|
|
The Fundamental Flaws of the Holocaust CultThe Fundamental Flaws of the Holocaust Cult At the Nuremberg trial (1945-1946), a tribunal of the victors accused a defeated Germany 1) of having ordered and planned the physical extermination of the Jews of Europe; 2) of having designed and used certain weapons of mass destruction, in particular those that it called “gas chambers”; 3) of having, essentially with those weapons but also through other means, caused the death of six million Jews. “Evil” people like myself have examined the evidence and concluded the three accusations are not true. We believe the Holocaust Cult is the sole official religion of the West. You can publish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed and of Jesus in most European countries, but prison cells await people who doubt the Holocaust Cult in many of these countries. Recently a Catholic bishop who publicly doubted the Holocaust Cult was expelled from Argentina. He has been forbidden to act as a bishop until he recants. To recant means to formally reject or disavow a formerly held belief, usually under pressure. This is what the Inquisition demanded of heretics. For sixty years evil people like myself having been asking the historians who preach the Holocaust Cult to do three things. 1) Show us one single document that, in your view, proves that Hitler or any other National-Socialist ordered and planned the physical extermination of the Jews; 2) Show us that weapon of mass destruction which, as alleged, was a gas chamber; show us a single one of them, at Auschwitz or elsewhere; and if you claim that you cannot show us any because, according to you, the Germans destroyed the “murder weapon”, provide us at least with a technical drawing representing one of those slaughterhouses which, as you say, the Germans destroyed and explain to us how that weapon with such a fabulous killing performance had been able to work without bringing on the death of either those who ran it or their helpers; 3) Explain to us how you have arrived at your figure of six million victims. The struggle to get the answers to these questions has gone on longer than the search for Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction. Almost sixty years ago scholarly books and articles began to appear that struck at the roots of the Holocaust Cult. 1) In 1951 the Léon Poliakov, who had been part of the French delegation at the Nuremberg trial (1945-1946), stated his conclusion that we had at our disposal an overabundance of documents for all points of the history of the Third Reich, with the exception of one point alone: the “campaign to exterminate the Jews”. For this, he wrote, “No document remains, perhaps none has ever existed” (Bréviaire de la haine, Paris, Calmann-Lévy, 1974 [1951], p. 171; English version: Harvest of Hate, New York, Holocaust Library, 1979, revised and expanded edition). 2) In 1960 Martin Broszat, a member of the Institute of Contemporary History in Munich, wrote: “Neither at Dachau, nor at Bergen-Belsen, nor at Buchenwald were any Jews or other detainees gassed” (“Keine Vergasung in Dachau”, Die Zeit, August 19, 1960, p. 16). At the Nuremberg trial the only homicidal gas chamber that the prosecutors ventured to show in a film had been that of Dachau, and the testimonies telling of alleged homicidal gassings in the three above-mentioned camps had been numerous. M. Broszat thus implicitly acknowledged that those testimonies were false. 3) In 1968 the Jewish historian Olga Wormser-Migot, in her thesis on Le Système concentrationnaire nazi, 1933-1945, (Paris, Presses universitaires de France), gave an ample exposition of what she called “the problem of the gas chambers” (p. 541-544). There were three separate camps at Auschwitz. On Auschwitz-I she was categorical: that camp where tourists visit an alleged gas chamber was, in reality, “without any gas chamber” (p. 157). 4) In 1979 thirty-four French historians signed a lengthy joint declaration in reply to technical arguments aiming to demonstrate that the allegation of the existence and functioning of the Nazi gas chambers ran up against certain radical scientific impossibilities. The thirty-four historians answered thus: “It must not be asked how, technically, such a mass-murder was possible. It was technically possible, since it happened” (Le Monde, February 21, 1979, p. 23). If thirty-four historians find themselves unable to explain how a crime of these dimensions was perpetrated, it is because that crime defies the laws of nature; it is therefore imaginary. 5) Also in 1979, the American authorities finally made public certain aerial photographs of Auschwitz which, up to then, they had kept hidden. The two authors of the publication, former CIA men Dino A. Brugioni and Robert G. Poirier, gave their little set of photos the title The Holocaust Revisited and tacked on here and there labels bearing the words “gas chamber(s)”. (Central Intelligence Agency, Washington, February 1979, ST-79-10001). In reality, what can be distinctly made out on them are crematoria structures, with no crowds huddled outside waiting to enter the alleged changing rooms and the alleged death chambers. The surrounding grounds are free of obstruction and visible from all directions. The flowerbeds in the patches of garden round the crematories are neatly laid-out and bear no trace of being stamped upon every day by thousands of people. Crematorium n°3, for instance, butts against what we know to have been, thanks to sound documents from the Auschwitz State Museum, a football field and is close to a volleyball court (Hefte von Auschwitz, 15, 1975, plate on page 56 and page 64). It is also close to eighteen hospital barracks of the men’s camp. I repeat, the eighteen hospital barracks in the men’s camp. Why, you might well ask, did the Germans build 18 hospitals for Jews at the men’s camp in Auschwitz and provide a football field for the prisoners? What about the theaters, the library, and the prisoners’ post office? 6) On April 21, 1982 an association (the “ASSAG”), was created in Paris for “the study of murders by gassing under the National-Socialist regime”, “with a view to seeking and verifying elements bearing proof of the use of poison gasses in Europe by the officials of the National-Socialist regime to kill persons of various nationalities, to contributing to the publication of this evidence, to making, to that purpose, all useful contacts on the national and international level”. Article 2 of the association’s charter stipulates: “The Association shall last as long as shall be necessary to attain the objectives set forth in Article 1.” This association remains in existence, at least until 2006, and has never published anything in its own name that proves that the existence of Nazi gas chambers. Clearly, the continued existence of ASSAG proves that it has failed to achieve the objective for which it was founded nearly twenty-seven years ago. 7) In 1982, from June 29 to July 2, an international symposium was held in Paris, at the Sorbonne, under the chairmanship of two Jewish historians, François Furet and Raymond Aron in order to refute the evil views of researches who rejected the Holocaust Cult. On the last day of symposium the two chairmen had to admit publicly that, “despite the most scholarly research”, no order given by Hitler to kill the Jews had been found. 8) On April 26, 1983, the long-running lawsuit against Professor Robert Faurisson, the world’s foremost critic of the Holocaust Cult for personal injury through falsification of history” (sic), begun by French Jewish organizations, in 1979, came to an end. On that day the first chamber of the Paris Court of Appeal, civil division section A, presided by judge Grégoire, It ruled, in effect, that there could be detected in Faurisson’s writings on the gas chambers no trace of rashness, no trace of negligence, no trace of having deliberately overlooked anything, nor any trace of a lie and that, as a consequence, “the appraisal of the value of the findings [on the gas chambers] defended by Mr Faurisson is a matter, therefore, solely for experts, historians and the public.” Profession Faurisson was ordered to pay a fine for making Jews feel unhappy. 9) In 1983, on May 7, Simone Veil, who is Jewish and herself a “survivor of the genocide”, declared on the subject of the gas chambers. “However, everyone knows that the Nazis destroyed those gas chambers and systematically did away with all the witnesses” (France-Soir Magazine, May 7, 1983, p. 47). One must ask: if the gas chambers were destroyed, what are the tourists being shown at Auschwitz and Dachau? If all of the witnesses were killed, where did the “witnesses” come from since 1945? 10) In 1961 the Jew Raul Hilberg, orthodox historian of the Holocaust Cult Number One, published the first edition of his major work, The Destruction of the European Jews, and it was in 1985 that he brought out the second edition, a profoundly revised and corrected version. In the first edition the Hilberg had brazenly affirmed that “the destruction of the Jews of Europe” had been set off following two consecutive orders given by Hitler. Hilberg professed to explain in detail the political, administrative and bureaucratic process of that destruction. He went so far as to write that at Auschwitz the extermination of the Jews was organized by an office that was in charge of both the disinfection of clothing and the extermination of human beings (The Destruction of the European Jews, 1961, republished in 1979 by Quadrangle Books, Chicago, p. 177, 570). However, in 1983, Hilberg suddenly changed his tune. He proceeded to state that the business of “the destruction of the European Jews” had, after all, gone on without a plan, without any organization, centralization, project or budget, but altogether thanks to “an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus-mind reading by a far-flung bureaucracy” (Newsday, New York, February 23, 1983, p. II/3). In October 2006, Hilberg told Le Monde: “There was no pre-established guiding plan. As for the question of the decision, it is in part unsolvable: no order signed by Hitler has ever been found, doubtless because no such document ever existed. I am persuaded that the bureaucracies moved through a sort of latent structure: each decision brings on another, then another, and so forth, even if it isn’t possible to foresee exactly the next step” (Le Monde des livres, October 20, 2006, p. 12). Hilberg disowned his first version and to explain a gigantic undertaking of collective murder as if it had all been carried out through something like the workings of the Tooth Fairy. 11) In May 1986 in France, certain Jews, alarmed upon realizing that they could not manage to answer the critics of the Holocaust Cult on the simple plane of reason, decided to obtaining a legal prohibition of critical research and thinking about their sacred cow. Chief amongst them were Georges Wellers and Pierre Vidal-Naquet, grouped, with their friends, round France’s head rabbi René-Samuel Sirat (Bulletin quotidien de l’Agence télégraphique juive, June 1986, p. 1, 3). After four years, on July 13, 1990, they would get, thanks notably to Jewish former Prime Minister Laurent Fabius, then president of the National Assembly, a special law passed allowing for the punishment of any person who publicly made revisionist statements on the subject of the “extermination of the Jews”: up to a year’s imprisonment, a fine of €45,000 and still other sanctions. You see, the Holocaust Cult must be true since it is a crime to dispute it in public. 12) In August 1986 Michel de Boüard, himself deported during the war as a resistant, professor of history and Dean of letters at the University of Caen (Normandy), member of the Institut de France and former head of the Commission d’histoire de la deportation within the official Comité d’histoire de la deuxième guerre mondiale, declared that “the dossier is rotten”. He specified that the history of the German concentration camp system, was “rotten” due to “a huge amount of made-up stories, inaccuracies stubbornly repeated — particularly where numbers are concerned — amalgamations and generalizations”. (Ouest-France of August 2nd and 3rd, 1986, p. 6). He went so far so far as to say that, if he hitherto personally upheld the existence of a gas chamber in the Mauthausen camp, he had done so wrongly, on the faith of what was said around him. 13) Arno Mayer, an American professor of Jewish origin teaching contemporary European history at Princeton University, wrote on the subject of the Nazi gas chambers: “Sources for the study of the gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable” (The “Final Solution” in History, New York, Pantheon Books, 1988, p. 362). 14) In 1989 Swiss historian Philippe Burrin, admitted the absence of traces of the crime and note what he decided to call “the stubborn erasure of the trace of anyone’s passing through” (p. 9). He bemoaned “the large gaps in the documentation” and added: “There subsists no document bearing an extermination order signed by Hitler. […] In all likelihood, the orders were given verbally. […] here the traces are not only few and far between, but difficult to interpret” (p. 13). Hitler et les juifs / Genèse d’un genocide, Paris, Seuil; English version: Hitler and the Jews: the Genesis of the Holocaust, London, Edward Arnold, 1994). You may imagine that the traces of Hitler’s crime are many and unambiguous but the historian who has examined the relevant documentation has, for his part, found nothing but sparse semblances and “traces”, and wonders what interpretation to give to them. 15) We have all been told that the plan to exterminate the Jews was laid out in detail at the Wannsee Conference. Kevin Branaugh stared in a recent movie to prove this to the ignorant. In 1992 Yehuda Bauer, professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, stated at an international conference on the genocide of the Jews held in London: “The public still repeats, time after time, the silly story that at Wannsee the extermination of the Jews was arrived at” (Jewish Telegraphic Agency release published as “Wannsee’s importance rejected”, Canadian Jewish News, January 30, 1992, p. 8). 16) In January 1995 French historian Eric Conan, co-author with Henry Rousso of Vichy, un passé qui ne passe pas (Paris, Gallimard, 2001 [1994, 1996]; English edition: Vichy: an ever-present past, Hanover, New Hampshire and London, University Press of New England, 1998), wrote that Professor Faurisson had been right after all to certify, in the late 1970s, that the gas chamber thus far visited by millions of tourists at Auschwitz was completely fake. Conan then related a staggering remark by Krystyna Oleksy, deputy director of the Auschwitz National Museum, who could not find the resolve to explain the misrepresentation to the public. He wrote: “Krystyna Oleksy […] can’t bring herself to do so: ‘For the time being [the room designated as a gas chamber] is to be left “as is”, with nothing specified to the visitor. It’s too complicated. We’ll see to it later on’” (“Auschwitz: la mémoire du mal” [Auschwitz: the remembrance of evil], L’Express, January 19-25, 1995, p. 68). The Polish official meant, in plain language: we have lied, we are lying and, until further notice, we shall continue to lie. 17) The leftwing French historian Jacques Baynac, a staunch opponent of the scholarly critics of the Holocaust Cult since 1978, ended up admitting, after due consideration, that there was no evidence of the Nazi gas chambers’ existence. One could not fail to note, wrote Baynac, “the absence of documents, traces or other material evidence” (Le Nouveau Quotidien de Lausanne [Switzerland], September 2, 1996, p. 16, and September 3, 1996, p. 14). But he said that he continued to believe in n the existence of those magical gas chambers. 18) In 2000, at the end of her book Histoire du négationnisme en France (Paris, Gallimard), Valérie Igounet published a long text by Jean-Claude Pressac. In 1993-1994, Pressac was the protégé of the French Jew Serge Klarsfeld and the American rabbi Michael Berenbaum, Project Director at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington. He was acclaimed worldwide as an extraordinary researcher who, in his book on Les Crématoires d’Auschwitz, la machinerie du meurtre de masse (Paris, CNRS éditions, 1993; English title: The Auschwitz Crematories. The Machinery of Mass Murder), had disproved the charges of the scholarly researcher who disputed the Holocaust Cult. In Igounet’s book, he signed his act of surrender. Like Professor Michel de Boüard, see point 12 above, he concluded that the dossier on the concentration camp system was irremediably “rotten”. He asked: “Can things be put back on an even keel?” and answered: “It is too late”. He added: “The current form, albeit triumphant, of the presentation of the camp universe is doomed”. He finished by surmising that everything that had been invented around sufferings all too real was bound “for the rubbish bins of history” (p. 651-652). 19) Justice Charles Gray conceded in his judgment at the end of trial of the Jewish-American academic Deborah Lipstadt for libeling the British historian David Irving that “contemporaneous documents yield little clear evidence of the existence of gas chambers designed to kill humans” (p. 489). In the text of his judgment, Charles Gray admitted surprise: “I have to confess that, in common I suspect with most other people, I had supposed that the evidence of mass extermination of Jews in the gas chambers at Auschwitz was compelling. I have, however, set aside this preconception when assessing the evidence adduced by the parties in these proceedings” (13.71). 20) In 2005, Yves Ternon conceded “It is known that the Führer neither drafted nor signed any order to eliminate the Jews…” Ternon then alleged that the decisions to exterminate the Jews were made in unrecorded secret meetings with unidentified German officials. (Yves Ternon, Revue d’histoire de la Shoah, July-December 2005, p. 537).
