|
|
|
Rudolfo
Banned
124 Posts |
 Posted - 03/28/2010 : 05:46:09
|
There is no physical evidence of the holocaust. No bodies, no mass graves, no murder weapon, no gas chambers, no gas vans, no documents, no photographs, no intercepted communications.
The 'eyewitness testimony' is phantasmagoria that is obvious on its face and not supported by a shred of physical evidence.
And yet, we believe the holocaust. How is that possible? Answer: there is now and has been for nearly 100 years a conspiracy to perpetrate the holocaust hoax. The hoax began during WW I and is documented in the book 'The First Holocaust, Jewish Fund Raising Campaigns with Holocaust Claims During World War One' by Don Heddesheimer. It is documented with reprints of articles from the New York Times and other Jewish press from the WW I era. The book is available online at ..
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/tfh/
And example article from 1919 can be seen here ...
http://balder.org/judea/billeder-judea/American-Hebrew-October-31-1919-The-Crucifixion-Of-Jews-Must-Stop-Martin-H-Glynn-Six-Million.jpg
The main players in the WW I hoax were rabbi Stephen Wise, head of the American Jewish Congress, and Felix Frankfurter, Justice on the Supreme Court and a leader of the Zionist movement.
Many of the participants in the WW I hoax, including Wise, were in Washington during WW II, and had connections with powerful members of the government. The primary creator of the hoax in the US was Henry Morgenthau, FDR's secretary of the treasury. Morgenthau was involved in matters relating to the war refugees as money from the treasury was involved. He finally convinced FDR to create a War Refugee Board (WRB) which was responsible for US policy relating to the refugees, and which was headed by Morgenthau and two others. This is how the Zionists gained control of US government policy relating to refugees during and after the war. Morgenthau used his position to issue a report based on the uncorroborated testimony of two anonymous Auschwitz escapees. Thus, the hoax became the basis of US policy. The WRB report was based on no evidence whatever. On the other hand, the state department which had access to US and British military intelligence, overflight date, diplomatic contacts, etc., etc., regarded the report as a hoax. The full story is given in 'The Hoax of the Twentieth Century' by Northwestern prof Arthur Butz, it is available online here ..
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/thottc/
This book is the bible of holocaust denial. Pics of relevant government documents can be seen here ...
http://www.newp.org/holohoax201/
The hoax was transformed from obvious phantasmagoria into judicially proven fact at the Nuremberg trials, so, they are the centerpiece of the holocaust hoax. This was explicit ...
"The determination of the International Military Tribunal in the judgments [...] that invasions, aggressive acts, aggressive wars, crimes, atrocities or inhumane acts were planned or occurred, shall be binding on the tribunals established hereunder and shall not be questioned except insofar as the participation therein or knowledge thereof by any particular person may be concerned. Statements of the International Military Tribunal in the judgment [...] constitute proof of the facts stated, in the absence of substantial new evidence to the contrary."
See http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/ord7.html
The Interational Military Tribunal (IMT) refers to the big trial at Nuremberg of the major Nazis, there were also trials of camp guards held at Dachau, and a series of specialized trials referred to as the Nuremberg Military Tribunal (NMT).
Thus, once the hoax was established at the IMT, it was from that point on 'fact'. The IMT was the trial of the high level Nazis like the commander of the Navy, the commander of the Air Force, top arms manufacturers, etc. None of the defendants were charged with having any part in the holocaust save one, Ernst Kaltenbrunner, who was the chief of the RSHA, and was (as I understand it) second in command under Himmler in the SS, and was responsible for implementing the holocaust.
There is the common perception that the defendants at the IMT admitted the truth of the holocaust and pleaded that they were merely 'following orders'. That is not the case, no defendant admitted to knowing anything at all about the holocaust, and Kaltenbrunner. the only person charged with knowledge of the holocaust, testified as follows:
Brookhart: Witness after witness, by testimony and affidavit, has said that the gas chamber killings were done on general or specific orders of Kaltenbrunner.
Kaltenbrunner: Show me one of those men or any of those orders. It is utterly impossible.
Brookhart: Practically all of the orders came through Kaltenbrunner.
Kaltenbrunner: Entirely impossible.
