ended and thus after the Holocaust had been allegedly proven by the Nuremberg Trials. With regard to the Holocaust, the silence of these "conoscenti" is deafening!
3. What was an inmate infirmary (and a brothel) doing in Auschwitz if in fact it was a death camp?
4. Why would the Germans round up Jews from their far-flung empire, thereby tying up large numbers of personnel and rolling stock, while fighting a war on two fronts, to deliver people to "death camps" hundreds of miles away who were then executed upon arrival? Wouldn't a bullet on the spot have appealed to the legendary German sense of efficiency?
5. Why after sixty years have historians not been able to come up with a single German document that points to a Holocaust? Should we believe the likes of Raul Hilberg that in the place of written orders there was an "incredible meeting of the minds" by the literally tens of thousands of people who would have had to coordinate their actions in order to carry out an undertaking of this magnitude?
6. How come it is still insisted upon that six million Jews were killed when the official Jewish death toll at Auschwitz, the flagship of the Holocaust gulag, from an immediate post-war figure of 3 million to a figure of somewhat less than one million? Why do many respond to this observation by saying "what's the difference if it was six million or one million." The answer is that the difference is five million. Another difference is that saying so can get you three years in an Austrian jail. Just ask David Irving!
7 . All of Germany's wartime codes were compromised including the ones used to send daily reports from Auschwitz to Berlin. The transcripts of these messages make no mention of mass executions or even remotely suggest a genocidal program in progress. Furthermore it has been insisted that the Germans used a kind of euphemistic code when discussing their extermination program of the Jews, e.g., final solution, special treatment, resettlement, etc. Why was it necessary for them to use such coded euphemisms when talking to each other unless they thought their codes had been cracked by the Allies?
8. The watertable at Auschwitz lies a mere 18 inches below the surface which makes claims of huge burning pits for tens of thousands of bodies untenable.
9. Initially, claims were made that mass executions in homicidal gas chambers had taken place in camps located within the boundaries of the old Reich, e.g., Dachau, Bergun-Belsen. "Evidence" to that effect was every bit as compelling as what was offered for other camps, located in occupied Poland, yet without explanation in the early sixties we were told that this was not the case and that all the "death camps" were located in the east, i.e., Poland outside (some would say conveniently) of the probing eyes of Western scholars.
10. No one has been able to reconcile the eyewitness accounts that personnel entered the gas chambers after twenty minutes without any protective gear and the fact that Zyclon B was a "time-release" fumigant that would have had a lethal capability for at least another twenty-four hours. And that even after twenty-four hours the corpses would have remained sufficiently contaminated by the hydrogen cyanide gas that they would have had the capacity to kill anyone who touched them who was not wearing protective gear.
11. Why do we no longer hear the claims that the Germans manufactured soap, lamp shades and riding britches from the bodies of dead Jews? Could it be that in light of modern forensics and DNA knowledge that these claims are totally untenable?
12. Why do we no longer hear claims that huge numbers of Jews were exterminated in massive steam chambers or electrocuted on special grids? "Evidence" of this was presented at Nuremberg. Evidence that sent men to the gallows.
13. Elie Wiesel has been described as the "Apostle of Remembrance" yet in his memoir, "Night," which deals with his stay at Auschwitz, he makes no mention of the now infamous homicidal gas chambers. Isn't this a bit like one of the gospels making no mention of the cross?
14. Virtually every survivor who was examined at Auschwitz says he or she was examined by Dr. Joseph Mengele.
15. According to survivor testimony, hundreds of thousands of Jews were executed at Treblinka and then buried in mass graves in the surrounding area. Why is it that extensive sonar probing of these burial grounds reveals that this final resting place for Holocaust victims has remained undisturbed since at least the last ice age?
16. "Proof" of the Holocaust rests largely on survivor testimony; there is little if any hard evidence. The best of this has been described by Jean Claude Pressac as merely "criminal traces." Even Judge Grey who presided at the Irving-Lipstadt trial commented that he was surprised the evidence pointing to the Holocaust was "extremely thin." To paraphrase Arthur Butz, "a crime of this magnitude would have left a mountain of evidence. Where is it? There was more hard evidence found against OJ Simpson at his trial and he was found innocent!"