The official defenders of the Holocaust Cult 1. cannot invoke a single document proving the crime; 2. are unable to provide the least representation of the crime weapon; 3. cannot produce any proof nor even any evidence; 4. cannot name a single truthful witness (see above, S. Veil’s opinion on the matter); 5. admit that their dossier is rotten (twice repeated), irremediably rotten and that it is bound for the rubbish bins of history; 6. admit the sources formerly invoked have revealed themselves to be not only rarer than was claimed but also unreliable; 7. admit hat the alleged traces of the crime are few and far between, and difficult to interpret; 8. concede that their side has used falsifications, misrepresentation, and artifice; 9. Concede that in support of their case there has too often been invoked a “silly [sic] story”, that of a decision to exterminate the Jews supposedly taken on January 20, 1942 at Berlin-Wannsee; 10. The foremost of their number, Raul Hilberg, now explains it all in a nonsensical way, by supposing the German bureaucracy boldly acted without any order, plan, instruction, supervision or budget. Thanks to an incredible meeting of minds and mind reading. 11. First in France and later in a number of other countries in Europe, the high priest of the Holocaust Cult have demanded special laws to silence their critics. When reason, history and science failed, these fanatics demanded policemen arrest their critics. This presentation is based upon my own research and a speech given by Professor Robert Faurisson at the Tehran Holocaust Conference, December 11, 2006 Posted by Robert Reis on Sunday, March 1, 2009 at 03:10 AM in That Question Again Comments:2
Posted by Truth Seeker on March 01, 2009, 05:21 AM | #
Two Models of White Racialism: A Preliminary Exploration of a Changing Morality 3
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 01, 2009, 10:46 AM | # A very good article, and of course timely as well, in view of the furore over Bishop Williamson’s daring to hold an opinion based on fact (an opinion which he now agrees he perhaps shouldn’t have divulged publicly the way he did — which is not a recantation, incidentally, especially knowing how he was deliberately “set up” in that Swedish T.V. interview)( * ). Daring to express an opinion that’s based on fact is not allowed in large parts of today’s Eurosphere because today’s Jews, unlike today’s Euros, reject the principle of freedom of speech and have worked their will on major portions of Western society. The Jews of course are moving mountains behind the scenes to get this brave, principled, knowledgeable, righteous, wholly innocent priest arrested, tried, and convicted before a Semitically-Correct Kangaroo Court and thrown into jail. How does the Jews’ rejection of freedom of speech bear on the Vatican’s relation to the Bishop Williamson case? It bears on it through today’s Jews’ clearly being able to coerce today’s Vatican so that it act contrary to its own interests and the interests of Catholics, Europe, the European races of mankind, and the West and Western Civilization generally: today’s Jews are clearly able to coerce the Vatican to act in ways that are contrary to all those interests. Unmistakable evidence of this coercion has shown itself a number of times over recent decades, including during the reign of the current Pope. ( * By the way, that interviewer supposedly working for Swedish television definitely didn’t have a Swedish or other Scandinavian accent. I remember wondering if that accent was Israeli, Arabic, or perhaps Russian or other slav — French being a very remote possibility, which might have relevance as it was the organized French lesbians who deliberately set the Bishop up in that interview. No biggie, but anyone happen to know what that guy was? He wasn’t Swedish.) 4
Posted by dead white male on March 01, 2009, 11:21 AM | # Good article. The Hoax need only survive another generation or two. By then North America will be Brazilianized, Europe will be Islamicized, and Euroman will have forever lost his opportunity to reassert independence, much less dominance. 5
Posted by Michael Santomauro on March 01, 2009, 12:43 PM | # Dear Friend, Sample Chapters and Contents for New Book:
Publisher’s Note: This is a non-Revisionist title for Theses & Dissertations Press. It will be the first book on the Holocaust, in publishing history, that will not take a Traditionalist or a Revisionist point of view. When you purchase this book, one-third of the proceeds will go to imprisoned scholar Germar Rudolf and his family. http://www.amazon.com/Debating-Holocaust-Look-Both-Sides/dp/1591480051/ Founded in 2000 the publishing company Theses & Dissertations Press is at the center of a worldwide network of scholars and activists who are working—often at great personal sacrifice—to separate historical fact from propaganda fiction. The founder of Theses & Dissertations Press is Germar Rudolf. Who is currently serving prison time for his published works and will be released on July 4, 2009. As the new director of TADP.org, I wish to express my outrage that the Holocaust, unlike any other historical event, is not subject to critical examination. Furthermore I deplore the fact that many so-called democratic states have laws that criminalize an examination and understanding of the Holocaust. It is my position that the veracity of Holocaust assertions should be determined in the marketplace of scholarly discourse and not in our legislatures bodies and courthouses.
Michael Santomauro 6
Posted by ben tillman on March 01, 2009, 01:36 PM | # I am of course sympathetic to any effort to get at the truth. However, I have some quibbles here.
In their masterpiece Complex Societies: The Evolutionary Dynamics of a Crude Superorganism, Boyd and Richerson compared World War II armies in the context of their understanding that “modern militaries ... are most successful when they can recreate many of the elements of the egalitarian tribal ethos notwithstanding the reality of highly formalized hierarchical command and control.” The conclusion of Boyd and Richerson, and numerous others they cite (including Israelis like Shalit and van Creveld), was that the German system was the most effective.
And
7
Posted by cladrastis on March 01, 2009, 04:01 PM | # Re Robert Reis and Truth Seeker: If Auschwitz lacked real gas chambers, what exactly were Fred Leuchter and the Polish “scientific” investigative team that followed him investigating for residual Zyklon B? Is this yet another example of fraudulent scientific publication? I haven’t looked at either study, but it would be interesting to see if they were conducted blind (w/o bias!). If the Polish “microdiffusion” rebuttal hasn’t been thoroughly “Critiqued” for its methodology, perhaps someone in the denial camp should do so. 8
Posted by Svigor on March 01, 2009, 07:32 PM | #
4) Show us the body. Where is the proof that the crime ever occurred? (This has got me thinking - the argument is that the 11 million in question (the Holocaust claims 11 million killed via mass extermination, not 6 million) are known to have died because of census data. Leaving aside the fog of war, and the maw of the Soviet Union yawning not far away (are we to believe their census data?), have revisionists ever attempted to find similar census gaps, and used them to “prove” millions of murders? Food for thought) 9
Posted by Svigor on March 01, 2009, 07:40 PM | # The gulags went on well into the 50s. How do we know the “missing” 11 million didn’t die in Soviet gulags? Because we trust the commies at their word? There’s no proof of 11 million deaths, other than some records, and lots of testimony about missing relatives. Numbers aside, how do we know they didn’t end up in Siberia? Or on a Martian saucer, for that matter? 10
Posted by Lurker on March 01, 2009, 08:35 PM | # Was there ever a post war attempt to debrief survivors, to get a handle on real numbers before making accusations of genocide? We often hear person X claim that 28 members of their family died or person Y say that all their relatives died. Did anyone ever attempt to correlate these stories - other than just collect and record them at face value? I dont think anything like that took place but I’m no expert. I used to be a believer in the standard narrative, its obvious of course the Holocaust took place. Only a nutter would think otherwise! I started looking into it a bit more via the internet just to confirm my feeling that the story was true. Whats the first thing to look at - that 6 million figure - how was it arrived at? Soon have my beliefs confirmed and see through those evil deniers, no problemo. Thats when I hit the whole census data thing, a rather shaky body of evidence and…thats it. No body counts, no forensic archaeology, no Nazi documentation and seemingly no debriefing of survivors. This cannot be right I thought - but it was. Is there anything else, any other source of evidence? 11
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 01, 2009, 09:32 PM | #
The fakes — the structures falsely claimed by the Jews and the Stalinists( * ) to be the gas chambers. ( * by the Jews and the Jews, in other words) 12
Posted by Lurker on March 01, 2009, 11:02 PM | #
I’ve just typed out the above from the Auschwitz-Birkenau guidebook (2007), more of a pamphlet really, 24 pages. A friend visited there a while back, I requested he collect a guidebook for me. Ive added some emphasis. 13
Posted by ben tillman on March 01, 2009, 11:20 PM | #
We don’t, and we don’t know how many Madeleine Albrights there were, Jewish emigres recorded as non-Jewish. As recently as 2004, I encountered a daughter of Holocaust refugees who was still emphatically repeating her parents cover story all too unnecessarily. “My name is Thomason—it’s an English name.” Her Hollywoodish exaggerated Southern accent and the timbre of her voice—almost identical to that of a French/Algerian Jewess I knew—were enough to clue me in, but her repeated unprompted explanation that Thomason was an English name was too much. 14
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 01, 2009, 11:38 PM | # The Jews will never let go of the Holocau$t myth, especially now it’s been incorporated into their relgion. They’ll never let it go until the end of time. We on this side, the side of truth and group self-preservation, have to simply move on, leaving that sad chapter behind us marked closed and disposed of: the Holocau$t never happened as claimed. (Yes the Jews were victims of a holocaust, but not the one claimed: Jews were persecuted, rounded up, and essentially done to death in their hundreds of thousands in camps they were not permitted to leave when disease and hunger struck. But nobody was gassed in a gas chamber, there was no Nazi plan to exterminate the Jews (the Jewish dead were victims of unavoidable wartime typhus and hunger; there was a typhus epidemic across Central Europe at the time, caused by the ravages of war, and Germans and everyone else were dropping of the same causes, typhus, starvation, lack of fuel for the winter, etc), and the six million figure of Jews killed is a fantasy, an invention, some sort of number with Jewish mystical significance they insist on and will never give up from now till the next Big Bang.) The Jews will never concede the implications of the facts, no matter what. We on the other hand must never lose sight of the facts and their implications because the other side’s propaganda will be endless, not to mention all the more insistent, outraged, and hysterical the more it’s debunked and disbelieved. It’s a blood libel on Germany. The Jews talk about the blood libel they’ve been subjected to and are outraged by it. The one they’re so outraged by isn’t the millionth the outrage of the blood libel they’re subjecting Germans to. I’m German. And I an outraged by the blood libel on my people concocted by the Jews. 15
Posted by ben tillman on March 01, 2009, 11:42 PM | #
The “hive mind” or “group mind” is a very real phenomenon, as T.D. Seeley and D.S. Wilson would tell you: If the individual is no longer a privileged unit of selection, it is no longer a privileged unit of cognition. We are free to imagine individuals in a social group connected in a circuitry that gives the group the status of the brain and the individual the status of the neuron. 16
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 01, 2009, 11:44 PM | #
... or Jews who left Germany who were wrongly listed as deceased in “the camps.” This was the case of the Canadian Jewish abortion clinic operator who just received a medal from the Canadian government — I forget his name — it was the case with him and his brother if memory serves, both of whom were alive and well in Canada when the records had them listed as perishing in the concentration camps. This “mistake” turned up through independent investigation, not through their admission. 17
Posted by ben tillman on March 01, 2009, 11:48 PM | # In fact, the notion of the “hive mind” is oftened offered to explain the apparently coordinated actions of the Jewish community. We need to keep our credibility on this point. 18
Posted by ben tillman on March 02, 2009, 12:02 AM | #
This reminds me of my communications with Ken McVay, director of Nizkor.org, a number of years ago. One page at the website was intended to respond to a question from a revisionist pamphlet: “What evidence is there that six million didn’t die?” On that page, the response was, “None.” I told McVay that there was an unimpeachable source that said the number was 10% lower: Nizkor.org! Nizkor itself (elsewhere) stated that the number of Jewish dead was 5.4 million. McVay’s response: Six million is a “convenient rounding-up”. Yeah, that’s awfully convenient. 19
Posted by THE BIOLOGICAL JEW on March 02, 2009, 01:26 AM | # Great piece which examines the parasitism of Jews - http://just-another-inside-job.blogspot.com/2008/03/biological-jew.html 20
Posted by ROBERT CROSS on March 02, 2009, 07:52 AM | # To decide upon the veracity of the holocau$t myth all that is really necessary is to examine the mechanical processes,today with all of the modern refinements of the technology of cremation ,various companies websites provide all the information that one needs.According to one,it requires a temperature of between 870-980c(1600-1800f) to incinerate a body and takes two hours,after which one is left with bone fragments of all sizes,weighing approx 6lbs for men,and 4lbs for women.Following these known facts it can be deduced that to incinerate 1000 bodies will take 55.5 days operating 24 hours a day,with one oven,half a million,75 years,6 million,450 years,obviously impractical.So an increase in scale is justified,so distribute the six million between the thirteen most prominent camps,461,538 each,now we have 5.76 years working 24 hours a day,and each year it produces 17.60 tons of bone fragments,this is based upon 80 minutes per body,too quick by todays standards.There may be flaws in my maths but i hope that you can see my point.All of this is in isolation,we must make provision for the time taken to kill the victims,the man power involved in the process,the guards to guard them,the supply of foodstuff,general logistics,the 101.38 tons of bone to be disposed of,trains to carry the victims,all of this and fight a war on two fronts at the same time,if any-one else would care to crunch some numbers,to find the true scale of the effort involved ,we can destroy this enourmous lie absolutely dead in its tracks. 21
Posted by john on March 02, 2009, 09:05 AM | # Here’s a documentary about Leauter. Quite interesting, made by a jewish guy. Not quite a documentary actually, some actors were used. Highlights include Shapiro’s eye’s and Fred’s ghost, also the barefaced lie by the jewish chemist. The beggining is classic jew. 22
Posted by Valerian on March 02, 2009, 04:13 PM | #
I’m assuming your an American just like me; if you are then you know how in high school we were taught how the Holocaust was a factual event in history and they even give it a special place in their curriculum. The sheer uprightness displayed in American teachers is rather profound in the first place so the Holocaust was like a tool they used to bludgeon our heads with indoctrination. The intellectual and popular character of modern civilization is built on the events that happened during and after World War 2 and this is the major foundation for all modern discourse on any subject in history; even Greek civilization is looked through the lens of modern civilization. What makes us so different from the rest of the world is because we question the events that happened during this time and we have a lot of different values that those people out there will find hard to understand for a while. My mind is freed up from all those webs and entanglements and just like Fred Scrooby, I have German in myself as well and I too am outraged by the blood libel against Germans; this is also considering how remarkable a people they are. 23
Posted by j on March 02, 2009, 05:29 PM | # In june 1944 Eichmann and his office organized the deportation of Hungarian Jews to Auschwitz. The names, the trains, the arrivals, etc. are fully documented. Some 600 thousand Hungarian Jews were sent in sealed cattle wagons to Auschwitz. When Auschwitz was liberated, about 30,000 famelic Hungarian Jews were found still alive. Where are the rest? There is no doubt that the extermination of Hungarian Jews was a highly organized, well documented, precisely executed operation. It was done on orders from above. The above commenter rightly says that German soldiers or bureaucrats did nothing without orders. The killing of Jews was well organized, very fast and efficient. After the war, all the Germans involved said that they were following orders. Even Eichmann. I for one believe they said the truth. 24
Posted by Valerian on March 02, 2009, 05:45 PM | # Show us your sources for what you just said, Mr. J. 25
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 02, 2009, 07:54 PM | # How come it can’t be debated, J? How come only one side can speak if it’s true? What is the other side, the side that claims it espouses the truth, afraid of? Why are France, Germany, Austria, Belgium, Spain, now Argentina it seems, and all the others, in Jewish lockdown on this subject? Why can everything else be debated but not this? 26
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 02, 2009, 08:05 PM | # The rhetorical questions I pose above to J can’t be answered by him or anyone else, other than to say we’re in Jewish lockdown because the Jews have something to hide. Three guesses what that something is. In France alone a huge amount of scholarly material has gone unpublished because of the Jewish/communist lockdown and an unknown but likely also huge amount of research has been prevented. The Jews (and communists) don’t want this subject investigated by scholars. Only someone afraid of being found out a liar takes that position. That position is indefensible and all by itself requires thinking individuals to conclude the so-called Holocaust didn’t happen as claimed. Does J favor repealing all laws punishing the questioning of the standard version of the Holocaust story? 27
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 02:23 AM | #
Now that is flatly untrue. I’ve designed far more efficient and quicker methods on the back of a paper napkin. (A morbid pursuit, but so is the entire Jewish holocaust industry, which elicited my design) So it’s WWII and we’re Germans looking to exterminate Jews. We put them on train cars (no biggie, since this is what the Germans actually did). We drive the train up to a depression, where the tracks lead underwater. We evacuate the German personnel from the train, and push it into the depression, submerging it for half an hour. We haul it out and dispose of the bodies. This is far more efficient than J’s method: 1) No messy, expensive Zyklon B is needed, so the corpses can be put to some useful task like animal feed. In any event, the bodies can be handled immediately, with no danger of contamination to German personnel. 2) No enormously expensive death camps needed. No vast mechanized death apparatus needed. No bureaucracy needed. 3) No millions of “holocaust survivors.” 28
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 02:31 AM | # Let’s get one thing straight about “holocaust denial,” by the way: I do not assert that the Jewish holocaust didn’t happen. I assert that the story is absurd on its face. There’s a big difference. The story is preposterous. It is not a story that makes sense, that I am denying. It’s a story that’s absurd and I find un-compelling. I don’t find the story of the Exodus compelling, either, or any of the fables of the Old Testament. Am I a “bible-denier” now? 29
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 02:44 AM | # J, Mangan protected you from my questions at his blog (I’ll take a wild guess and speculate that he’s frightened of Jews, quaking-in-his-boots-pissing-his-pants intimidated), so I’ll ask you here: Real people is uninteresting. In Latin American teleteatros (soap operas) all the actors look Swedish or Russian. In American soap operas all the middle class people is African while downstairs is peopled by Whites. It is a convention, everybody knows that it is only entertainment. Tell us all about the Israeli media, J. Arabs run the show in the fantasy world created by the Israeli media? Arabs are the essence of “cool” there? Or maybe some other group, that not from the majority Israeli demographic? http://mangans.blogspot.com/2009/02/your-anti-racist-seal-of-approval.html 30
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 02:48 AM | # How about advertising, J? Does every Jewish girl have a negroid on her arm in beer commercials in Israel? Do Jewish girls cavort with negroids on a regular basis in programs aired on Israeli TV? 31
Posted by some guy on March 03, 2009, 05:46 AM | # I hope GW will let this comment through.