Kaltenbrunner also testified that he learned of the holocaust from theh allied press and radio -
KALTENBRUNNER: I had no knowledge of Hitler's order to Heydrich regarding the final solution of the Jewish problem at the time I took up my office. In the summer of 1943 I gathered from the foreign press and through the enemy radio...
This begs the question, if the only man charged with participation in the holocaust denied it at Nuremberg, how did the holocaust become judicial fact? The answer is textbook simple, the holocaust phantasmagoria was read into the record as, with one notable exception, the testimony or an affidavit from a prosecution witnesses. Since it did not apply to any defendant, it was not challenged ! The wildest phantasmagoria imaginable thus became fact.
The one exception is that Rudolf Hoess, the main architect of the holocaust, was called by Kaltenbrunner as a defense witness ! Hoess had been the commandant at Auschwitz in 1943 (the commandant that followed him, Richard Baer, was also captured, he admitted nothing, and died in his cell despite being in perfect health), and had confessed to every atrocity. Hoess wrote in his 'memoir' ...
"At my first interrogation evidence was obtained by beating me. I do
not know what is in the record, although I signed it. Alcohol and the
whip were too much for me. The whip was my own, which by chance had
got into my wife's luggage. It had hardly ever touched my horse, far
less the prisoners."
Hoess's affidavit, written and English and signed by Hoess, and translated to German for the trial, is one of the key pieces of 'evidence' for the holocaust. The perfunctory cross-examination was by the prosecution! Kafka could not have attempted to describe such an absurdity, and it would have strained Gogol. At the conclusion of the Nuremberg trial, and without a shred of physical evidence, Hoess's affidavit became 'fact'.
(Note: I'm going to take a break and try to figure out where to go from here .... this might take a while)
|
Edited by - Rudolfo on 03/28/2010 07:32:22
|
|
|
The Rat
SFN Regular
Canada
1370 Posts |
Posted - 03/28/2010 : 07:29:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Rudolfo
(note 2 : this is going to take a little longer than I anticipated ..)
|
Oh please take as much time as you like, I'm sure we would all be happy if you didn't get back to us during this century.
|
Bailey's second law; There is no relationship between the three virtues of intelligence, education, and wisdom.
You fiend! Never have I encountered such corrupt and foul-minded perversity! Have you ever considered a career in the Church? - The Bishop of Bath and Wells, Blackadder II
Baculum's page: http://www.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=3947338590 |
 |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 03/28/2010 : 07:45:43 [Permalink]
|
I knew it, I fucking knew it!
You're one of those Zionist Conspiricy twits, aren't you. That tripe has been around for a long time and hasn't improved with age.
Zog Ate My Brains
Conspiracy theories about Jews abound. Chip Berlet unpacks their appeal.
If you surf the web, you may have encountered the claim that the Israeli spy agency Mossad warned 4,000 Jews who worked in the World Trade Centre to stay home on 11 September 2001; or that a handful of Jewish lobbyists control US foreign policy; or the world is run by the Zionist Occupation Government (ZOG). All these claims are patently false, yet they have devoted defenders.
The idea that a secret group of powerful people is conspiring to control world events is centuries old, and it is seeing a troubling resurgence on the political Left. Unlike most progressive theories about political power that stress systemic, institutional or structural analyses, conspiracy theories claim a handful of sinister plotters are mucking things up. This often devolves into charges that ‘The Jews’ are behind some sinister plan for global subversion. Where do these ideas come from?
|
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 03/28/2010 : 09:12:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Rudolfo
There is no physical evidence of the holocaust. No bodies, no mass graves, no murder weapon, no gas chambers, no gas vans, no documents, no photographs, no intercepted communications. |
Why should one read further when the opening line is so in denial of reality? (Of course, since you've already shown that you're using a personal definition of "holocaust," this shouldn't be surprising.) But should we expect the post to somehow get better as we read, when it starts so poorly? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 03/28/2010 : 10:13:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Rudolfo
There is no physical evidence of the holocaust. No bodies, no mass graves, no murder weapon, no gas chambers, no gas vans, no documents, no photographs, no intercepted communications. |
So when some SS officers write about a gas chamber, I'm pretty sure that that counts as some documentation as to what was going on.