17. Why has Holocaust Revisionism been criminalized in at least eleven countries? What other historic truth needs the threat of prison or the destruction of one's career to maintain itself? Should someone be sent to prison for expressing skepticism about the official Chinese claim that they suffered thirty-five million dead in World War II?
18. Why do the court historians insist that "denying the Holocaust" is like denying slavery or saying the earth is flat, when it is nothing of the sort? The leading Revisionists are first-rate scholars who hold advanced degrees from the world's leading universities. Is there anyone comparable among those who would say the earth is flat or that slavery never existed?
19. Promoters of the Holocaust have expressed concern about remembering the Holocaust once the last survivors die. Why haven't Civil War historians expressed similar concerns since the last survivor of that conflict died in 1959?
20. Survivors of the Holocaust testified that smoke billowed from the crematoria as they consumed the bodies of murdered victims. Some eyewitnesses even claimed they could detect national origins by the color of the smoke. How can this be reconciled with the fact that properly operating crematoria do not emit smoke of any color?
21. According to the offical version of the Holocaust hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Jews were rounded up in mid-1944 and sent to Auschwitz, where most were gassed immediately upon arrival and their bodies disposed of by burning in huge open air pits using railroad ties and gasoline. Why is there no evidence of these huge funerary pyres in the high resolution surveillance photos taken by Allied aircraft who were overflying the camp on a daily basis? Furthermore, why have no remains been found, since open pit burning, even when gasoline is used, generates insuffienct heat to totally consume a body?
22. All of the liberated camps were littered with corpses; is there a single autopsy report or any other forensic evidence that shows that even a single death was as a consequence of poison gas?
23. The death toll for the Holocaust lies exclusively on population statistics provided by Jewish sources; has any independent demographic study been produced that shows that 6 million Jews were "missing" at the end of the war?
24. Why do the wartime inspection reports of the camps made by the International Red Cross contain no references to mass executions? It strains credulity that such monumental crimes could be hidden. The only explanations are that these crimes were not occurring or that the Red Cross was complicit in a cover-up.
25. Why has there been no effort to respond to the Leuchter report?
26. "The Holocaust was technically possible because it happened." Why is this intellectually bankrupt argument, which turns scholarship on its head, considered by the promoters of the Holocaust as historical truth, considered a sufficient response to the mounting Revisionist evidence to the contrary?
27. What other historical truths rely to the extent that the Holocaust does rely on eyewitness testimony, and why have none of these eyewitnesses every been cross examined?
28. According to the official version of the Holocaust, the Jews remained ignorant of their fate until the very end, so skillful were their Nazi murders in deceiving their victims. How can this ignorance be reconciled with the fact that the Jews have historically been as a group the most literate and highly informed people on the planet with legendary access to the highest levels of government?
29. Anne Frank's diary was written with a ball point pen even though they hadn't been invented yet.
2. Why is there no mention of the Holocaust in Churchill's six-volume History of the Second World War or the wartime memoirs of either De Gaulle or Eisenhower or any other lesser luminaries who wrote about the Second World War? Keep in mind all these were written years after the war ended and thus after the Holocaust had been allegedly proven by the Nuremberg Trials. With regard to the Holocaust, the silence of these "conoscenti" is deafening!
3. What was an inmate infirmary (and a brothel) doing in Auschwitz if in fact it was a death camp?
4. Why would the Germans round up Jews from their far-flung empire, thereby tying up large numbers of personnel and rolling stock, while fighting a war on two fronts, to deliver people to "death camps" hundreds of miles away who were then executed upon arrival? Wouldn't a bullet on the spot have appealed to the legendary German sense of efficiency?
5. Why after sixty years have historians not been able to come up with a single German document that points to a Holocaust? Should we believe the likes of Raul Hilberg that in the place of written orders there was an "incredible meeting of the minds" by the literally tens of thousands of people who would have had to coordinate their actions in order to carry out an undertaking of this magnitude?
6. How come it is still insisted upon that six million Jews were killed when the official Jewish death toll at Auschwitz, the flagship of the Holocaust gulag, from an immediate post-war figure of 3 million to a figure of somewhat less than one million? Why do many respond to this observation by saying "what's the difference if it was six million or one million." The answer is that the difference is five million. Another difference is that saying so can get you three years in an Austrian jail. Just ask David Irving!