The comment you refer to said that Soviets never did anything without orders from above, while the Germans were notable for their initiative.
Argument by assertion. In an entire thread devoted to establishing that there is precious little documentation or evidence of “organization” this won’t due.
That’s what is being asked: what actually became of them. People are not satisfied with “The Germans obviously must have killed them.” You’re a remarkably arrogant bastard, J. I can accept that it might be tough going, but you have never demonstrated any concern about the issues the blogs you visit raise, yet you expect to be taken seriously. Why should anyone care about you when you so clearly care so little about anyone else? Perhaps it really is as some Karin Friedman lady recently said, that you jews are hopelessly incapable of realizing no natural law requires anyone to care about more you than about anyone else (which you incredibly interpret as “hate”). (Personally, I do care: I feel I owe a lot to jews. But geezus, you make it hard for a guy.)
Right. Now combine that with the unquenchable rage so many of you feel and it becomes completely believable that massive numbers of jews were killed, whether in gas chambers or not.
32
Posted by j on March 03, 2009, 06:02 AM | # We drive the train up to a depression, where the tracks lead underwater. Svigor, you have not thought that out to the end. Trains, in WW2, were scarce. GNPs were a fraction of what are in our days. Recently I read that even the German army moved mostly by horse carriages, as mechanized transport was lacking. The Polish fought with cavalry units. It was another world, not so easy to imagine. Not a world where valuable, irreplaceable trains could be just sunk and forgotten. There is another aspect. Nazi ideology maintained that Jews hated physical work, that they did not work but exploited others. So they did not just killed them but killed them by hard work without food. Auschwitz was surrounded by factories and quarries, where Jews were worked and starved to death. Of those who were not killed after the first selection, the majority may have died of physical and mental extenuation and disease. Dysentery meant death in two or three days. No one seems to want to answer the question what happened to the 3 million Polish Jews the Germans found when occupying Poland, and what happened with the Hungarian Jews transported to Auschwitz in sealed cattle wagons. 33
Posted by danielj on March 03, 2009, 06:37 AM | # Svigor, you have not thought that out to the end. Trains, in WW2, were scarce. Not so scarce they weren’t able to complete the largest population transfer in human history. Recently I read that even the German army moved mostly by horse carriages, as mechanized transport was lacking. Where? Source please? I’m pretty sure they fought in tanks and on foot. There is another aspect. Nazi ideology maintained that Jews hated physical work, that they did not work but exploited others. Nazi ideology, in this case, is completely aligned with simple fact. Jews were overrepresented in ‘creative’ roles in Germany as they are in America. So they did not just killed them but killed them by hard work without food. I thought they killed them in gas chambers? Why did Auschwitz have hospitals, a post office, a pool and housing if they were going to starve them to death? You think the Germans were that fucking hell-bent on teaching the Jews a lesson? They must have really loved those little kikes! No one seems to want to answer the question what happened to the 3 million Polish Jews the Germans found when occupying Poland, and what happened with the Hungarian Jews transported to Auschwitz in sealed cattle wagons. Show me where they were missing from. Sources please. Then explain what you think happened. I must warn you in advance that I don’t trust today’s census data so I’ll find the data that was collected during the war, when Jews would have seen it has highly advantageous to lie about the race they belonged to, as quite shaky and unreliable as well. I’ve with Svigor, the story is absurd on the face of it. If it is true, then I say it is comeuppance for what happened in Canaan. 34
Posted by silver (himself) on March 03, 2009, 08:01 AM | #
Good to see you’re finally giving the commies their due. Robert Lindsay has been on a tear about race lately. You can even use whatever racial epithets you like and not get banned. But try defending HR—not its conclusions, just the effort—and watch a man lose all ability to reason. He charged HRists with “supporting” the “greatest dysgenic disaster” (or something like that) in history. I pointed out that they hardly “support” it if they dispute it even took place, which was enough to prompt a speedy deletion. Commies obviously have a massive stake in enforcing conformity. 35
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 03, 2009, 08:37 AM | #
That’s for the European scholars to answer, J, but the Jews for some reason don’t want them getting involved in the debate. How come? Why have the Jews (and communists) forbidden debate? 36
Posted by Sanity Personified on March 03, 2009, 09:44 AM | #
Source: Why the Allies Won by Richard Overy, p.5. WW> Norton, New York, 1995. So J. makes a simple, verifiable statement and he gets showered in abuse for his troubles. You guys are so ignorant that I wonder why he even bothers. 37
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 03, 2009, 10:02 AM | # To “Sanity Personified”: scholars should be allowed to debate the Holocaust claim without fear of punishment. Why have the Jews seen to it they can’t, stifling all scholarship on the issue? That’s the question. You can’t answer it and neither can J. 38
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 03, 2009, 11:10 AM | #
Svi, did Mangan delete comments of yours in that thread at his blog? 39
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 02:12 PM | #
Uhm, as noted above, trains are how they were moved in the Jewish holocaust narrative. So, you’re tearing down your own story now.
Uhm, anyone who’s paid the slightest attention to the history of WWII knows this. It’s the kind of thing you learn by osmosis at blogs, or browsing grognard sites. Where was he abused for his misuse of facts? He was called on his obstinate, arrogant behavior, which is transparent to anyone who deals with him often enough. E.g., where’s his response to my question about Israeli media?
I’ll chalk this one up to a language barrier (who says I’m not a generous fellow?), and repeat that in my back-of-a-paper-napkin design, the trains are recovered within a half an hour, not abandoned. The demand on trains would’ve been lessened by my plan. Instead of rounding up all European Jewry and transporting them to various distant sites in Poland, they would’ve traveled less in my plan; it wouldn’t have taken much to build a submerso-genocide site in each region of Germany. And since the genocide would’ve been carried out in full in roughly the time it took to round up all the Jews, the trains (and personnel) could’ve been returned to military or civil service infinitely sooner.
I see. So the point of the Jewish holocaust really wasn’t genocide. It was torture first, then genocide. Amazing how this sort of specific plan came together without orders. Sorry Ben, but this is too much of a stretch for me. I can buy hive minds, but not telepathy.
Again, this changes the narrative for me. It calls into question the stated goals of the Jewish holocaust. If they didn’t kill them anywhere near efficiently, then I think it’s fair to question whether genocide was their point at all. This CERTAINLY refutes your bullshit about how perfectly efficient the genocide was. Does it not? This is not only a rhetorical question. I’d like an answer from you.
I’d love to know what happened to them. Jews seem to be the ones avoiding finding out as if their lives depended on it. Again, as I implied but didn’t directly state above, I’m not a believer in “the Jewish holocaust didn’t happen.” Just as I’m not a believer in the Jewish holocaust. I don’t believe in either. I just haven’t been given reasons to believe sufficient to a critically-thinking adult. Just thinking out loud here, but Steve Sailer (another quaking-in-his-boots type when it comes to the Jewish holocaust) likes to add the Jewish-inspired and -run “culture of critique” to the plus column for Jews. Hmmm. Where’d that one go for the Jewish holocaust? It’s okay to fondle whitey’s tender bits. But nobody gets anywhere near Schlomo’s. Das is verboten! How ‘bout it Steve? We’re just discussing things openly in a rational manner, right? Isn’t that what the “culture of critique” is all about? There’s even a reward; if sufficient evidence comes to light, I’ll recant and join the orthodoxy. 40
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 02:16 PM | # My mistake, I hadn’t seen where DanielJ had asked for a source. Daniel, it’s common knowledge. Look at the historical figures lines, for example. E.g., German artillery was normally hauled by horse. Not that this changes the fact that Jewry was moved about via train, mind you. This is similarly agreed-upon common knowledge. It’s common to my napkin design, the orthodox Jewish holocaust narrative, and the holocaust revisionist narrative as far as I know. 41
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 02:21 PM | #
I made several comments there, in succession. As far as I can remember, five or six. Only two showed up as of last night. I should’ve been clearer that the question I posed to J here was a bowlderized version, copy-pasted from my second attempt to get the point through at Mangan’s. The original was more blunt and went something like: (J is a Jew living in Israel) [followed by a blunter but not malicious version of the question I pasted in above] I haven’t checked to see if the new version went through. 42
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 02:27 PM | # The Jewish holocaust narrative states that the Germans went to extraordinary (superhuman?) lengths to destroy evidence of their attempt to destroy European Jewry. Is this at all consistent with the claim that Germans wanted to punish Jews via labor and starvation first, to the extent that they built camps to house millions of them? I say it is not. Obviously the facile answer is and will be, “the Germans were nuts” but is that really a sufficient answer? It seems to me like a convenient way to excuse inconsistencies in the Jewish narrative to me, and little else. 43
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 02:29 PM | # I know if I ever set out to kill 11 million people, I’m not going to build houses for them first.
44
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 02:34 PM | #
GW lets all comments through. In my years at this blog, I’ve only seen him delete a handful of comments (in two threads, if memory serves). Actually, I’ve only seen him ban two posters. I don’t know if he’s ever deleted comments. 45
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 02:43 PM | # More food for thought: The more you learn about holocaust revisionism, the more the thought “reasonable doubt” comes to mind. I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m just not willing to convict Germany based on the pathetic evidence offered so far. Jewry is not a credible witness (I’m being nice here), so eye-witness testimony isn’t going to cut it. If I’m a prosecutor, and the only evidence I have that a murder even occurred, much less occurred by the hand of the accused, is the word of a known liar and gangster, then I’m not going to trial. It’s as simple as that. I don’t have a body, I don’t have a scrap of evidence, all I have is the word of a liar and criminal known to have a history of conflict with the accused…I don’t go to trial. And as a juror, I sure as hell don’t render a guilty verdict based on this dearth of evidence. 46
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 02:55 PM | # Another question: If the Germans killed 11 million in death camps, then why are all the “eye-witnesses” and “survivors” Jews? Why don’t we see more “eye-witness” and “survivor” testimony from non-Jews? Or am I wrong? Is there a body of such testimony that I’ve not had brought to my attention? If there is, shouldn’t it be nearly as large as that contributed by Jews? If not, why not? Everyone here knows how lying and deception approaches the level of national sport in Jewry. Allay our fears, if you want us to buy into the orthodox narrative; show us proportional amounts of non-Jewish testimony, and numbers of non-Jewish survivors. Same goes for the itinerant nature of Jewry. It’s easy to imagine Jews fleeing to points east, west, and south during and in the wake of WWII. It’s much harder to imagine non-Jews (as a whole, mind you) doing the same thing. So if we get proportional eye-witness and survivor testimony from non-Jews, it would be much easier to believe. Are the numbers of survivors and their ethnic origins even made public? Last I checked, this seemed like a closely-guarded secret, which seems more consistent with my “holocaust as shakedown” narrative than it does with the orthodox narrative. 47
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 03:39 PM | # Heh. I did a quick Google to find out how many people survived the holocaust. http://www.historiography-project.com/misc/19970901survivors.html Amcha is a Jewish organization. According to them, only Jews survived the holocaust. In fact, Jewishness is written into the definition of “holocaust survivor.” Too funny. So the Germans hated Jews above all others, but they only managed to totally exterminate the non-Jews they rounded up into camps. So I went to the Wikipedia page on the holocaust, and the word “survivor” only appears twice. Both instances are links to the same document - a list of famous survivors! There is no “holocaust survivor” page at Wikipedia, and AFAICT, no real info at Wikipedia about how many survivors there were, much less their ethnicity. The “after the holocaust” page does seem to imply that all the survivors were Jews. A miracle! 48
Posted by Dasein on March 03, 2009, 03:42 PM | #
Maybe we should be calling it the ‘gas libel’. 49
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 03:48 PM | # http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1155581.ece I stumbled on this, which is the first confirmation I’ve read in the mainstream press of the idea that Judaism prohibits counting Jews. This is huge because it casts doubt over the argument for Jewish genocide based on censuses. 50
Posted by Guessedworker on March 03, 2009, 03:53 PM | # Svi, That Times article says:- Stanley Waterman of the institute said that one of the chief factors leading to the discrepancy was that many people did not want to identify themselves as Jewish because of memories of the Holocaust and other persecution. So they lied? Surely not. I mean, no ... never. Not lied ... en masse ... just like that? These people are the soul of our new religion. I’m shocked. Truly shocked, I tell you. 51
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 04:03 PM | # More: Why is it forbidden to count Jewish people?