And then, here's a newspaper article. It's from Die Zeit of Jan. 1, 1998 (and thus in German). The article talks about some recently discovered documents that detail what was going on. In particular, Joseph Goebbels wrote in his diary on December 12, 1941:
"Bezüglich der Judenfrage ist der Führer entschlossen, reinen Tisch zu machen. Er hat den Juden prophezeit, daß, wenn sie noch einmal einen Weltkrieg herbeiführen würden, sie dabei ihre Vernichtung erleben würden. Das ist keine Phrase gewesen. Der Weltkrieg ist da, die Vernichtung des Judentums muß die notwendige Folge sein."
You could translate this loosely as:
"Regarding the Jewish Question, the Führer has decided to clear the table. He prophesied to the Jews that if they again induce a world war, they would live to see their annihilation in it. That wasn't just a phrase. The world war is here, and the annihilation of the Jews must be the necessary consequence."
The article goes on to note that a few days later, Heinrich Himmler met with Hitler and then entered in his appointment calendar "Judenfrage, / als Partisanen auszurotten," or "The Jewish Question: to be exterminated like partisans."
This all seems to show the intent and jibes well with eyewitness testimony. |
| Edited by - Cuneiformist on 03/28/2010 10:13:41 |
|
|
|
Rudolfo
Banned
124 Posts |
Posted - 03/29/2010 : 06:46:10 [Permalink]
|
Nuremberg - there was the International Military Tribunal, the IMT, which was the single trial of the Nazi bigwigs at Nuremberg. The IMT was conducted by the Allies jointly. There followed 12 more trials that are part of the Nuremberg series of trials, these trials were conducted by the US alone and are referred to as the Nuremberg Military Tribunal (NMT).
There was also a series of trials referred to as the Dachau trials, conducted at Dachau, by the US, concurrent with the Nuremberg trials. This is where the camp guards for the British/US liberated camps were tried by military tribunals. For example, the 40 guards/personnel from the Dachau camp itself were tried, 36 were sentenced to death. The Dachau trials were conducted by the War Crimes Branch (WRB) of the US government. The WRB was centered in Washington DC and was headed by David 'Mickey' Marcus. After heading the WRB Marcus went on to become the Supreme Commander of the Israeli armed forces, and was killed in action in 1948. The chief of Dachau branch of the WRB was A. H. Rosenfeld.
Butz refers to the Dachau trials as perhaps the most shameful episode in US history. The complaints about the conduct of the trials became so pervasive that an investigation was ordered. The result ...
"The report made by these two American judges following their investigation, like so many other reports pertaining to Germany, has been kept secret from the American public. But Judge van Roden, after his return to the United States, gave a series of lectures and after-dinner speeches in which he stated that such third-degree methods as the following were used to obtain the conviction of the Germans condemned to death, many of whom have already been hung :
Beatings and brutal kickings; knocking-out of teeth and breaking of jaws; mock trials; solitary confinement; torture with burning splinters; the use of investigators pretending to be priests; starvation; and promises of acquittal. Speaking to the Chester Pike Rotary Club on December 14, 1948, Judge van Roden said : 'All but two of the Germans in the 139 cases we investigated had been kicked in the testicles beyond repair. This was standard operating procedure with our American investigators.'"
The above is from pg. 186 of 'The High Cost of Vengance' by Freda Utley, online at http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/thcov/index.html
|
| Edited by - Rudolfo on 03/29/2010 06:52:04 |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 03/29/2010 : 09:04:46 [Permalink]
|
| Do we get to call Judge van Roden's "after dinner speeches" (were these Aryan Nation dinner parties, or what) just "phantasmagoria" and then dismiss it? Seems fair. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
|
|
Rudolfo
Banned
124 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 06:45:46 [Permalink]
|
There is a real holocaust mystery.
Much of the holocaust conspiracy and how it works is clear.
The origins in WW I, and the motivation for the hoax.
The endless willingness of Zionists to lie in support of the holocaust narrative.
How the Zionists gained control of the US government offices, the WRB and WCB, dealing with the war refugees and prosecution of the Nazis in the NMT and Dachau trials.