7 . All of Germany's wartime codes were compromised including the ones used to send daily reports from Auschwitz to Berlin. The transcripts of these messages make no mention of mass executions or even remotely suggest a genocidal program in progress. Furthermore it has been insisted that the Germans used a kind of euphemistic code when discussing their extermination program of the Jews, e.g., final solution, special treatment, resettlement, etc. Why was it necessary for them to use such coded euphemisms when talking to each other unless they thought their codes had been cracked by the Allies?
8. The watertable at Auschwitz lies a mere 18 inches below the surface which makes claims of huge burning pits for tens of thousands of bodies untenable.
9. Initially, claims were made that mass executions in homicidal gas chambers had taken place in camps located within the boundaries of the old Reich, e.g., Dachau, Bergun-Belsen. "Evidence" to that effect was every bit as compelling as what was offered for other camps, located in occupied Poland, yet without explanation in the early sixties we were told that this was not the case and that all the "death camps" were located in the east, i.e., Poland outside (some would say conveniently) of the probing eyes of Western scholars.
10. No one has been able to reconcile the eyewitness accounts that personnel entered the gas chambers after twenty minutes without any protective gear and the fact that Zyclon B was a "time-release" fumigant that would have had a lethal capability for at least another twenty-four hours. And that even after twenty-four hours the corpses would have remained sufficiently contaminated by the hydrogen cyanide gas that they would have had the capacity to kill anyone who touched them who was not wearing protective gear.
11. Why do we no longer hear the claims that the Germans manufactured soap, lamp shades and riding britches from the bodies of dead Jews? Could it be that in light of modern forensics and DNA knowledge that these claims are totally untenable?
12. Why do we no longer hear claims that huge numbers of Jews were exterminated in massive steam chambers or electrocuted on special grids? "Evidence" of this was presented at Nuremberg. Evidence that sent men to the gallows.
13. Elie Wiesel has been described as the "Apostle of Remembrance" yet in his memoir, "Night," which deals with his stay at Auschwitz, he makes no mention of the now infamous homicidal gas chambers. Isn't this a bit like one of the gospels making no mention of the cross?
14. Virtually every survivor who was examined at Auschwitz says he or she was examined by Dr. Joseph Mengele.
15. According to survivor testimony, hundreds of thousands of Jews were executed at Treblinka and then buried in mass graves in the surrounding area. Why is it that extensive sonar probing of these burial grounds reveals that this final resting place for Holocaust victims has remained undisturbed since at least the last ice age?
16. "Proof" of the Holocaust rests largely on survivor testimony; there is little if any hard evidence. The best of this has been described by Jean Claude Pressac as merely "criminal traces." Even Judge Grey who presided at the Irving-Lipstadt trial commented that he was surprised the evidence pointing to the Holocaust was "extremely thin." To paraphrase Arthur Butz, "a crime of this magnitude would have left a mountain of evidence. Where is it? There was more hard evidence found against OJ Simpson at his trial and he was found innocent!"
17. Why has Holocaust Revisionism been criminalized in at least eleven countries? What other historic truth needs the threat of prison or the destruction of one's career to maintain itself? Should someone be sent to prison for expressing skepticism about the official Chinese claim that they suffered thirty-five million dead in World War II?
18. Why do the court historians insist that "denying the Holocaust" is like denying slavery or saying the earth is flat, when it is nothing of the sort? The leading Revisionists are first-rate scholars who hold advanced degrees from the world's leading universities. Is there anyone comparable among those who would say the earth is flat or that slavery never existed?
19. Promoters of the Holocaust have expressed concern about remembering the Holocaust once the last survivors die. Why haven't Civil War historians expressed similar concerns since the last survivor of that conflict died in 1959?
20. Survivors of the Holocaust testified that smoke billowed from the crematoria as they consumed the bodies of murdered victims. Some eyewitnesses even claimed they could detect national origins by the color of the smoke. How can this be reconciled with the fact that properly operating crematoria do not emit smoke of any color?