Crash Course in Jewish History Part 43 - The Jews of Babylon
Some Rules About Counting Jewish Persons
(One wonders if the Jewish penchant for deception and legalism had its origin in the stupidity of Jewish law) I had trouble finding confirmation previously because I was using the word, “census.” “counting Jews” was a much more effective term. 52
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 04:06 PM | # Corrected: Crash Course in Jewish History Part 43 - The Jews of Babylon 53
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 04:10 PM | #
I find the “other persecution” part telling, too, because it presumably predates the holocaust. That means Jews were probably lying before the Great Jewish Excuse for Everything came along. 54
Posted by danielj on March 03, 2009, 04:10 PM | # My mistake, I hadn’t seen where DanielJ had asked for a source. Daniel, it’s common knowledge. Look at the historical figures lines, for example. E.g., German artillery was normally hauled by horse. I meant the source he read. I wasn’t denying the simple fact that horses moved artillery.. I was asking what book he was reading since he had brought it up. It almost isn’t worth debating. 55
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 04:25 PM | #
LOL! I love it. The gas libel it is. I also kinda like my new term for the holocaust (The Great Jewish Excuse for Everything). 56
Posted by Captainchaos on March 03, 2009, 05:26 PM | # Here is a video of a Jew that admits his Holocaust tale is a lie. Does he feel bad about lying? Nah. He says it was the right thing to do. Guess what? He even has a movie deal in the works. Yup, the Jewish director doing his movie interrupted in the middle of the interview with ABC News to defend his protagonist. Can’t make this stuff up. http://vodpod.com/watch/1390011-holocaust-faker-speaks-on-yahoo-video (Hat tip: Reason Radio Network) 57
Posted by Colin Laney on March 03, 2009, 07:25 PM | # Just thinking out loud here, but Steve Sailer (another quaking-in-his-boots type when it comes to the Jewish holocaust) likes to add the Jewish-inspired and -run “culture of critique” to the plus column for Jews. Sailer isn’t that cowardly. Here’s a post of mine that was published, entirely unmolested, at Steve’s blog, February 2007: What is challenged is the existence of *homicidal gas chambers*, and consquently the numbers of Jewish dead. This isn’t completely true. What is challenged is that the Nazis ever intended genocide, the systematic extermination of all Jews in Europe, or all Jews everywhere, that this was a concious plan undertaken by the ruling Party of Germany 1933-1945, and that this resulted in the deaths of approximately 6 million Jews, with gas chambers as the primary instrument of mass murder. ? Lined up against all that are a heap of inconvenient facts: many gas chambers are falsely labelled or reconstructed; Nuremburg eyewitness evidence also has eyewitness testimony attesting to death by mass steaming, mass drowning, mass electrocution in swimming pools, and many more possibilites still more unlikely and in some cases, embarrasing. Standards of evidence and the use of coercion at Nuremburg further pollute the data. ?? While no documents show existence of a Holocaust plan, we do have documents which refer to the ‘Final Solution’ as something which will take place after the war and involve either Madagascar or Palestine. Himmler’s notorious Posen speech is often brought forth as evidence of the Holocaust, but use of the term ‘ausrotten’ as ‘physically exterminate’ will not hold up - the term has been used in a political context as ‘root out utterly’ in the context of competing political parties even in recent German history. The National Socialists prosecuted Amon Goetz, the commandant depicted in Speilberg’s famous picture (a Holocaust movie with no gas chambers, you will notice) and he was not alone. I think there are 150 extant sets of minutes of courts martial of various personnel in camp positions for excesses which were punished quite severely (prison guards in any nation being prone to these), and so on. The most powerful evidence agaisnt the Standard Model that I’ve seen are the large free Jewish populations in Berlin, Frankfurt, and so on - all throughout the war. This, combined with the very plausible evidence regarding typhus, namely that gassed people are not hyperemaciated like the photos of the stacked dead we have seen and that the Allies had destroyed the entire infrastructure of wartime Germany by aerial bombardment, making shipment of food and medicine in sufficient quantities impossible. This is all perfectly consistent with the main challenges to the Exterminationist model I have seen. There are many other anomalies which bring the homicidal intent of the camps into question, too many to list here. Interested parties are directed to wait for the release of various historians from German - modern German - prisons to question them on the subject. ?? I would say you can email David Irving on the subject, but I think the Austrian court system got him to admit that he never saw any planets moving in his telescope. ?? It would be very funny indeed if Irving were to become the last advocate of the “Hitler ordered it and six million were killed in the gas chambers” school of history, but the human story has seen odder moments.
I would say about three hundred thousand total died from the effects of starvation and exposure, but almost all in the last year of the war and almost all because of the Allied bombing campaign which made transport of food and medicine impossible. ?? For Heaven’s sake, the Nazis moved prisoners West with them in the face of the Red Army invasions - for the sake of safety. Even Elie Weisel was given the choice of staying in a camp to await the Red Army or to travel West with the Germans. Which do you suppose he opted for? If it does, than I don’t see your point in attempting to deny the existence of gas chambers, or claim that they were used for some purpose other than killing people. ? Well, we now know that there were no Extermination camps on German soil, as even the Simon Weisenthal center confirms, so it has been established in principal that many German internment camps (all the ones on German soil for intstance) have been misidentified as death camps for propagandandistic ends.?? The gas chambers have only a few years of life left in them, and will soon be as one with the tales of lampshades and soap made from “Jewish Fat”. Katyn Forest, as the Germans told us during war time, was a Russian crime, not a German one. It took forty years for the truth on that to come forward. A more recent mass grave in the Ukraine that has been exhumed has now also been properly relabelled as a Soviet atrocity. Since Stalin was our ally, we couldn’t exactly come forward regarding all the nasty business his Army had been about.?? Such scholarly interest as there still is in gaining a few more years for the Standard Model is taking a new look at the Einsatzgruppen and the Eastern Front. Next year’s movie scripts must come from somewhere. ?? It’s not that people in the camps didn’t die - it’s only that your complaint is more properly addressed to Bomber Harris and the Allied Air Command, rather than with the Germans. They did everything possible to keep their internees alive: Anne Frank - the most famous ‘victim’ of the Holocaust - died of typhus in an infirmary, recieving medical care. How does this fit in with the model of a systematic, planned extermination? 58
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 08:06 PM | # Okay, so Sailer’s intent isn’t the systematic genocide of all holocaust revisionism.
But he has exterminated every post I’ve ever made on the subject. Maybe he was trying to save me from myself. It definitely wouldn’t be the first time I’ve gotten that impression. 59
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 08:09 PM | #
I’ll take your word for it. I’m on dialup. That said, hehe, that’s great. A nice illustration of the empty space where Jewish morality should be. 60
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 08:10 PM | # Hey, where’s J? Israel’s on the other side of the world, but he should be awake by now. 61
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 08:14 PM | # Apparently Mangan and J are both rushing home before the street lights come on. (no, Mangan didn’t approve my comment) 62
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 08:17 PM | #
Wait a sec - so the Poles “debunked” Leuchter, using fake (“reconstructed”) gas chambers? Do I have that right? Are we sure on this? If so, that’s frickin’ hilarious! No, really, if so, that’s flat out funny. :D 63
Posted by Captainchaos on March 03, 2009, 08:22 PM | # Deborah Lipstadt comments on Herman Rosenblatt’s fibs here: http://lipstadt.blogspot.com/2008/12/apples-over-fence-3-new-republic.html Rosenblatt even appeared on Oprah once. 64
Posted by Words of a Jewish Race Realist on March 03, 2009, 08:22 PM | # From a 1908 article in The Atlantic:
—- “You cannot do the Jews and the community at large a greater service than by excluding the undesirable members of their race.” 65
Posted by Lurker on March 03, 2009, 09:13 PM | # Its true the German military relied on horse transport all through WW2. Only the main attacking formations were fully motorized. This was true of most armies at the beginning of WW2. The only fully motorized force in 1939 was the British army. No horse drawn transport, no cavalry. 66
Posted by Lurker on March 03, 2009, 09:24 PM | # I should point out that when I said the Germans relied on horse transport, I’m not talking about long distance strategic movement of troops etc. For that they used the railways, the German rail network being perhaps the best in Europe then and now. It was pretty well designed with military input from the very beginning in the 1800s. The Germans had the use of German railways of course and those of western Europe, their problem was in the east. In Poland and Russia railways were usually broad gauge unlike the standard gauge of Germany and the west. That meant after 1941 the Germans became more dependent on road transport and that included horses. 67
Posted by Svigor on March 03, 2009, 10:23 PM | #
(From Lipstadts’ article, linked above) Let me take this opportunity to add that I don’t think all “survivor” stories are false from top to bottom, or that most even invent things. Memory is a real bitch. There have been many studies showing how unreliable eye-witness testimony is. Combine this with the madness of groupthink, and Jewry’s obvious failings in the moral arena, and it’s easy to imagine that most stories are both believed, and partly false. It seems likely that the narrative emerged from the vividly fertile Jewish rumor mill during the war, and after its end. How many of them actually saw gas chambers? How many could easily convince themselves they had, when they hadn’t? It isn’t like Jews are sticklers for accuracy, especially when accuracy collides with what’s best for Jews. Just look at how fervently Jews today believe in their holocaust, when all they have to go on is hearsay. Tell a white man the moon landings didn’t happen and he’ll probably look at you like you’re nuts, but he’ll probably listen to your explanation, and even entertain it as food for thought. He doesn’t come out with the (metaphorical) knife, or try to put you in prison. 68
Posted by ben tillman on March 03, 2009, 10:46 PM | #
When it comes to race and IQ, there is neither an empirical nor a theoretical basis for supposing that European and Negroid IQ are equal. The Holocaust issue is different. There are theoretical reasons to suppose that mass murder or extermination was contemplated and effectuated. The problem, however, is evidentiary. We were not there. The chain of custody of the “evidence” invariably has passed through the control of perhaps the three greatest perpetrators of falsehood of all time: the Soviet government, the Jewish community, and the U.S. government (though the list is to some extent redundant). It could be true, but I certainly can’t take their word for it. 69
Posted by Lurker on March 03, 2009, 11:04 PM | # Ive seen somewhere a guy who keeps listing “another sad tale of the holocaust”. Where is that? He just takes published survivor stories and picks them apart. For myself Ive noticed there does seem to a pattern in stories Ive read. The Germans arrive in town and commit some atrocity Its never the straightforward ‘line them up and shoot them’ routine, its generally perverse. Standing on one leg until you fall over and die of exhaustion (OK, I made that up, you get the idea) Then the transport to the camp. Selection comes next, the victims always ‘know’ that going to the left (or right) means death and the selection criteria often seem perverse. Its never the obvious; fit and healthy to one side, old and infirm to the other. Its generally long hair vs short, spots or no spots and so on. Again I’m making those up, focus on the general perversity. Dr Mengele often makes an appearance. And so on. The perverse atrocities are always different and the perverse selection criteria are always different. 70
Posted by Lurker on March 03, 2009, 11:30 PM | # Talking of the problem of counting...
5,000-70,000, that’s a rather wide range is it not. I really think its meant to be 50,000. However on Wikipedia, we see that:
That’s a rather staggering range too, can it really not be nailed down any more accurately than that? If that’s the case now, what are we to make of claims based on the pre and post war census with all the upheaval in between. 71
Posted by Colin Laney on March 04, 2009, 01:19 AM | # It could be true, but I certainly can’t take their word for it. There are actually many reasons that it cannot be true, but that is an argument for another time. It should be acknowledged that even Yad Vashem does not hold that there were death camps inside of Germany. This is very significant: every camp that might meet the conditions of the hypothetical death camps just happen to be those which were captured by the Red Army. Putin has already relased documents showing that Stalin was planning an invasion of Europe, just as Hitler supposed. The Russians have not released any of the documents regarding the camps they ‘liberated’. It is not impossible that Putin might be holding on to the greatest trump card in the history of the world. Postulating that the ‘Holocaust’ happened also requires us to ignore the evidence of the Red Cross, which had regular access to the camps. They did not see the events in question. There are also plenty of eyewitnesses who were interred (Rassinier was at Buchenwald, Israel Shahak was at Bergen-Belsen) who saw the ‘Holocaust’ not happening at first hand. Since their case has taken the day with regards to all of the camps captured by the West, there is strong reason to believe that the case you make that begins with the officers in these camps intuiting and carrying out the wishes of their superiors is not sustainable. Part of your case is plausible, that officers in the field understand their broader mandate and pursued it under their individual initiative, but how on earth could the Nazis have known in advance to only kill Jews in only those camps that would later be captured by the Soviets, rather than the Americans or the British? Perhaps the Nazis really did have the Spear of Destiny and could use it to tell the future? But even accepting this - as we now must - do we go on to suppose that the Ahnererbe was sharing occult information with officers in charge of the camps, even morale crushing information about their eventual loss of the war? Finally, we must contrast the hypothetical ‘holocaust plan’ - for which no evidence exists - to the very real American plan for German genocide, JCS 1067. This was - in contrast to the hypothetical plan the Germans were using - very detailed and created much documentation and direct orders to American occupying forces. There is also the case of the American bestseller, Germany Must Perish! , praised in Time magazine, which called for the sterilization and destruction of the German population. In contrast, the Germans made exactly two anti-Jewish movies, neither of which was exterminationist in orientation: Jud Suss, and Der Ewige Jude. Neither were popular with the German public, neither were forced on the public by the Nazi party, and neither were representative of Ufa’s output from 1933-1945. Ufa’s main product during this period were romantic comedies. Compare this with the onslaught of ‘Brave Little England’ movies that clogged American theaters during this time period and ask yourself: which is the totalitarian society? Which government works harder to mold the opinion of its citizenry through film? There was no societal ‘exterminationist’ sentiment, using Ufa’s output as evidence, unlike the United States and Britain, whose citizens were driven into a war psychosis which has not faded to this day. In addition, the Heer was very much an independent organization, quite distinct from the Party and very proudly so. Hitler did not want volunteer troops from other nations in German uniform, for example, but was overriden by his army. These examples - others could be adduced - do not point to an environment for a plausible unspoken meeting of the minds between the Party and the Heer directly. Moreover, the ‘meeting of the minds’ hypothesis cannot account for the prescient German decision to not take exterminationist action against Jews on German soil. That’s a very nice distinction, and would require both explicit directions rather than general ones, and direct foreknowledge of future events, as I have shown. On this second point, nobody questions that Hitler had direct demonic inspiration for his every act, so this precise degree of foreknowledge may be accepted by all parties as generally factual (but only in the general sense; our hard won knowledge of demonology shows that these creatures are not above lying, even to valued human confederates like Hitler). We were not there. The chain of custody of the “evidence” invariably has passed through the control of perhaps the three greatest perpetrators of falsehood of all time: the Soviet government, the Jewish community, and the U.S. government (though the list is to some extent redundant). I hope you are not excluding the British government from that shortlist of the greatest perpetrators of falsehood of all time. Someone invented all those armless Belgian boys and bayonetted nuns, and somebody created those vast camps in which the bodies of those killed by the Germans were converted into margarine. Now, we weren’t there, so we can’t know that they didn’t exist. However, if the stories were false, then their creation and propogation would speak directly to the British character. I am inclined to give Jews the top spot in world falsehood, but I will certainly be willing to argue the case that the silver medal must go to Perfidious Albion. The British government did more than its fair share to silence the truth about Katyn for fifty years, and only relented in the face of declassified Soviet documents, made available by the Russian government. This speaks to the integrity of the entire historiographical caste of the island. I would remind readers that David Irving, one of the few sources one might use to get some sense of what happened during WWII, is not a historian. I have spoken here before on the mafia like behavior of British Conservatives in the case of Lord Aldington and Keelhaul: this should also be considered before the top prize for ‘Great Masters of the Lie’ is awarded: http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=114
The methods the English used to betray those millions are likewise little known:
The coverup of Keelhaul has two broad phases both of which speak to the English character generally and the English governing classes more specifically:
Part II of the coverup, establishing trait permanence of certain features of the English character, involve the heroic investigations and whistleblowing of Count Nicolai Tolstoy - great-grand nephew to that Tolstoy - and his relentless persecution by an establishment of British Conservatives who closed ranks, knowing full well what they were guilty of. Fearing a direct encounter with Tolstoy - whom they rightly feared - they did, in their own Perfidious Albinion way, sue the publisher. Very clever, these Brits. Here’s the offending passage:
I disagree only with Tolstoy’s judgement of this deed being ‘without parallel’ in British history: mass betrayal is a national sport there, like cricket. Germany, Rhodesia, Cyprus - the target hardly matters at all! I think the only people the English haven’t betrayed are the Jews, to whom they fulfilled the promise of the Palestine Mandate as the Jews had been good enough to bring America into the war for them - this being WWI, of course. I forget how many promises the English had to abrogate to get the Mandate into Jewish hands. And lets not even get into what happened to those Boer women and children. Cold blooded duplicity and treachery is the rule in English politics and foreign policy, not the exception. Every single armless Belgian child and bayonetted nun testifies to it. And who can forget the Poles, on whose behalf Britain destroyed civilization? Does anyone imagine that they would have gone on cheerfully torturing and murdering volksdeutsch inside their borders and refused even the most generous offers of peace from the Germans without the upright, truth-telling English there, promising: “Don’t give in now! We’ve got your back.” I imagine the English cackling uproariously when Poland was swallowed by the Soviet maw. Wogs will never learn! I don’t mean to go on and on, but it is always frustrating when a true champion, operating at the top of his game, goes unrecognized by the judges and the international community. So when I saw your short list of Americans, Jews and Soviets as the greatest liars of all time, I felt that I must register a protest. In any real ranking, Jews would take first place, the English second, and the Americans a very, very distant third and fourth place. The Soviets, on the other hand, can only claim an honorable mention in this regard. Stalin didn’t exactly lie about the facts on the ground in his nation, or his intent for the world. It was the American and British press that did this. Roosevelt and Churchill were either exceptionally stupid or monstrously evil in their alliance with the Soviet Union; which of these is the actual case I leave as an exercise for the reader.