How holocaust phantasmagoria was endorsed by the US WRB and became the basis for US government policy.
How holocaust phantasmagoria became judicial fact at Nuremberg and Dachau.
This seems well understood to me. But hardly sufficient to explain the success of the holocaust hoax.
If it's so obvious, why hasn't the hoax been exposed. Well, of course, it has, right after the war by revisionists like Columbia prof Harry Barnes, and French former camp prisoner Paul Rassiner, and by a string of other revisionist that have been writing since that time. But these exposes have received no media attention or popular or academic acceptance at all.
The mystery to me is that while the holocaust is an obvious hoax to anyone who takes an active interest and studies it for a short amount of time (e.g. is doesn't take a student of history to know that gas chambers don't have windows), nonetheless it is accepted almost to the last academic in the US. University professors are tenured, which means that their jobs are secure. They are intelligent, energetic, egotistical, driven to succeed, and they pride themselves on the quality (and quantity) of their work. And they, with only one exception I'm aware of, Butz, endorse the holocaust narrative. That has got to be a real mystery for a revisionist.
Academia avoids addressing the revisionist arguments by ... simply refusing to address them. The rational is given in two quotes from Noam Chomsky,
"By entering into the arena of argument and counterargument, of technical feasibility and tactics, of footnotes and citations, by accepting the presumption of legitimacy of debate on certain issues, one has already lost one’s humanity."
and
"The Holocaust was the most extreme atrocity in human history, and we lose our humanity if we are even willing to enter the arena of debate with those who seek to deny or underplay Nazi crimes."
These quotes accurately present the attitude that academia has toward any questioning of the holocaust narrative. To see how extreme their complete avoidance of revisionist arguments can be consider the case of a current 'campaign' by revisionist Bradley Smith, who has placed ads in several college newspapers challenging the academic community to provide him with "the name of one person who died in a gas chamber at Auschwitz, along with proof". For the most part, 99%+, the academicians, professors, students, and university administrative staff, ignore the question, and Smith, altogether. The small fraction that do respond do not address the question asked, but instead attack Smith as a raving lunatic, anti-semite, and in all ways reprehensible character ! For asking a question !
Generally, college newspapers refuse to run Smith's ad. In March Smith did place an ad in the Univ. of Wisconsin student newspaper, the ad read, in total ..... 'The holocaust: the power of taboo - www.codoh.com'. There was a subsequent firestorm of protest generated by Hillel, the ADL, and Jewish students on campus. The editor of the paper wrote a lengthy piece denouncing Smith, a Dean wrote another. The director of the USHMM chimed in. Meetings were held, tearful Jews told of the hardship the ad caused, faculty advised and apologized to the Jewish community, administrators promised action and apologized to the Jewish community. The board of governors of the newspaper met and discussed new ad policies at the newspaper would prevent such an ad from ever being placed again, and apologized to the Jewish community.
You can see a history of Smith's efforts at http://bradleysmithsblog.blogspot.com/ page back through the March entries...many of the meetings are on video and can be seen there.
The holocaust was used to justify the creation of the state of Israel. Israel has been for the last fifty years the most likely spark point for the next global war. Thus, the direct consequences of the holocaust have created a threat to every person on the planet. And the topic is taboo on university campuses. That is an unfathomable mystery to me.
|
| Edited by - Rudolfo on 03/30/2010 09:25:43 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 09:48:39 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Rudolfo
These quotes accurately present the attitude that academia has toward any questioning of the holocaust narrative. To see how extreme their complete avoidance of revisionist arguments can be consider the case of a current 'campaign' by revisionist Bradley Smith, who has placed ads in several college newspapers challenging the academic community to provide him with "the name of one person who died in a gas chamber at Auschwitz, along with proof". For the most part, 99%+, the academicians, professors, students, and university administrative staff, ignore the question, and Smith, altogether. The small fraction that do respond do not address the question asked, but instead attack Smith as a raving lunatic, anti-semite, and in all ways reprehensible character ! For asking a question ! |
It's a question asked in bad faith, and Smith and everyone else know that. Perhaps you're naive enough to think otherwise. If so, do you think that the Black Death struck Europe in the 14th century? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
astropin
SFN Regular
USA
970 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 12:32:56 [Permalink]
|
Gee Rudolfo you're about 0.00001% of the way to convincing me that the Holocaust is a big hoax.