21. According to the offical version of the Holocaust hundreds of thousands of Hungarian Jews were rounded up in mid-1944 and sent to Auschwitz, where most were gassed immediately upon arrival and their bodies disposed of by burning in huge open air pits using railroad ties and gasoline. Why is there no evidence of these huge funerary pyres in the high resolution surveillance photos taken by Allied aircraft who were overflying the camp on a daily basis? Furthermore, why have no remains been found, since open pit burning, even when gasoline is used, generates insuffienct heat to totally consume a body?
22. All of the liberated camps were littered with corpses; is there a single autopsy report or any other forensic evidence that shows that even a single death was as a consequence of poison gas?
23. The death toll for the Holocaust lies exclusively on population statistics provided by Jewish sources; has any independent demographic study been produced that shows that 6 million Jews were "missing" at the end of the war?
24. Why do the wartime inspection reports of the camps made by the International Red Cross contain no references to mass executions? It strains credulity that such monumental crimes could be hidden. The only explanations are that these crimes were not occurring or that the Red Cross was complicit in a cover-up.
25. Why has there been no effort to respond to the Leuchter report?
26. "The Holocaust was technically possible because it happened." Why is this intellectually bankrupt argument, which turns scholarship on its head, considered by the promoters of the Holocaust as historical truth, considered a sufficient response to the mounting Revisionist evidence to the contrary?
27. What other historical truths rely to the extent that the Holocaust does rely on eyewitness testimony, and why have none of these eyewitnesses every been cross examined?
28. According to the official version of the Holocaust, the Jews remained ignorant of their fate until the very end, so skillful were their Nazi murders in deceiving their victims. How can this ignorance be reconciled with the fact that the Jews have historically been as a group the most literate and highly informed people on the planet with legendary access to the highest levels of government?
29. Anne Frank's diary was written with a ball point pen even though they hadn't been invented yet.
White Shogun
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 6,285
Very informative post, freedom1.
I hadn't read that Anne Frank's diary having been written in ball point pen, and honestly, when I first read it I thought it was one of those myths that had been debunked but still quoted by 'revisionists.'
So I took the time to look it up, and found a few articles that mentioned it was at least partially written in ball point pen ink, although from what I read they believe it was 'completed' by Frank's father after her death.
I also came across a very interesting article on Rense.com that I thought I'd share with the thread:
How Not To Be Interview By CNN
I hadn't read that Anne Frank's diary having been written in ball point pen, and honestly, when I first read it I thought it was one of those myths that had been debunked but still quoted by 'revisionists.'
So I took the time to look it up, and found a few articles that mentioned it was at least partially written in ball point pen ink, although from what I read they believe it was 'completed' by Frank's father after her death.
I also came across a very interesting article on Rense.com that I thought I'd share with the thread:
How Not To Be Interview By CNN
reclaimsocal
Guru
Excellent Post freedom1.
Excellent reading Freedom and great article White Shogun. At the end of the article I noticed someone wrote in about the ball-point pen to point out that it was invented just before the war and thus Anne Frank could have used one.
It was, however, extremely rare for one to actually own one. I wonder why Anne, who wrote about the smallest details of her life and thoughts, never wrote a single sentence about this new invention called the ball-point pen or about how her family somehow came across one amidst their hiding. Odd isn't it?
It was, however, extremely rare for one to actually own one. I wonder why Anne, who wrote about the smallest details of her life and thoughts, never wrote a single sentence about this new invention called the ball-point pen or about how her family somehow came across one amidst their hiding. Odd isn't it?
I clipped the above points out of an article on WhatReallyHappened.com. You guys should check it out. It's a great site.
Here's a quote from Nixon:
"There may be some truth in that if the Arabs have some complaints about my policy towards Israel, they have to realize that the Jews in the U.S. control the entire information and propaganda machine, the large newspapers, the motion pictures, radio and television, and the big companies, and there is a force that we have to take into consideration."
-- Richard Milhous Nixon, Thirty-Seventh President of the United States of America, as quoted by Leonard Dinnerstein, Antisemitism in America, Oxford University Press, New York, (1994), pp. 232-233. Dinnerstein cites: "Clipping of Fikri Abbaza, interview with Richard Nixon, Al-Mussawar, July 12, 1974, folder 'Jewish Matters, 1969-1974,' box 5, Leonard Garment mss., LC."
Yeah, but the don't control the internet!!!!