Theoretical reason? That’s a bit bold. If you’re playing by Nuremburg rules, I suppose it can be allowed. Germans must prove they did not commit some act that they might have committed? Also, while there may be theoretical reasons that mass murder was contemplated, I don’t see how there can be theoretical reasons mass murder was effectuated. The only reason one might have to believe something was effectuated is evidence. Here’s how your statement reads to me: “There are theoretical reasons to suppose that sexual congress with the devil and flight through the air was contemplated or effectuated by European witch cults over hundreds of years. The problem, however, is evidentiary.” Now, we can’t know that the witch cults didn’t have sexual intercourse with the devil or fly through the air. After all, we weren’t there. The chain of custody of the “evidence” has passed through two of the greatest perpetrators of falsehood of all time: the Dominican Order and the Roman Catholic Religious Organization. It could be true, but I certainly can’t take their word for it. 72
Posted by Templar on March 04, 2009, 01:53 AM | # The chain of custody of the “evidence” has passed through two of the greatest perpetrators of falsehood of all time: the Dominican Order and the Roman Catholic Religious Organization. To the best of my knowledge, the Dominicans actually threw out the vast majority of “witchcraft” accusations they handled due to lack of evidence, actually. 73
Posted by silver (himself) on March 04, 2009, 05:23 AM | # Wintermute, impressive. (I’d say ‘splendid’ but that would just kill the moment.) Almost makes a guy ashamed enough to want to preempt the Day of the Rope. I know it’s mighty presumptuous of me to address you without an intermediary but my point requires explication.
That can’t be true: “meetings of minds” take place. I can’t see how you can possibly argue that such a meeting of minds absolutely could not have taken place in this instance. The motive certainly existed. Of course, “meeting of minds” sounds deliciously demonic and fantastically unbelievable. But most people would recognise it as “one thing led to another and…” Eg Chit-chat—>anger—>decision—>execution—>acceptance—>refinement—>head of steam.
More accurately: “There are theoretical reasons to suppose that the murder of gentile boys for their blood for rituals was contemplated or effectuated by Jews over hundreds of years. The problem, however, is evidentiary.” Look, the whole point was to say that the lack of certainty about the fate of European Jews cannot be taken to mean they must have been killed—as conformists would have it—or that they cannot possibly have been killed—as you would have it. 75
Posted by Robert Reis on March 04, 2009, 08:02 AM | # …I survived (six years of imprisonment in ghettos, labor camps and concentration camps as a child during World War II)… When, as a nine-year-old, I spent a month in Buchenwald, it never occurred to me that those of my fellow-inmates who were Gypsies, Soviet prisoners of war, or Danish policemen arrested for helping the Jews escape, were undergoing experiences that were different from mine…. Ever since, for over half a century, I have not been able to accept the singling out of this one front, horrible as it may have been, as a unique epoch-making event that requires its own grandiose name, its own capitalized dictionary entry, its own academic discipline called “Holocaust studies.”… But the recent, officially accepted revision of the number of Auschwitz victims from four million to a million or so has made me wonder. One of the precursors of denialism, Paul Rassinier, who died in 1967, asked: “Were Jews murdered?” and answered: “Yes, but not as many as one thinks. Were there any gas chambers? Yes, but not as many as one thinks.” ... For those who believe in ethnic cleansing, the leap from resettlement to massacre is not as great as some of us may think; and if the Nazis were, perhaps, no more evil than the Interahamwe of Uganda, the Bosnian Serb paramilitaries led by Karadži? and Mladi?, or the anti-independence militias of East Timor, there is no reason to suppose that they were less so…. Both of my parents survived, and I had no siblings. I have no tattoo (though I sometimes perversely envied those who had them). I was never beaten or starved. After the War I went on with school at the normal grade level. And when I recently visited the Buchenwald memorial site, the foremost thought in my mind – unrepentant cinephile that I am – was to find the location of the barrack where I saw my first movie; never mind that my first screen image was of a smiling Hitler on horseback, introducing a newsreel. The search for the site of the barrack where I actually lived took second place. ... I spent the last months of the War, after Buchenwald, in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp… 76
Posted by Guessedworker on March 04, 2009, 08:36 AM | # WM: Do we laugh or cry? Actually, we consider our own motives and speak what truth we possess thereafter. As much as is possible, we do NOT carry our prejudices into discourse, do not let them infect our striving after Truth nor our relations with our nationalist peers. That is simply a necessity for making progress. Those who will not abide by it are not our friends and colleagues, but are treating us no better than does a Hollywood Jew. Ufa’s main product during this period were romantic comedies. Compare this with the onslaught of ‘Brave Little England’ movies that clogged American theaters during this time period and ask yourself: which is the totalitarian society? Which government works harder to mold the opinion of its citizenry through film? There was no societal ‘exterminationist’ sentiment, using Ufa’s output as evidence, unlike the United States and Britain, whose citizens were driven into a war psychosis which has not faded to this day. The British tribes fought as one, and dedicated everything to victory. The direct cost to the British economy was running at 44% of GDP by 1944. Even the Russians did not match this. This did not reflect a totalitarian system any more than the fact that German factories were still producing consumer goods in 1945 reflected a lack of totalitarianism. In fact, quite the reverse. The British government had no reason to fear its people, and accordingly Churchill, in his great speech delivered on 13th May 1940, could tell them “I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat.” Hitler, however, expressly maintained the production of non-essential items to way-lay public dissent. It should be understood that the theory of air power developed in the inter-war years was predicated in large part on the sapping of the enemy people’s war-will and on creating popular dissatisfaction with the government. This theory proved to be wrong in the case of the Blitz and the Area Offensive (and the misleading American Daylight Offensive). But among the Allies it was not challenged tactically until the Rolls-Royce powered P51B arrived in February ‘44, and Spaatz’s Oil Plan was initiated at the beginning of May. I imagine the English cackling uproariously when Poland was swallowed by the Soviet maw. Wogs will never learn! Oh, really! What honour you do yourself in the historical breach you utterly destroy with the gratuity of such remarks. 77
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 04, 2009, 11:07 AM | # Silver says uncertainty as to the fate of Europe’s Jews doesn’t mean they weren’t put to death as claimed (the claim being millions were gassed, six million specifically): Right, but other facets of the question do mean they weren’t. Silver knows about the following site, but some others reading this doubtless don’t, so it’s a good place to begin your re-education, for any who don’t know the site. Browse it and follow its copious links around the web. Take a few months to do it calmly, reflectively, with an open mind, reading about the various questions concerning the Holocaust, at your leisure. No one — no honest person — will come away still accepting the standard “Holocaust” claims. I received my education in this regard during five months, June through November 2005, without intending to: I had no particular interest in finding out more about the Holocaust or about the Nazis, Hitler, or the National Socialist period in Germany. I accepted the standard story (I understood there were quibbles as to exact numbers of Jews put to death, something I had zero interest in quibbling about: whether two million, three million, five hundred thousand, or five million, it was still a Holocaust). My sole interest in being on blogs at all was today’s race-replacement crisis. I was outraged at the Jews’ pushing the criminalization of Holocaust debate, something that 1) could not be justified on any grounds whatsoever and 2) only served to make thinking people suspect the standard story must not be true, but I did not doubt the standard story, or at least its basics. I took the step of joining a certain other web forum (not CODOH, an unrelated one) not in order to learn about the Holocaust debate but because I had had enough of being called a “fascist” for opposing what is today’s obvious governmental policy of forced race-replacement of whites: exactly how did opposing that make me a “fascist”? I didn’t mind being called one if I was one, but I needed to find out, “Was I one?” I decided I needed to find out once and for all what the other side was getting at in constantly leveling that accusation seemingly for no reason: I needed to find out once and for all exactly why I was not a “fascist” in order to be able to respond definitively to the accusation and dispose of it permanently, or on the contrary exactly why I was a fascist and exactly why, in that case, there was not only nothing wrong with being a “fascist” but everything right with it. So, I was looking to join a “fascist” site to learn what the “fascists” were about and whether I was or wasn’t one and in either case the exact reasons why I either was or wasn’t, when one day at the start of June, 2005, Phil Peterson had a verbal dust-up with a commenter said or implied by Phil to be “of that persuasion,” in one of MR.com’s threads. It came out that this commenter belonged to a certain web-site. I asked what site, and Phil posted the link. It was a forum, and I joined for the above reason. Part of what got discussed there (a relatively small part actually) was truth-telling about the so-called Holocaust, and thus did I receive my education thereon — as well as on other things that affected me profoundly enough that those five months were an intellectual and spiritual revolution for me, one of maybe four major ones in my adult life. What I learned there changed my thinking in huge ways. 78
Posted by silver (himself) on March 04, 2009, 12:06 PM | # WM,
Oh, in that case I ought to apologise. I haven’t been trying to defend a single item from the Standard Model. Forget the Standard Model. I read Faurisson having been well prepped by Irving to bear in mind there’s a whole other side to the entire history of the war—a rather obvious point when you think about it but then that’s half the problem isn’t it. The ‘gas chambers’ then immediately struck me as improbable, even completely idiotic, and the only thing that kept me hanging on was the unquestionable raaaacism of the White Men of the North and the thought of what those bastards would do given half a chance. Forget the Standard Model, forget the ‘gas chambers’. I’m talking about motive, nothing more.
Very well. It still speaks to motive, doesn’t it. Why a resettlement policy? Why any such policy? You know and I know. But again, very well, that’s how it had to be. Very well, put that aside. Now, the war effort takes a turn for the worse. Life starts to get shitty. The troops begin to wonder why they’re even in such a mess. What answer comes to mind? True to their Germanic ways the tendency is to maintain order in the ranks. But the war drags on. Relief does not appear forthcoming. And that ‘answer’ plays on their minds—why should it we doubt that it would have? A man today cannot venture two yards into WN without tripping over the JQ, bumping his head against the JQ, pricking his finger or stubbing his toe on the JQ. Would there have been a fundamental difference then, there, on the front or in the camps in those conditions, conditions ripe for a meeting of minds? I don’t claim to know, but I maintain the possibility exists.
The Times doesn’t say that. Read the “how dare you question” faggotry in the comments on that article to remind yourself of how far gone mainstream opinion is. I don’t think needless interpolations like yours help any.
Touche. But I already know all this. Why are you telling me? I didn’t start it. I can’t undo what happened. I’d have had a few more great uncles hadn’t it happened, but it did. And that’s that. I’m not bitter, that’s life. I don’t like the lies any more than you do. But what’s the answer? Tell the truth, okay, fine, that’s what I do. Reverse race-replacement. Okay, sure. But what more? Revenge? Is that what you want? Refight it all and this time win? Can’t people ever learn anything—the correct thing—from history? Or is it to be winners and losers yesterday, today, and forever on in? To me, history has been grabbing us by the scruff off the neck and screaming into our ears “Build fences—better yet moats—not bridges! Anything but fucking bridges! When bridges collapse people perish!” Good luck with your endeavors, Laney. Try to remember one thing: truth privileges you. It doesn’t privilege schmucks like me. You, with some effort, can ease that ton of bricks off your back. Others, it seems to me, are sure to be crushed by it. Most interesting times are in store, for sure. Scrooby,
That’s not true. I said uncertainty didn’t mean large numbers were definitely not killed. (Forget the gas.) 79
Posted by Svigor on March 04, 2009, 02:06 PM | #
Sorta like Saddam Hussein hiding his WMD in Syria so we wouldn’t find them when we invaded him for being…wait for it…an evil dictator who could unleash his WMD at any moment. Hehehe. You really can fool most of the people most of the time. I remember asking a very motivated defender of the holocaust why didn’t they just round up the Jews and shoot them. His response was that the Germans were too squeamish and soft, and were coming down with post-traumatic stress or somesuch (the same Germans he was calling psychopaths), so they had to find a different method. I pointed out that they’d only need a handful of really nasty, amoral Germans to run the MGs on the trenches filled with Jews, say a few dozen, tops, and surely such could be found. I think the street lights came on shortly after so I never got his reply. 80
Posted by Svigor on March 04, 2009, 02:25 PM | # Said few dozen needn’t even have been nasty or amoral, they could’ve been just Germans willing to undergo post-traumatic stress to get the job done. There are many such men to be found. 81
Posted by Armor on March 04, 2009, 02:30 PM | #
I suppose it was meant to preserve self-existence, because : At least, all of that is true today.
Many obvious things need constant repeating. What someone says to you on a forum isn’t intended for you only.
No revenge, just a stop to race-replacement, and a lot of resettlement. I wouldn’t call that reverse race-replacement, as it doesn’t harm anyone. It just means sending immigrants back home. The Jews themselves are not about to be expelled, but we have to complain about their anti-European race-replacement activism, or it won’t stop.