Exactly where I was before you showed up here. |
I would rather face a cold reality than delude myself with comforting fantasies.
You are free to believe what you want to believe and I am free to ridicule you for it.
Atheism:
The result of an unbiased and rational search for the truth.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 13:18:27 [Permalink]
|
'Way back there in the original thread, all of Rudolfo's arguments were dealt with and nothing has changed in this one. I am now waiting to hear all about the Zionist/Freemason plot to control the world. That's the next, logical step in his narrative as it rambles on into Illuminati hallucinations.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
| Edited by - filthy on 03/30/2010 13:21:15 |
|
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 13:27:16 [Permalink]
|
I ask again: what exactly are you hoping to accomplish by posting here?
Are you suffering from SIWOTI syndrome?
Why is it so important to convince us? And since you are failing miserably, wouldn't you say that the style or content of your argument leaves something to be desired?
Actually, I predict that you will claim that it is our "close-mindedness, faux-skeptical worldview" that is at fault, and that there is not a thing wrong with your argument.
Regardless, if you want to convince us of your claims, wouldn't it be wise to indulge us and answer some simple questions?
Additionally, even if you convinced us, what would that accomplish? If you wish to blow the lid of this vast conspiracy, wouldn't your efforts be directed more effectively with published, peer-review papers? Perhaps think-tank/foundation funding? |
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
Rudolfo
Banned
124 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 14:30:07 [Permalink]
|
The responses in this thread are not commensurate with the OP or the continuations that I have posted. I just read Kil's article on 'what is skepticism' and he appears to be serious. And yet, nowhere in this forum do I find an ounce of skepticism to an absolutely incredible event that is not supported by any physical evidence as admitted by van Pelt ! That is another mystery to me. Instead, you go to great lengths to justify the absurd. No one can name one person who died in a gas chamber. Bad faith request! The gas chamber is a hoax? Not evidence! The eyewitness testimony is prima facie absurd. So what!
You're skeptical of holocaust denial, and you express your skepticism with idiotic comments and insults. What is the sense of that? Just for an example, take Dave W.'s comment (the only one in this thread that even referenced the OP) that the revisionist request to 'name one person who died in a gas chamber at Auschwitz' is 'in bad faith'. Can this be serious? Not to me. If you think it is serious, and represents skepticism, well .......
You're skeptical of Uri Gellar. For Christ's sake, everyone in the world knows he is a fake. That doesn't make you a skeptic. You're skeptical of an alien invasion, etc. This isn't skepticism, as no one believes this nonsense.
Here is the point - you're supposed to be skeptical about EVERYTHING ... especially what authority tells you ....
|
| Edited by - Rudolfo on 03/30/2010 15:18:06 |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Rudolfo
Banned
124 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2010 : 15:36:22 [Permalink]
|
[What would satisfy as "proof"?]
A good question. That's up to the person answering the question, there are no restrictions. The proof, or the evidence if you will, is part of the answer. The evidence that one sees in the literature, "The Nazis took my sister and I never saw her again", obviously doesn't qualify.
I'd rephrase the question, name one person who died in a gas chamber at Auschwitz, and the evidence for that claim. But, it's the same question.
There is no reason to evade the question. You, or Professor XYZ, can supply the proof, or evidence, and it will be evaluated, not only by Bradley Smith, but by everyone.
The real point is no one can answer the question, hence, they don't. There is no evidence that can withstand a minute of scrutiny that any named person died in a gas chamber. So, instead of answering the question, or admitting that they do not have an answer, academia, to his point, has only reviled the person asking the question and has not even acknowledged the question itself. I note that I said that a dean denounced Smith, actually it was the Chancellor ! This has happened at several universities. Smith has written a funny article about it ..... read it ... you can learn something about real skepticism ....
http://codohfounder.com/the-irrational-vocabulary-of-the-american-professorial-class-with-regard-to-the-holocaust-question |
| Edited by - Rudolfo on 03/30/2010 15:45:38 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
The holocaust conspiracy