Here's a quote from Nixon:
"There may be some truth in that if the Arabs have some complaints about my policy towards Israel, they have to realize that the Jews in the U.S. control the entire information and propaganda machine, the large newspapers, the motion pictures, radio and television, and the big companies, and there is a force that we have to take into consideration."
-- Richard Milhous Nixon, Thirty-Seventh President of the United States of America, as quoted by Leonard Dinnerstein, Antisemitism in America, Oxford University Press, New York, (1994), pp. 232-233. Dinnerstein cites: "Clipping of Fikri Abbaza, interview with Richard Nixon, Al-Mussawar, July 12, 1974, folder 'Jewish Matters, 1969-1974,' box 5, Leonard Garment mss., LC."
Yeah, but the don't control the internet!!!!
Mr. Lutefisk
Newbie
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2004
- Messages
- 66
"Six million men and women are dying ... eight hundred thousand children cry for bread. And this fate is upon them through no fault of their own, ... but through the awful tyranny of war and a bigoted lust for Jewish blood. In this threatened holocaust of human life ..."
--The American Hebrew (New York, issue 582 of October 31, 1919)
I guess the 1919 Holocaust didn't stick. Maybe the author should have shown some pictures of skinny bodies and several corpses piled up. That is real proof of a Holocaust as we all know. Just look at the pictures and shut off all logic.
http://www.iamthewitness.com/Crucifixion-of-Jews.html
--The American Hebrew (New York, issue 582 of October 31, 1919)
I guess the 1919 Holocaust didn't stick. Maybe the author should have shown some pictures of skinny bodies and several corpses piled up. That is real proof of a Holocaust as we all know. Just look at the pictures and shut off all logic.
http://www.iamthewitness.com/Crucifixion-of-Jews.html
Will Smith -- Hitler, Schmitler; He Wasn't That Bad
Posted Dec 24th 2007 2:22PM by TMZ Staff
On the day before Christmas, a leading Jewish group is kvetching loudly about Will Smith's recent suggestion that Adolf Hitler wasn't all bad, calling it "ignorant, detestable, and offensive." Oy.
The Jewish Defense League is calling on Barack Obama to repudiate Smith's comments, and wants theaters to pull Smith's new flick "I Am Legend" from their screens. Smith told a Scottish paper that Hitler "didn't wake up going, 'Let me do the most evil thing I can do today.' ... I think he woke up in the morning and using a twisted, backwards logic, he set out to do what he thought was 'good.'" What kind of meshuggeneh talk is that?!
Smith's words, say the JDL, "spit on the memory of every person murdered by the Nazis. His disgusting words stick a knife in the backs of every veteran who fought (and sometimes died) to save the world from the intentions of Adolf Hitler."
UPDATE: Will Smith's rep sent TMZ the following statement from him, which reads: "It is an awful and disgusting lie. It speaks to the dangerous power of an ignorant person with a pen. I am incensed and infuriated to have to respond to such ludicrous misinterpretation. Adolph Hitler was a vile, heinous, vicious killer responsible for one of the greatest acts of evil committed on this planet."
Link
Posted Dec 24th 2007 2:22PM by TMZ Staff
On the day before Christmas, a leading Jewish group is kvetching loudly about Will Smith's recent suggestion that Adolf Hitler wasn't all bad, calling it "ignorant, detestable, and offensive." Oy.
The Jewish Defense League is calling on Barack Obama to repudiate Smith's comments, and wants theaters to pull Smith's new flick "I Am Legend" from their screens. Smith told a Scottish paper that Hitler "didn't wake up going, 'Let me do the most evil thing I can do today.' ... I think he woke up in the morning and using a twisted, backwards logic, he set out to do what he thought was 'good.'" What kind of meshuggeneh talk is that?!
Smith's words, say the JDL, "spit on the memory of every person murdered by the Nazis. His disgusting words stick a knife in the backs of every veteran who fought (and sometimes died) to save the world from the intentions of Adolf Hitler."
UPDATE: Will Smith's rep sent TMZ the following statement from him, which reads: "It is an awful and disgusting lie. It speaks to the dangerous power of an ignorant person with a pen. I am incensed and infuriated to have to respond to such ludicrous misinterpretation. Adolph Hitler was a vile, heinous, vicious killer responsible for one of the greatest acts of evil committed on this planet."