You are cryptic and melodramatic. I don’t think the whole white world should go, just to protect the feelings of one person who is part African, part European. But people often think that way. For example, an Irish American like Ted Kennedy will support mass immigration from Africa because he can’t be an English American ! 82
Posted by Guessedworker on March 04, 2009, 02:57 PM | # Absurdly enough, it’s going to be Sir Teddy now. 83
Posted by Dasein on March 04, 2009, 03:04 PM | #
The father of a friend of our family’s came home for leave from the Eastern Front to learn that his wife and newborn child had been recently killed in a bombing attack. There would have been a sizeable pool of hardened soldiers with few qualms about exacting their revenge on others, by any method they were told to use. They could also have forced the kapos to do it. With regards to gas, I’m also not sure why (actually, I think I do know) the holocaust dogmatists haven’t presented plans for train cars that could have been used for gassing (or maybe they have and I’ve just not seen it- in any case, it hasn’t received the attention that the diesel gassing vans has). 84
Posted by Dasein on March 04, 2009, 03:27 PM | # Svigor, I think that person you mention was referring to a decision said to have been made after Babi Yar. The reasoning is absurd. What’s easier? To tailor a process around people, or to find people who can handle the work required. Many people can’t stand the sight of blood; doesn’t mean surgery hasn’t been performed for centuries. 85
Posted by j on March 04, 2009, 05:40 PM | # Svigor asks: Where’s his response to my question about Israeli media? Sorry for the delay, but I work for my living and not always am available. Regarding Israeli media, it is not different from the American one. You see mostly beautiful, young, healthy, Nordic looking people. Africans and Arabs are invisible. We have some 200,000 Ethiopian immigrants (their ancestors converted to Judaism a thousand years ago) and their average IQ is the same as Ethipians in general (see Lynn). Much resources have been invested in sending them to universities, to officer courses and so on. Also they receive free housing to avoid the creation of African gettoes like say, Detroit. There is a large effort to show them favourably in the media, but contrary to a commenter here, our Africans show no talent whatever for the show business nor sports. You have to understand, Svigor, that this country is in a permanent state of war, so no ablebodied fighting man is rejected. No love is involved. Ethiopian soldiers have started to fall in our latest wars in Lebanon and Gaza. Regarding the Holocaust, I dont know from where you get the idea that gas chambers were the main killing method. According to testimonies and common sense, two or more thousand people crowded in an hermetically closed room will suffocate in short time. Sometimes the Zyclon gas was not available but everybody died anyway. It took more time. The gas they used was a common insecticide gas, it was a rather por poison, but is what they had at hand. Much of the immates in Auschwitz died of infectious disease, and in those pre-penicylin times, the Germans were panicked that the camps become centers of epidemies. People continued to die in large numbers even after the liberation of the camps. I dont understand why svigor and others try to deny the Holocaust. The German people does not, they sincerely repented and paid reparations and are decided to avoid repeating it. Hitler brought destruction and much suffering to the Germans themselves, think of the millions uprooted from Silesia and the Sudeten, who in his mind would want him again? 86
Posted by danielj on March 04, 2009, 07:01 PM | # The German people does not, they sincerely repented and paid reparations and are decided to avoid repeating it. Yes, but did the ancient Israeli’s pay reparations to the victims of the Canaanic Holocaust? Did they promise never again? 87
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 04, 2009, 07:24 PM | #
In America it’s the exact opposite, J, thanks directly or indirectly to the Jews. The media depict this country as 99.999999999999999999999999% Negro and 0.0000000000000000000000001% white. That’s the Jews doing that. It’s the preference of Jews involved in media, and it’s being imposed by coercion on any Euros in the media whose natural inclination would be the opposite. How do the Jews coerce it? By, among other ways, the trillion watchdog agencies, governmental and private, they’ve set up to make sure the U.S. gets depicted that way. 88
Posted by Guessedworker on March 04, 2009, 08:12 PM | # Oh Robert, Robert, you’ve gone and upset that man Auster. Stanley Womack espied the latest Austerism and mailed me the link:-
“Any white gentile” ... “eliminate the Jews” ... “the exterminationist anti-Semites at Majority Rights.” Not a lot of room for subtlety in Larry’s thoughts, are there? Do you suppose that one or two of his readers might ask themselves whether his presentation of us in so simplistic and singular a form says more about him than us? 89
Posted by danielj on March 04, 2009, 08:37 PM | # Do you suppose that one or two of his readers might ask themselves whether his presentation of us in so simplistic and singular a form says more about him than us? Shut-up! ANTI-SEMITE!!! 90
Posted by danielj on March 04, 2009, 08:41 PM | # Any white gentile who recognizes the unregenerately malign character of the Jews—and surely Hitler recognized it, as well as writing a book about it and publicly promising to eliminate the Jews—has only one logical option: to eliminate the Jews Come on Larry, this fact - assuming its truth - doesn’t necessitate extermination. There are multitudinous other options that a sane Gentile might avail himself of in the endeavor. One perfectly reasonable possibility being the expulsion of the resident Jewry, and if I’m not mistaken, this has been the preference historically. Larry thinks in black and… No, no… Larry thinks in Jew and white and there is no room for subtlety in that infinitesimal area of his brain that is reserved for nuance and tolerance of dissenting of views. 91
Posted by Svigor on March 04, 2009, 09:29 PM | #
No need to apologize. We’re used to hit-and-runs where people spout off and then don’t return. Eventually we get gun shy. A quick note that you’d be back would’ve taken 5 seconds.
How is this not different from the American media? You’re contradicting your own point, made at Mangan’s. African’s aren’t invisible here, J, they’re plastered all over the media. They’re the new “cool.” This is equivalent to having Arabs as the new “cool” on Israeli television, banging Ashkenazi girls and playing philosophers, statesmen, poets, scientists, technologists, etc., but never terrorists, criminals, thugs, perverts (roles reserved for Ashkenazi men) etc. Elected an Arab president lately, J?
Those 200,000 Falashas are a walking PR move. I doubt the rest will make it into Israel (why bother, when Israeli apologists can (and do) make hay with the 200k already in Israel?) Here’s the difference - the Falashas won’t be welcomed into Israeli private or political life, and that’ll be the end of it. See, Jews don’t have to worry about Jews using blacks as an instrument of race-replacement against fellow Jews. There’s no one to “Jew the Jews,” if you follow. Sure, there’ll be a Jewish Israeli movement to assimilate the Falashas…just big enough to make the papers (in English mostly, right?). The Falashas are excluded from Israeli Jewish society, and will continue to be so.
Wikipedia says there are 120k Falashas in Israel, not 200k, which is little more than 1.5% of Israel’s population. Doesn’t really compare to our situation, even in raw numbers, let alone context. I’d be interested in knowing the intermarriage rate of Falashas and real Jews.
We have that in common. At least you get to win yours. Well, for now anyway. You’ll have to expel the Arabs, or surrender eventually.
South America, Africa, and Asia are teeming with able bodies who’d be willing to fight your wars for you.
None of this really addresses the fact that my paper napkin design is far superior.
What does finding the holocaust story laughable have to do with wanting Hitler back? I’m an American. I’d prefer something much closer to what the American founders envisioned to what we have today, or Hitler. Well we haven’t gotten very far with this exchange, but we have established that your statement that the alleged genocide was remarkably “efficient” was totally absurd. A pothead with ADD could come up with better. 92
Posted by Svigor on March 04, 2009, 09:35 PM | #
What would I do without Auster the Yid to tell me, and everyone who’ll listen, what I believe. Thank goodness for Auster. And thank goodness for his typical Jewish cult-of-personality, where he sits us all at his knee and tells us how it is - no need for discussion. Well, unless you consider carefully-selected and -reproduced fawning praise to be discussion. No Auster, not all Jews are made enemy by evolution. But you were. 93
Posted by Svigor on March 04, 2009, 09:49 PM | #
Indeed. I forgot how millions were stuffed alive into ovens. That one really comes back to haunt the orthodox, as soon as anyone with two brain cells to rub together sees a photo of the ovens in question. Ever seen those ovens, J? Want to take a guess how many Krauts it would take to shove me, alive, into one? Hint: bring friends. 94
Posted by Desmond Jones on March 04, 2009, 09:54 PM | # Auster endorses an elimination (the act of expelling or throwing off;) policy, Robert Locke’s, transfer option. http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/006235.html
95
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 04, 2009, 09:57 PM | # I wonder if this last post by J was by the same guy who usually posts under that name — the quality of the English this time was noticeably less good. (I had understood J to have been American originally, then to have moved to Israel as a young adult. If so, his English should be perfect, and I don’t recall noticing him make lots of mistakes previously, but in that last comment he made lots of them.) 96
Posted by weston on March 04, 2009, 10:19 PM | #
Congratulations. You’ve won the “silver” award for most glaring self-contradiction in the shortest period of time. This is the exact opposite of what you said over at Mangan’s.
I found myself asking that very question after one of his anti-anti-semite rants a few years ago. I’m sure his large Jewish readership eats these performances up, but a perceptive white may have a seed of doubt planted by one of these two-minute hates. Keep doing what you’re doing, Larry. 97
Posted by Lurker on March 04, 2009, 11:58 PM | # Colin - I don’t think I’m quite up to speed as to why the English are supposed to have betrayed Poland and rejoiced at its rule by the USSR. What benefit did they derive from this (apart from some very perverse satisfaction)? Britain ended WW2 with 100,000s of dead and crippled, massive debts, ruined industry, housing and infrastructure. In absolute and relative terms the British of all classes were less powerful, less influential, less wealthy than before the war. (In fact very much like post-WW1) All this just to see Poland wrecked. If that’s a successful outcome in English terms one is left pondering just what a failed outcome would look like. A few more successes like this and Britain would resemble Somalia. Your implication seems to be that this is what they wanted, being the arch liars of the situation, getting the conflict started and all. The US seems the clear beneficiary, yet we are supposed to believe they were more innocent in this than the British. It would make sense if the US and Britain were being manipulated by other groups to behave against their own interests, but the English themselves? Whats in it for them.? Thats like crying racism or anti-semitism as a driver of mass sustained action, true for some individuals but for large numbers of people I don’t buy it. Ive met British people appalled at the betrayal of Keelhaul (if they’ve heard of it) and of Rhodesia etc Unfortunately we aren’t the ones giving the orders are we. 98
Posted by j on March 05, 2009, 03:20 AM | # that the alleged genocide was remarkably “efficient” was totally absurd. Svigor, the elimination of 800 years old Polish Jewry, a well organized, compact community, in 2-3 years in the middle of a world war can be considered an organizational feat. The deportation of HUngarian Jewry in just 5 weeks in Summer 1944 by Eichmann was - I dont want to use the word efficient, which has positive connotations. All these events are extreemely terrifying, no other people ever suffered it, and you have to understand that it is what motivates people like Abe Foxman. I find it paradoxical that Prof. Macdonald, an otherwise thinking intellectual, does not understand it. 99
Posted by j on March 05, 2009, 03:32 AM | # To end my comments and go to work, I want to say that I too am against the Holocaust Cult. It is unhealthy for a people to bealways remembering it defeats, its failures. Normal healthy peoples glorify their heroes and battles won, an when they have no heroes, they invent them. I think the Zionist attitutude to the Holocaust after the war was healthy, it was the glorification of Mordechai Anilevitch who led the Warshaw Getto’s uprising, and Hanna Szenes, who parachuted into Nazi occupied Hungary to organize the escape of the Jews. It is sick for a whole people to concentrate to much on the dead and the victims. The Holocaust was the worse ever defeat for us the Jews, and it would be much better for us to somehow forget it. We need to go on living and build our country. But that is my personal opinion only. 100
Posted by White Western Man on March 05, 2009, 04:17 AM | #
That’s a very good and healthy attitude j, and I wish other Jews felt the same way. But the fact that many Jews actually immigrate away from Israel rather than to it is dispiriting. The last thing we need in the USA is more Jews showing up and expecting to be let in to America, and with it the continuing and highly unjust Jewish domination of America’s key economic and cultural sectors despite their status as a small ethnic minority. If this happens the USA will degenerate even further in to more of a Jewish dictatorship than it already is. The USA is a democracy, a system where the ‘majority rules,’ and what we have now is a situation where an ethnically Jewish minority rules and runs too many of America’s most critical sectors - thus America is undemocratizing due to too much Jewish power and influence and is becoming similar to the first 50 years of the Soviet Union where Jews basically ruled unopposed. A permanent Jewish state run by and for Jews is the only answer to the Jewish Question, a nation where at least 95% of world Jewry lives and works; the times of wandering around and acting like glorified gypsies needs to come to an end for the Jews if they truly want peace, prosperity, and peoplehood instead of hate, paranoia, chaos, and dissolution. The lack of a homeland for Jews is a precarious life of exile, dependence, alienation, and parasitism, and also often an existence where Jews have so often provoked major hostility by trying to dominate economic matters and/or culturally subvert the peoples they settle amongst - just witness the rising anti-Jewish sentiment in the USA as an example of what happens when Jews (a small ethnic minority) gain way too much power, as has occurred in so many other nations, regions, cities, and territories where Jews have settled in sizable numbers throughout history. Jewish writer Jeffrey Goldstein wrote: “Exile was the disease, and Israel was the cure.” Similarly, Ben-Gurion said:
The Zionist A. D. Gordon wrote:
Also,
—- Those quotes, all of them by Jews and for Jews, sums up the case for Israel nicely. Yes, despite the fact that I am strongly anti-Jewish (anti-Jewish Diaspora, actually) I support Israel as a permanent Jewish state, though they need to solve the Palestinian Question and stop being so crazily belligerent toward other neighboring nations and peoples if they want to be looked upon more favorably by the world community. 101
Posted by danielj on March 05, 2009, 06:43 AM | # All these events are extreemely terrifying, no other people ever suffered it I’m gonna have to call Shenanigans on that one. Again, what about the Canaanites? 102
Posted by Robert Reis on March 05, 2009, 07:47 AM | # Dear J, The nightmare you are covinced happened is only possible if you accect to unrealistic assumptions. 1. Jews are extremely stupid. “Oh golly, the Nazis are coming. Let’s wait for them! 2. Jews are cowards. “The Nazis have killed Granny, Wifey and the kids in that gas chamber over there. I’m gonna work even harder as a slave.” Cheers, RER 103
Posted by Robert Reis on March 05, 2009, 07:53 AM | # Dear J, The nightmare you are covinced happened is only possible if you accept two unrealistic assumptions. 1. Jews are extremely stupid. “Oh golly, the Nazis are coming. Let’s wait for them! 2. Jews are cowards. “The Nazis have killed Granny, Wifey and the kids in that gas chamber over there. I’m gonna work even harder as a slave.” Cheers, RER Sorry, I was not wearing my reading glasses. 104
Posted by silver (himself) on March 05, 2009, 07:54 AM | # Armor,
It was a rhetorical question intended as a reminder of the intense jew-hatred that flourished at the time (no, not in every individual, perhaps not even in a majority, but in a significant portion); I know perfectly well why it flourished then and why it wants to today.
It’s reasonable to assume so when a reply is directed to you.
Armor, you don’t need to educate me. From what I’ve seen, it’s you who is the initiate here, not I. Now, to correct you, stopping immigration, sending immigrants home and resettling racial incompatibles (a crucial step, which you have left out) is “reversing race-replacement.”
With good reason, too. Look, you’re French. When you read Colin Laney, does it stir something in you? Something deep, really deep? Does it make the entire history of your people flash before your eyes, as is said to happen to an individual just before the point of death? Does every lie, every distortion, every meme come sharply into focus and loom large? The Jew has dethroned the Germanic, humbled him, dispossessed him, and the forces he has unleashed threaten to permanently extinguish him. His consolation is the complicity of his own kind in their destruction. But can any force can hope to finesse the pent up rage? Melodrama, Armor, is entirely warranted.