Link
This blog notes the way Will Smith has been smeared by the media:
[url]http://desertpeace.blogspot.com/2007/12/will-smith-i-never-s aid-hitler-was-good.html[/url]
It's the total lack of moderation and perspective that those who control Big Media have that's slowly but surely doing them in. Yes, Boobus Americanus will always be easy to manipulate and exploit, but the significant minority remnant of thinkers and producersare rejecting the PTB in a big way, as reflected by the Ron Paul Revolution. I like this short but sweet blog entry on Lew Rockwell.com:
<H2 =date>December 24, 2007</H2>
<DIV =blog>
<H3 =title>Ron Paul Dismantles the Establishment</H3>Posted by Lew Rockwell at December 24, 2007 08:24 PM
There was a time when smears from a Bill Kristol or the New York Times could destroy someone, but that time is long gone. Today, Ron Paul supporters and potential supporters--and all young people--get their information from the internet, and not from a mouldering sheet like the Times, let alone a neocon talking head.
Today, the Times, which declines in circulation and influence every quarter, is taken seriously by the Manhattan and DC rich, period. When average Ron supporters hear that the NY Times has attacked him as a "Nazi," it makes them hate the Times, and see it as a pack of lies. And note that among regular Americans, the Times has no more status than the Wichita Bugle. "Wichita Bugle Attacks Ron Paul." If you saw such a story, you wouldn't think, Oh no, what has Ron done? You'd think, biased MSM! And inded that is the response of all Ron Paul revolutionaries to the libels.
Then we have the fact that no one under 30 reads a newspaper, and few under 60. And very few pay attention to a neocon like Bill Kristol or believe him. Few even know who he is. So if they should tune into Murdoch TV and see him calling Ron a "crackpot" and a "crank," and warning Americans not to pay any attention to him, it only diminishes Kristol. Or rather, it makes him disappear, as they turn the channel.http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/017993.html<A name=more></A>
[url]http://desertpeace.blogspot.com/2007/12/will-smith-i-never-s aid-hitler-was-good.html[/url]
It's the total lack of moderation and perspective that those who control Big Media have that's slowly but surely doing them in. Yes, Boobus Americanus will always be easy to manipulate and exploit, but the significant minority remnant of thinkers and producersare rejecting the PTB in a big way, as reflected by the Ron Paul Revolution. I like this short but sweet blog entry on Lew Rockwell.com:
<H2 =date>December 24, 2007</H2>
<DIV =blog>
<H3 =title>Ron Paul Dismantles the Establishment</H3>Posted by Lew Rockwell at December 24, 2007 08:24 PM
There was a time when smears from a Bill Kristol or the New York Times could destroy someone, but that time is long gone. Today, Ron Paul supporters and potential supporters--and all young people--get their information from the internet, and not from a mouldering sheet like the Times, let alone a neocon talking head.
Today, the Times, which declines in circulation and influence every quarter, is taken seriously by the Manhattan and DC rich, period. When average Ron supporters hear that the NY Times has attacked him as a "Nazi," it makes them hate the Times, and see it as a pack of lies. And note that among regular Americans, the Times has no more status than the Wichita Bugle. "Wichita Bugle Attacks Ron Paul." If you saw such a story, you wouldn't think, Oh no, what has Ron done? You'd think, biased MSM! And inded that is the response of all Ron Paul revolutionaries to the libels.
Then we have the fact that no one under 30 reads a newspaper, and few under 60. And very few pay attention to a neocon like Bill Kristol or believe him. Few even know who he is. So if they should tune into Murdoch TV and see him calling Ron a "crackpot" and a "crank," and warning Americans not to pay any attention to him, it only diminishes Kristol. Or rather, it makes him disappear, as they turn the channel.http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/017993.html<A name=more></A>
Taking a quote out of context is one thing, lying about a quote is quite another issue. The infamous gossip columnists with the aid of their paparazzi entourage have ruined many a successful career with their rantings....
The latest 'would be' victim was Will Smith, popular actor. His statement of "Everyone is basically good", along with... "Even Hitler didn't wake up going, "let me do the most evil thing I can do today," came out as 'hitler was a good guy'.....
C'mon guys.... let's have an ounce of truth in your reporting. It's bad enough the political reporters lie about everything under the sun, at least let's see some reality when it comes to important stuff like gossip.