I agree. But what is the formula that will avert one disaster without causing a new one? Is there any? 105
Posted by Dasein on March 05, 2009, 08:07 AM | #
J does a bad job of defending the official version, but these are not assumptions he had to make. Point 1 would apply to any people the Germans conquered. And if the official version is correct, what would have been the reason for Polish Jews to have believed they would be exterminated? With regards to point 2, were there any metrics for measuring productivity in the camps? Did it increase after family members disappeared (due to said gas chamber or typhus)? These assumptions are not fair. 106
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 05, 2009, 08:08 AM | #
One-hundred percent bullshit by Silver, as usual. (For any who might not “get it,” he’s saying here that facing facts about the current racial crisis puts him as a “Serb” in, essentially, the category of non-whites. With that typical Silver-style harping he’s just proving he’s a Pakistani or God knows what, and certainly no Serb. No Serb ever born thought that way about himself racially. Doesn’t exist, never did, and never will. This person is not of European ancestry. It’s clear he’s also not Jewish. What he is, Paki or whatever, we’ll just have to keep guessing.) 107
Posted by Colin Laney on March 05, 2009, 08:32 AM | # It’s clear he’s also not Jewish. This is not at all clear. A Serb would not be so vehement and tenacious in trying to aggravate the Med/Nord split on a White bulletin board, nor would he show such obsessive paranoia about Whites. Also, a Serb would not be so determined insinuate that the Holocaust really did happen in the teeth of massive amounts of evidence that it didn’t. His eloquent and gloating tone regarding how the Jew has humbled and dispossessed the German is not typical of Serbian prose, in my experience. Finally, his skill with language and with psychological operations (in plain language, he is an unusually effective troll) also mitigate against Serbianness. There is something familiar about Silver’s prose style. He reminds of someone I read over at Mencius Moldbug’s blog. How about it, Silver, have I seen you over there? 108
Posted by Captainchaos on March 05, 2009, 11:35 AM | # j: “All these events are extreemely terrifying, no other people ever suffered it, and you have to understand that it is what motivates people like Abe Foxman.” I’ll cut to the chase as I am wont to do: Abe Foxman wants Jews to be able to enrich themselves in a White milieu, he wants to hide behind the pant leg of the White man while Whitey protects Israel, and he wants to sap the vigor of the White man by encouraging race-replacement, pathologizing White group consciousness and encouraging miscegenation. That is not a sustainable course of action, am I wrong? You Jews had better make up your fucking minds or we will make it up for you. We will not go quietly towards the grave. “I find it paradoxical that Prof. Macdonald, an otherwise thinking intellectual, does not understand it.” MacDonald fears a hostile Jewish elite will oppress and slaughter Whites in America just as it did in the Soviet Union. 109
Posted by Re:CaptainChaos - Official Jewish Policy of Race R on March 05, 2009, 11:51 AM | #
Exactly. And a recently Israeli government communique says so openly and bluntly: “Enhanced ties between Jewish communities and the Hispanic and Afro-American communities in the US” The same communique also says:
Bolded sections: yes the current economic crisis is a blow to Jewish economic status because what made Jews have high economic status was all phantom Jew-funnymoney to begin with; notice how they speak of “growing competition” - with who? More racially aware Whites, or maybe some Jew-aware East Asians too; “eroding philanthropy” - again, this system is crashing because it was fed by Jew-funnymoney for a long, long time; ” the diversion of contributions to outside the [Jewish] community” - aw, the poor Jews have noticed a big dropoff of non-Jewish dollars funneled to Holocaust museums and various other Jew charity scams. Boo hoo. 110
Posted by White Western Man on March 05, 2009, 12:04 PM | #
I fully share these fears. Has anyone noticed how ‘vibrant’ and ‘multicultural’ the American military has increasingly become? I’d say America’s armed forces are now made up of at least 1/3 ethnic minorities (Black and Hispanic), and growing. The U.S. military has also recently started offering non-citizen immigrants a path to citizenship if they join up. I sometimes have nightmarish thoughts of America’s rapidly darkening military one day starting to round up and American pro-White activists under the direction of America’s Jewish elites in a much touted ‘campaign to stamp out intolerance.’ Just thinking about that scenario makes me shudder. American Whites (whether racially aware or not) need to start rejoining the military in MUCH larger numbers before it becomes even more taken over by Blacks and Hispanics. Luckily America’s local police forces are still largely White, but don’t forget that only the rapidly darkening military has access to the real big guns and the know-how to use them. 111
Posted by Templar on March 05, 2009, 01:11 PM | # Luckily America’s local police forces are still largely White, but don’t forget that only the rapidly darkening military has access to the real big guns and the know-how to use them. Aren’t the actual combat forces of the American military still mostly white though? I was under the impression that non-whites tended to fill out the ranks of support personnel for the most part. 112
Posted by Svigor on March 05, 2009, 02:43 PM | # Svigor, the elimination of 800 years old Polish Jewry, a well organized, compact community, in 2-3 years in the middle of a world war can be considered an organizational feat. It was an organizational feat. So is tying one’s shoes. But the story does not tell of efficiency. It tells of inefficiency, to put it mildly. The deportation of HUngarian Jewry in just 5 weeks in Summer 1944 by Eichmann was - I dont want to use the word efficient, which has positive connotations. You’re still making my point for me. The deportation was efficient, and with minimal added planning and effort, the mass execution would’ve been just as efficient. Instead it went totally pear-shaped. (“efficient” generally carries the connotation of the process it’s used to describe) All these events are extremely terrifying Now that I’ll grant you. But being terrified depends only on believing the story, not on it being true. Hell, I get a bit worked up after watching a scary movie. no other people ever suffered it No one person or people’s experience is ever identical to another, but I think it’s arrogant of Jews to set themselves up as the Saints of Suffering. Russians got it pretty badly in the gulags. The Mongols left mountains of skulls (men, women, children) behind them. and you have to understand that it is what motivates people like Abe Foxman. I find it paradoxical that Prof. Macdonald, an otherwise thinking intellectual, does not understand it. No. The Abe Foxman gene was in Jewry long before the holocaust. It was behavior like Foxman’s that set it in motion. Talk about Paradoxes. Whatever it is, there’s something in Jewish DNA that prevents them from introspection. They just have to keep robbing goy pockets. They just have to keep attacking. My guess is it’s closely bound to the essence of Jewishness, that same essence that has compelled them to keep their peoplehood and misanthropy down through the ages. It’s why they fight with everyone, everywhere they go; I suspect that if they stopped, they’d cease being Jewish and be absorbed. This ties into why I think Jews can never be WNs. 113
Posted by Svigor on March 05, 2009, 02:47 PM | #
Especially when you consider that Jews have spent history going ‘round asking for it, whereas Russians do not, and the Mongols’ victims did not. 114
Posted by Svigor on March 05, 2009, 02:50 PM | #
Funny, in that sense the holocaust has a lot in common with your typical Hollywood action flick or television show. Like Batman. The villain always got hold of Batman, and instead of killing him right then and there, he comes up with some hare-brained Rube Goldberg method to “dispose” of him. 115
Posted by danielj on March 05, 2009, 04:43 PM | # Aren’t the actual combat forces of the American military still mostly white though? I was under the impression that non-whites tended to fill out the ranks of support personnel for the most part. They are and Whites have died in numbers disproportionate to their percentage of the population despite the insistence of the folks on the left that minorities are suffering and dying disproportionately. I remember a lot of hip hop songs that came out over the last few years claiming that very thing so I did some investigating and discovered that the exact opposite was the case. You can easily find the statistics on the internet. Here is a chart on deaths by the Brookings Institution: Iraq Losses by Race from a good blog on the subject of race and the military. 116
Posted by Templar on March 05, 2009, 05:02 PM | # Here is a chart on deaths by the Brookings Institution: Iraq Losses by Race from a good blog on the subject of race and the military. Ouch. 117
Posted by Lurker on March 05, 2009, 09:40 PM | # Having read and seen Black Hawk Down - that would appear to conform to the above. The more elite the unit, the whiter it is. Hence Delta being 100% white, Rangers about 99% white. 118
Posted by danielj on March 05, 2009, 09:52 PM | # Having read and seen Black Hawk Down - that would appear to conform to the above. The more elite the unit, the whiter it is. Hence Delta being 100% white, Rangers about 99% white. The lead character of the movie (Josh Hartnett’s role) was a convicted pedophile. Just so everyone knows. 119
Posted by Lurker on March 05, 2009, 10:24 PM | # Dan, I believe it was actually Ewan McGregor’s character - Grimes - who was later convicted of something nasty. Grimes is the only fictional American soldier in the movie, he replaces a real person from the book. Dont have it to hand, so no name, sorry. 120
Posted by Templar on March 05, 2009, 11:14 PM | # Grimes represents Specialist John Stebbins, who was apparently convicted of sexually assaulting his daughter in 1999 according to Wikipedia. The two primary Delta characters are somewhat fictionalized as well though, if I recall the book correctly, with their names being changed, and the real-life inspiration for Eric Bana’s character being blond and sporting a flattop haircut at the time of the battle. 121
Posted by danielj on March 06, 2009, 06:22 AM | # Dan, I believe it was actually Ewan McGregor’s character - Grimes - who was later convicted of something nasty. Sorry. Should have looked it up first. 122
Posted by last comment on March 07, 2009, 12:06 PM | # I didn’t realize my last comment got through. I thought GW had banned me. He may as well. I’m pretty much through with you all. I apologize for wasting your time and I’m sorry I’ve wasted my own. Scrooby,
I can only laugh. What you have proven to me, beyond any cause for me to doubt it, is your essential insanity. But that deserves my pity, not my derision. You need help Fred. Your delirium is doing neither you nor your—I’m sorry to say—rather pathetic movement any good at all.
That is just so laughably untrue it would be mind-boggling it was written didn’t desperation necessitate it. Funnier yet, I’ve stated on numerous occasions that I’m half Greek yet you just ignore that. Even funnier than that…oh forget it, it’d just go over your head.
Wrong and completely meaningless in any case. It’s staggering how ignorant you are of the most basic of racial realities, Fred. Sad, too. Anyway, I hope you get your head right soon. Some of your words have angered me greatly, but I think in your heart of hearts you’re a decent man. It’s troubling what your passions can reduce you to though. I don’t think there’s anything more you and I need to say to each other. Farewell, Fred. Laneymute,
No, not by half he wouldn’t. I really wouldn’t have expected you to be as deluded as Fred, WM. I certainly wouldn’t have expected you to be as deceitful (if that is what it is). The truth is, there’s not a southern European of any variety of a certain generation here that doesn’t remember having to fight for his right to party. If you didn’t know that, now you do. If you did, or if you could imagine it, then cease with the disingenuousness. If you cared to read a little closer, you’d have noticed I’ve sought to mitigate the split (which nature, not I, created), not “aggravate” it—though if you truly understood your racial interests, and were not being deceitful or disingenuous, you’d welcome such aggravation, not bemoan it. Come to think of it, I suspect you do, but do not wish to appear to. And to think it’s I who am accused of psychological operations. (Credit where it’s due: one of your movements few notable successes has been the free advertising you’ve secured by stirring up racialist disquiet in a part of the world it does not properly belong.) And if you’re going to refer me as anything, make it Greek. Phenotypically, you’ll be much closer.
Oh he most certainly would—ever heard of Jasenovac? The revisionist method has been most profitably employed to smash through Serbo-commie fabrications. Such elementary ignorance is not reassuring. Moreover, my insinuations were aimed at urging caution. Why should you want to put all your eggs in that one basket, that there was absolutely, positively no effort at mass murder? Take it from one wise in the ways of psychological manipulation: disappointment will deaden enthusiasm and induce remorse. (You don’t want the rank and file packing it in if HR doesn’t check out do you?)
What experience would that be and why should it count for anything? People who I’d expect to grasp the basics of bell curves should not be making such a fuss about apparent anomalies. To address your point: I wasn’t gloating; I was attempting to characterise the sentiment that is the subtext of this board’s nearly every lament. And I wasn’t attempting to push your buttons: the realizations that led to that terse characterisation were as difficult for me as reading it may have been provocative for you. I note you have neglected to answer the question I posed at its end. Perhaps your answer is akin to Goldfinger’s laconic retort to James Bond: “No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die.”
The PR drubbing that country took throughout the 90s suggests you might be on to something. Must be the Greek in me then. But “troll.” That’s really all it takes, isn’t it. One word and your minions will confidently disregard whatever comes next. It worked like a charm for Rienzi (or JWH as you might know him), that great racialist theorist, most notable for his adumbration of Salter, in whom he saw the opportunity to insinuate himself into white purity by waving around his lab reports. (If he’s reading, I won’t divulge his identity, but I think I’ve seen his pic. If so, he can relax and put away his whiteness certificate; he’s “in” on pheno alone.)
I might have left a solitary comment under “silver” there once long ago. If I did, it was the only time I’ve commented and one of the very few times I’ve even visited. I consider him an irritant and I’m not interested in his (apparently easily refutable) historical theses or his loopy takes on economics and society. Why do you bother with him? My recent now-deleted reply to “mnuez” at SecularRight, who in a now-deleted reply to me derided me as a “nebech” (yiddish for pathetic toady I gather) for being an “ardent Nazi” while the “fanged ones” at MR suspected I was a “closet Jew”, establishes why I once bothered with this blog: those of us who know the truth have a responsibility to state it and to demand policies be based on it, else, in time, not only will the hated northern breed perish, there will quite literally be “neither Greek nor Jew” (as we now are). No room for such views here, however. Not only are we not with you if we’re against you; if we are not one of you we are against you. 123
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 07, 2009, 12:28 PM | # Another piece of one-hundred percent bullshit, from first word to last, by Silver.
I’ll be satisfied if you just shut up and go away. 124
Posted by danielj on March 07, 2009, 01:10 PM | # Another piece of one-hundred percent bullshit, from first word to last, by Silver. I’m not entirely sure that is true. He is right about not putting all our eggs in one basket regarding HR. 125
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 07, 2009, 02:22 PM | # No one here is “putting all our eggs in one basket regarding” truth-telling about the Holocau$t. No one here is putting any eggs in any basket regarding truth-telling about the Holocau$t. Truth-telling about the Holocau$t is truth-telling about the Holocau$t. It’s no eggs in any basket. The legitimacy of opposition to the current forced race-replacement régime hinges in no way whatsoever on what Germany did or didn’t do to the Jews. 126
Posted by Svigor on March 07, 2009, 03:23 PM | # Yeah, Auster can kvetch all he wants, but I see no evidence that MR as a body is passionately attached to HR. Ever notice how no one brings it up? I sure don’t. On those rare occasions when it does, I add my tuppence. Otherwise, it’s a non-issue to me. When zhids like Auster bring it up, I’ll respond. When fellow ethnic nationalists bring it up, I’ll discuss it (Verboten! Zhoo must conform! Only condemnation is acceptable!). I’ve been pretty careful not to put all my eggs in any one basket. Not that danielj was saying otherwise, but like Scroob, I’m responding to silver’s implication, which is saying otherwise. 127
Posted by RE:silver/last comment on March 07, 2009, 04:16 PM | # Silver/last comment, I for one have enjoyed many of your comments here at MR, and I thank you for caring about preserving “the hated northern breed” (Nordic-Northern Euro Whites) as you put it here. A suggestion - since you haven’t been very welcome here (sadly), why not start your own blog or website espousing a new variant White nationalism focused solely on Whites of Mediterranean-Iberian-Italian-Greek origin as was discussed on a recent thread on RL’s blog?—> http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2009/03/01/a-little-black-in-all-of-us/#comments Whites of differing ethnic groups everywhere need to ally and unite under the fairly inclusive banner of the White race if we are to preserve our genetic heritage for the long-term - and obviously Nordics/Northern Euros cannot go it alone. A new movement of White nationalism based upon the genetic and cultural preservation of Mediterranean-Iberian-Italian-Greek Whites would naturally be an ally movement of Nordic/Northern Euro White nationalism. I’d also like to see White nationalists who are Slavic set-up more blogs and websites focused on building up the Slavic White nationalist movement (seems to be growing nowadays). All of these different White ethnic groups - Nordics, Meds, and Slavs, among other White ethnic groups - definitely need to work together more in order to preserve and protect the White race as a whole; we need to immediately cease the infighting amongst ourselves, which only aids those groups which seek to further dispossess us, especially Jews. Whatever you do…I hope you stay well, stay smart, and keep fighting the good fight. In White Unity 128
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 07, 2009, 04:39 PM | # What a dupe this guy is, posting just above. He actually thinks Silver is sympathetic to Euro survival. Wake up, comrade. Silver came here solely to sow discord. Moreover, it’s doubtful in the extreme that Silver is a Euro. 129
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 07, 2009, 04:43 PM | # Furthermore, Silver will show up again under a new name (or possibly under Silver). 130
Posted by Not a dupe (stop acting like such a Jew Scroob) on March 07, 2009, 04:56 PM | #
Add to that list Celts (which are a Nordic-Mediterranean mix according to Grant), various Alpine White groups, etc etc. 131
Posted by danielj on March 07, 2009, 05:07 PM | # Silver came here solely to sow discord. I’m not sure about that either. I think he likes to be contrary and really likes attention (...face it, who doesn’t like attention?) but psychoanalyzing is for Jews. You should start your own blog Silver. You get kinda buckshot when you respond to others instead of having the accuracy of the rifle that I think you are capable of firing. It’s no eggs in any basket. The legitimacy of opposition to the current forced race-replacement régime hinges in no way whatsoever on what Germany did or didn’t do to the Jews. True. Very true. You are 100% correct. 132
Posted by Armor on March 07, 2009, 08:38 PM | # ” Truth-telling about the Holocau$t is truth-telling about the Holocau$t. “ It is more useful than that. I had never paid attention to “holocaust narratives” before. Reading recent threads on MR, especially simple remarks made by Svigor, made me realize how the Jews insult our intelligence when they mention WW2. Sample: “I know if I ever set out to kill 11 million people, I’m not going to build houses for them first.” An example of the debate in France : According to the dreaded Wiki, JM Le Pen was condemned in 1987 to pay 1.2 million Francs (183,200 Euros) for saying this: “I ask myself several questions. I’m not saying the gas chambers didn’t exist. I haven’t seen them myself. I haven’t particularly studied the question. But I believe it’s just a detail in the history of World War II.” What wiki doesn’t say is that the French were also condemned by the media to several years of intense propaganda about the infamy of using the word “detail”. To this day, in some circumstances, it may feel dangerous to use the word “detail” in public conversation, and we have to think of other ways to say the same thing, even though the conversation has nothing to do with WW2. In French, the word ‘detail’ has barely escaped genocide. Last year, Le Pen also said that 80 000 people had been working in the IG Farben factory in Auschwitz, and as far as he knows, those people at least were not gassed. I wonder how much he will be fined for having said that. 133
Posted by Svigor on March 09, 2009, 01:41 PM | #
I’ll take a bite from Scroob’s position; I’m not a Historical Revisionist, I’m just a normal, common-sense, critical thinker. I was going to suggest “common sense revisionism?” but I like Scroob’s idea better. I’m just someone who looks at the story and realizes it makes no sense. I think someone upthread asked about “Tales of/from the Holocaust,” a guy who posts the stories of “survivors” (scare-quoted because what they are is story-tellers; who knows if they actually survived anything worse than a bad batch of lox?), but the stories are so absurd they call the holocaust narrative into question. His handle is Yehuda something or other. He’s a poster at Stormfront, and his schtick is flat-out brilliant (though he could carry it out better by being a bit more subtle, and staying in character 100% of the time); he somewhat-half-assedly pretends to be a Jewish supporter of the orthodox narrative, and posts tendentiously-framed summaries of “survivor” stories, along with links. Apparently, he reads lots of “survivor” stories in the press and on the Web generally, then quotes the most fantastic elements with a straight face. It’s hilarious and iconoclastic and brilliantly subversive, IMO. I don’t know if he still has the act going, but it’s quite the bit of Shoah bidness. I think it would be an idea much better realized in a blog. 134
Posted by Svigor on March 09, 2009, 01:50 PM | # To Silver’s friend - I’m ALL FOR med ethnic nationalism. Viva la meds! God bless them! Why should we all blend into one big mass of whiteness? Why should the Italians lose their special gift for art, for example, in any melting pot, of any kind? 135
Posted by Weaver on March 10, 2009, 08:52 AM | # White Western Man, I’ve said pretty much the same thing, but I wonder where there’s space for them? The idea of Frank Salter’s universal nationalism is that some nations will inevitably lose out… There are limited resources and space. —- Reg. the Holocaust, I wonder if challenging a Holocaust scholar to a public debate isn’t a good idea. 137
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2009, 09:49 AM | # Some news from Germany:
______
138
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2009, 11:56 AM | # (The photo caption at the first link above reads, “The empty mass grave.”) 139
Posted by steel68 on May 18, 2009, 04:41 PM | # Mr. Scrooby, As a regular commentator at thecivicplatform.com, I was curious if you had any personal information as to whether Mr. Braun is in the process of creating a new site? 140
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2009, 07:41 PM | # Steel68, I don’t have that information. I’m not in touch with FB. I will say I consider the blog he created to have been of outstanding quality and I was sorry to see it suspended. On the other hand it must have been hard work to keep it going, and I can understand needing to take a break.
I left out a word there: make that
141
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2009, 07:46 PM | # Prior to setting up his site FB contributed a large number of posts to MR.com’s own forum which are worth browsing. 142
Posted by steel68 on May 18, 2009, 08:39 PM | # Mr. Scrooby, Thanks for responding! I concur on your assessment of thecivicplatform and Mr. Braun. I discovered the blog by accident about six-months back and I felt the analysis there was of a much broader and more penetrating analytical depth of which you were a major contributor. If I remember correctly, you are both fluent in French and German, correct? Have you ever read Johannes Fritsche’s, “Historical Destiny and National Socialism in Heidegger’s Being and Time?” http://www.amazon.com/Historical-Destiny-National-Socialism-Heideggers/dp/0520210026#reader 143
Posted by J Richards on May 18, 2009, 10:16 PM | # steel68, Friedrich Braun is lost to us. Canadian authorities (Jews) got him. Here are some obvious reasons why. After reading these reasons, mull over why Scrooby wrote (especially last sentence) the following even though he surely has read my comment about Braun:
If Friedrich comes back with a new website, you can guess what content it’ll feature (refer to my linked comment) and therefore how useful it’ll be. 144
Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 18, 2009, 11:24 PM | #
My French is better than my German. I need to brush up on both.
I haven’t. It sounds interesting though. My most recent acquisitions (got them two weeks ago from Amazon.com) are “Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides” by Thomas Dalton (just published in February) and “The Myth of the Six Million: Examining the Nazi Extermination Plot” by David L. Hoggan (first published 1969). 145
Posted by steel68 on May 18, 2009, 11:38 PM | # Interesting J Richard! I will be looking foward to Mr. Scrooby’s reply and I must say that I did find his last statement somewhat perplexing the FIRST time I read it. One additional thing of note is that I bellieve FB is still posting comments at VNN. I am not a member and have not visited the site in a some days, however, I did at one point “mine” some threads where he commented looking for some information as to why thecivicplatform was down and I came across a handful of his comments (post shutdown) where there was no mention of the fate of thecivicplatform. Maybe we could get a VNNer to post a thread relating to this topic if it hasn’t been done already. Threads there get buried quite quickly. Dasein! I am assuming your moniker is related to the mighty Black Forest hermit and his towering ontological project? 146
Posted by Robert Reis on May 27, 2009, 01:52 PM | # Israel declares there was no Holocaust Extermination: 27 million Jews survived the holocaust As we know the average life expectancy giving a number of people alive in a year is the same as giving the percentage alive in that year to a first order approximation. In giving a number Israel also gave the percent. The problem is the average life span in 2000 for Europeans was about 75 years.[1] The year 2000 was 55 years after the end of it.[2] So if all ages from newborn to the elderly were among the survivors then 55/75th have died since 1945 and the number alive in 2000 equals 20/75th of the number in 1945, a bit less than 1/3 of them. Elementary algebra[4] says if there were one million alive in the year 2000 then there were 3.75 million holocaust survivors alive in 1945. That is a huge number. But wait! There’s more! [Cue Popiel slice and dice logo] If the Nazis killed those unable to work it gets worse. Lets assume 13 years old is old enough to work. So in 1945 the youngest survivor was 13. That means it is as though there were one million survivors in the year 2012. As that is 67 years after it ended then 67/75ths have died and one million represents 8/75ths of the survivors in 1945. That means there were roughly 9.375 million holocaust survivors in 1945. Pick any unable-to-work age you want down to newborn and still we are left with 3.5 million in 1945 as the minimum number of holocaust survivors. But if we have newborns surviving then we have a good fraction of women taking care of the children and thus not working. That weighs against the trademarked Pure Nazi Evil. Not working everyone to death stains the trademark of Pure Nazi Evil.
We must conclude the official numbers asserted for purposes of claiming compensation are either lies for the purpose of extortion or there was no extermination in the holy holocaust. And if the former is a lie, lying in one leads to a reasonable assumption of lying in all and it is up to the liar to show he is not lying this time. OTOH we can look at the 1945 Red Cross numbers for all concentration camp survivors as 120,000. That means there should be 33,000 survivors today assuming no extermination of those unable to work. Assuming extermination of those unable to work as under 13 we have roughly 10,000 survivors. If we expand camp survivors to those who survived by hiding either their identity or physically perhaps the number can be doubled or even tripled before one cannot keep a straight face saying it. Norman Finkelstein quotes his mother as asking, If all of these people are survivors, who did Hitler kill? I can add to her consternation. Every conceivable modification to the data short of a fountain of youth for holocaust survivors, short of increasing their life expectancy, increases the number of survivors in 1945. Evan a million survivors in 1945 (no one died in 55 years) begs the question of what does holocaust mean. So just how many Jews were their in Europe during WWII? From this copy of a newspaper article we can see there were 8.9 million Jews in Europe going into the war. [The entire image by country is here.] This is the population numbers reported by Jews. So with just shy of 9 million in all of Europe going into the war, losing the magic 6 million during the war and having nearly 4 million survivors of the holocaust part of the war is clearly not possible. The suggestion there was a natural population increase between 1938 and 1945 requires Jews to have produced children at a rate at least equal to what would have occurred had there been no war and no extermination and not even concentration camps. In fact with all the Jewish claims of zero population growth the claim of natural growth is not credible. It only approaches credibility if the story of immediately killing those who could not work is either a total lie or so rare it is not worth mentioning. With killing those who were unable to work means there were more holocaust survivors in 1945 than there were Jews in Europe in 1938. So the claim of killing those to young to work is clearly one of the many lies told as absolute truth by holohuggers. It is clearly impossible to have more survivors alive in 1945 than there were Jews in Europe. In a larger context we can look at the distribution of Jews in Europe during WWII and at its maximum expansion only 3 to 4 million Jews lived under Nazi rule. Taking the official number of one million without extermination of those unable to work we have every Jew who was at any time under Nazi rule claiming to be a holocaust survivor. So again, who did Hitler kill? Certainly he did not kill those unable to work. Also he clearly did not kill women with infants to care for else the infants would have died. As Maxwell Smart might say about the extermination, Missed it by that much.
The more I think about this the more I think Israel should be commended for putting the interests of the survivors, whomever they are defined to be, ahead of their national interest in perpetrating the gas chamber and extermination myths. ———————————————————————————————————————— [1] Life expectancy in 1945 was on the order of 67 years overall for Europe but included unsanitary eastern Europe of about 10 years shorter where most of this holocaust is supposed to have happened. However this changes nothing as those who had the poor lifestyle as young adults in eastern Europe would be dead before 2000 even if they had a 75 year life expectancy in 1945. This 75 year life expectancy applies mainly to the youngest in 1945. On average it applies to those 20 and younger in 1945. [2] The first approximation rule of demographics is there an equal number in all age groups. To make it easy, say the population is 75 million. That would mean 1 million aged 0-1, 1 million age 1-2 and so forth up to 1 million aged 74-75. Of course no population is a first order approximation. But all the interesting aspects of demographics are departures from this ideal. For purposes of this discussion the only interest is the Z-shaped curve around the average life expectancy. These days the Z-curve has a large number living much longer than the average but in fact there is an equally large number dying before the average age. If it were otherwise the average life expectancy would increase so the same considerations are always true. They are kept true by moving the baseline. It is also true that 75 is not good for all European countries but it is close enough for this exercise. [3] In this case “close enough” means there is no official source of the number rather there is a ballpark range of numbers that different groups adopt as the true number. [4] 20 75 147
Posted by Frank on July 30, 2009, 09:33 AM | # What nonpolitical academic websites are there devoted to this topic? Too many are telling me the Holocaust didn’t happen, so I’d like to read more. 148
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 30, 2009, 10:03 AM | #
Go back and re-read the ones telling you the ©Holocau$t®™ didn’t happen (no one was gassed; there was no extermination plan; six million didn’t die and of those who did, not in the way claimed, though hundreds of thousands did die in what still could rightly be called a holocaust though on a far smaller scale than other holocausts during that period including the Holodomor and the 14 million German civilians and POWs murdered AFTER the 1945 German surrender). 149
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 30, 2009, 10:13 AM | # Try the recent book by Thomas Dalton mentioned in my comment above of May 19. 150
Posted by Frank on July 30, 2009, 10:36 AM | # Thanks, and there’s even a website albeit only with one chapter. I especially like:
That’s just what I was looking for. I’m going to purchase this book. - Another blogger “Lokuum” gave me these: E. Michael Jones is finally fed up with Holocaust and VHO. 151
Posted by Al Ross on July 31, 2009, 12:42 AM | # Re Friedrich Braun’s late lamented civicplatform journal, some of the entries may still be viewed here : http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.thecivicplatform.com A bit hit or miss though, but worth the effort. 153
Posted by Frank on July 31, 2009, 05:13 AM | #
Surely they can’t be blamed for all that as a people. After the war, that’s the expected state of things. The British are some of the most white in Europe… Were many children produced from these rapes? Who was doing the raping? Next entry: Cameron and the Anti-White Alliance Previous entry: Didactic Discourse : Dugin to Dogs |
|
Existential IssuesWhite Genocide ProjectOf note
Recent CommentsAlso see trash folder. J Richards commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/04/12, 02:32 AM. (go) (view) Tim commented in entry 'Ground taken in the thread wars' on 02/04/12, 01:56 AM. (go) (view) Lurker commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/04/12, 12:52 AM. (go) (view) Captainchaos commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/04/12, 12:20 AM. (go) (view) Lurker commented in entry 'Ground taken in the thread wars' on 02/04/12, 12:12 AM. (go) (view) Tim commented in entry 'Ground taken in the thread wars' on 02/03/12, 11:35 PM. (go) (view) Lurker commented in entry 'Ground taken in the thread wars' on 02/03/12, 10:18 PM. (go) (view) Jimmy Marr commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/03/12, 09:01 PM. (go) (view) MOB commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/03/12, 06:51 PM. (go) (view) great advice commented in entry 'Ground taken in the thread wars' on 02/03/12, 06:00 PM. (go) (view) jamesUK commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/03/12, 05:20 PM. (go) (view) zalmoxis commented in entry 'A potential one-man mental hospital for Anders Behring Breivik!' on 02/03/12, 05:17 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/03/12, 04:08 PM. (go) (view) Tim commented in entry 'Ground taken in the thread wars' on 02/03/12, 03:52 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/03/12, 03:48 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/03/12, 03:35 PM. (go) (view) MOB commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/03/12, 01:03 PM. (go) (view) Papa Luigi commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/03/12, 11:53 AM. (go) (view) Bill commented in entry 'Ground taken in the thread wars' on 02/03/12, 06:57 AM. (go) (view) Dasein commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/03/12, 04:05 AM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry 'A potential one-man mental hospital for Anders Behring Breivik!' on 02/03/12, 01:08 AM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry 'A potential one-man mental hospital for Anders Behring Breivik!' on 02/03/12, 12:37 AM. (go) (view) Eumaios commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/03/12, 12:05 AM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/02/12, 11:17 PM. (go) (view) Lurker commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/02/12, 10:46 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/02/12, 10:11 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/02/12, 10:06 PM. (go) (view) Lurker commented in entry 'Ground taken in the thread wars' on 02/02/12, 09:27 PM. (go) (view) Thoreau commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/02/12, 09:14 PM. (go) (view) anon commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/02/12, 09:11 PM. (go) (view) anon commented in entry 'Re: The New American Divide, by Charles Murray' on 02/02/12, 08:59 PM. (go) (view) Søren Renner commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/02/12, 08:58 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/02/12, 08:46 PM. (go) (view) Søren Renner commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/02/12, 08:32 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry '2 2 2012' on 02/02/12, 08:23 PM. (go) (view) Recent Posts
General NewsScience NewsScience CategoriesAll CategoriesThe WritersEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages. LinksEndorsement not implied. Controlled Opposition Crime General
Immigration
Islam Jews
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Whites in Africa |
Posted by James Bowery on March 01, 2009, 03:27 AM | #
It is worth noting that the veracity of the dogma of Holocaustianity is not really relevant to the proposition that Holocaustianity is the state religion of former Christendom (and _only_ former Christendom). For example, it is widely accepted that about as many Ukranians died in the Holomodor under equally horrendous conditions to those claimed by the dogmas of Holocaustianity, but there is nothing like theocratic enforcement about that event across former Christendom.
It is no coincidence that the media, ancient (scriptural) and modern (mass media), control religiosity and that both are largely the work of Jews. You might say they specialize at creating theocracies even more than creating ponzi schemes. Come to think of it, most theocracies _are_ ponzi schemes.