Yeah, you can't even mention Hitler's name. Even if you're a favored son like Will Smith, the Jewsmedia will take you down.
The latest 'would be' victim was Will Smith, popular actor. His statement of "Everyone is basically good", along with... "Even Hitler didn't wake up going, "let me do the most evil thing I can do today," came out as 'hitler was a good guy'.....
C'mon guys.... let's have an ounce of truth in your reporting. It's bad enough the political reporters lie about everything under the sun, at least let's see some reality when it comes to important stuff like gossip.
Yeah, you can't even mention Hitler's name. Even if you're a favored son like Will Smith, the Jewsmedia will take you down.
screamingeagle
Mentor
Nixon may have been anti-semitic, but remember in 1973, he gave Isreal planeloads of our most advanced weapons to them during their darkest hour. Another Anti-semetic named Harry Truman recognized Isreal.
I don't know what this proves, but...
I don't know what this proves, but...
Capt. Larsen
Newbie
Great post freedom! That just about covers it. The only thing I can think to add is, were there even 6 million jews in that vicinity at that time? I heard that there weren't.
This information needs to be spread before the internet becomes regulated, 'cause I'd bet the farm that the holohoax will be the first to be criminalized in the USA.....then will come the jews favorite pawns of color.
This information needs to be spread before the internet becomes regulated, 'cause I'd bet the farm that the holohoax will be the first to be criminalized in the USA.....then will come the jews favorite pawns of color.
GiovaniMarcon
Mentor
Would I be right to conclude that the consensus is that Hitler is still evil, just no quite so evil as he's generally made out to be?
Hitler = greasy haired poindexter
Himmler = four-eyed doofus
Goering = fatty
Canaris = dirty old man
Hess = queerboy
Rohm = fat queerboy
Goebbels = midget
It's easy to dismiss the nazi leadership with throwaway insults. It makes it easier not to think about it.
Just like it's easy to harp on "six million, six million."
If you say it often enough you stop asking why, you just keep saying it.
Perhaps after hundreds of years have passed a less emotional and clinically detached recounting of the whole episode of history that was World War 2 will reach students, and we'll get more facts.
I'm sure the version of Roman history spoken about in schools in the year 250AD was a lot different than the one we get now.
Hitler = greasy haired poindexter
Himmler = four-eyed doofus
Goering = fatty
Canaris = dirty old man
Hess = queerboy
Rohm = fat queerboy
Goebbels = midget
It's easy to dismiss the nazi leadership with throwaway insults. It makes it easier not to think about it.
Just like it's easy to harp on "six million, six million."
If you say it often enough you stop asking why, you just keep saying it.
Perhaps after hundreds of years have passed a less emotional and clinically detached recounting of the whole episode of history that was World War 2 will reach students, and we'll get more facts.
I'm sure the version of Roman history spoken about in schools in the year 250AD was a lot different than the one we get now.
Ground Fighter
Mentor
Angelcynn said:
Its funny you say that because many extremeist muslims are actually thankful to Hitler for what he did to the jews.
As far as what Hitler did, I'm keeping my personal opinions to myself because I don't want to start a war on this site. But I will say this much...the guy was (intelligence-wise) a genius. Think about it. Within a matter of a few short years, he managed to gain total and utter control of Germany and basically wrecked havoc on half the planet. A stupid man would not be capable of performing a task like this. His speeches were probably some of the most persuasive speeches ever spoken, as he sawyed the German people into supporting him.
Once again, I'm not saying that everything he did was acceptable and "right", but his intelligence and political-presence were like nothing the world has ever seen. Even to this day, a figure of such stature has yet to walk athe Earth again.
The numbers disputes come from differing definitions of a "jew." Most of the people who were in the concentration camps on account of being jewish, would not be considered as such by most groups like the jdl. Rockwell's aide, Frank Collin would be considered jewish, or a "mischling" by the nazis, but would never have been considered jewish by a rabbi(even without ANP connections.)
The nazis killed around 11 million total in the camps, around 6 of those million on account of being jewish. However, most of those killed would not have checked off "jewish" on a self reporting census.
The nazis killed around 11 million total in the camps, around 6 of those million on account of being jewish. However, most of those killed would not have checked off "jewish" on a self reporting census.