Announcement

**BeBMan** · March 26, 2003, 10:15

Hm, what sense would it make to create a "myth" of concentration camps, and uphold this myth over decades?

Not to mention the logistical nightmare such an operation would be (who could constrcut this myth, fabricate evidence en masse ect, etc.)

**orange** · March 26, 2003, 10:21

Well, and again I'm not saying it's true or that I necessarily believe it, according to the guy who wrote the site, there are many reasons including justification of the war and legitiamizing a Jewish homeland. He actually doesn't say that there were no concentration camps, just that "the final solution" didn't take place, and that the vast majority of the camps were only labour camps, not death camps.

**orange** · March 26, 2003, 10:23

The 15th page of the site is called "The last battle" and draws conclusions from the previous 14 or so pages of work. He's well documented, and even sites Jewish sources, which is not to say that it's necessarily legitimate...but maybe this can answer the question a bit too...

15. The last battle

"Achieving our quest for a new world order depends upon our learning the Holocaust's lesson." (Ian Kagedan, director of government relations for the Jewish Bnai Brith organisation, as quoted by the Toronto Star, 26 November 1991.)

a) The transformation of the holocaust into a religion

The orthodox holocaust story can not possibly be defended with rational arguments because its absurdity is overwhelming. We are asked to believe in the fata morgana of a vast slaughter in killing factories which left no traces whatsoever - no documents, no bones, no teeth, no ashes - nothing! We are further asked to believe that the Allies, who had a large network of informers all over Europe and a spy in the German leadership (Admiral Canaris, the head of the German intelligence), did not become aware of this gigantic genocide until the end of the war, for if they had known about the mass murder, they would have acted to stop it. Finally, we are asked to believe that the Jews in Poland, the epicentre of the holocaust, did not know anything about the Auschwitz gas chambers as late as in August 1944, otherwise the Jews from the Lodz ghetto would not have gone to Auschwitz voluntarily - which is precisely what they did, as related by Raul Hilberg in his standard work about the holocaust (Die Vernichtung der europaeischen Juden, p. 543/544).

As the Zionist-controlled system of the "Western democracies" is woefully unable to counter the revisionists with arguments, it resorts to censorship and brute force in order to silence the dangerous heretics. And the Jews are gradually transforming the holocaust into a religion. This is a very clever strategy, for as Robert Faurisson aptly remarks, one cannot refute a religion with scientific arguments. Thus, the holocaust museums and holocaust monuments spreading like mushrooms all over America and Europe are really temples of the new religion, whereas professional "holocaust survivors" such as Elie Wiesel are the priests of the new religion. To prove this assertion, we only have to quote Wiesel himself: "The Holocaust is a holy mystery, the secret of which is limited to the circle of the priesthood of survivors" (Peter Novick, The Holocaust in American Life, 1999, p. 211, 212, retranslated from the German). Another high priest of the holocaust cult, Simon Wiesenthal, goes even further: "When each of us comes before the Six Million, we will be asked what we did with our lives... I will say: I did not forget you" (Simon Wiesenthal in Response, Vol. 20, Nr. 1).

No critical questions about the holocaust are allowed because they are a blasphemy: They cause immense distress to the eternal victims of persecution, the Jews, and are an attempt to whitewash National Socialism - the most evil ideology of all times which made the holocaust possible! In today's Germany, it is even considered inadmissible to compare the holocaust with the atrocities of communist tyrants such as Stalin or Cambodian dictator Pol Pot because this is regarded as a "relativisation" and "trivialization" of the worst crime in history.

French Zionist propagandist Claude Lanzmann, the producer of a long and unspeakably dull film about the holocaust (the title of this film is Shoa, the Hebrew word for "catastrophe", which is often used by Jews as a synonym for "holocaust") makes no effort to conceal that the holocaust cult is to replace Christianity:

"If Auschwitz is something other than a horror of history, then Christianity totters in its foundations. Christ is the Son of God, who went to the end of the humanely endurable, where he endured the cruellest suffering. (...) If Auschwitz is true, then there is a human suffering with which that of Christ simply cannot be compared. (...) In this case, Christ is false, and salvation will not come from him. (...) Auschwitz is the refutation of Christ." (Les temps modernes, Paris, December 1993, p. 132, 133.)

Nowadays, a large percentage of the Jews do not believe in God any more, but virtually all of them believe in the Six Million. The Zionist leadership cunningly exploits the holocaust to unite the World's Jews by keeping them in a constant state of hysteria and persecution mania, insinuating that only if the Jews stick together will they be able to ban the threat of a new holocaust.

It goes without saying that very few Non-Jews are willing to embrace the murky holocaust religion. While the overwhelming majority of people in the West still believe that the official holocaust version is essentially true (even if they suspect that the figures might me somewhat inflated), they are thoroughly fed up with the eternal lamentation about Jewish victims and Jewish suffering. They simply don't want to hear it any more. In Germany, opinion polls showed that a vast majority of the population was against the planned holocaust monument in Berlin (which not a single major party, not a single leading politician and not a single big newspaper dared to oppose). Privately, the politicians are probably as profoundly disgusted with the endless holocaust litany as the rest of the population, but they cannot possibly afford to let the revisionists win because this would shatter the very foundations of the "democratic" system to which they own their careers and their wealth.

b) The function of the holocaust in the world since 1945

The political consequences of the holocaust since 1945 have been tremendous. When I speak about the "holocaust", I do not mean a historical fact, as the extermination of the Jews in chemical slaughterhouses did not actually take place. But in the mind of the populace, this extermination is as real as the Second World War or the Egyptian pyramids, while real genocides, such as the artificially provoked Ukrainian famine in which several million people were deliberately starved to death by the Communists in 1932/1933, are all but forgotten. Let us have a close look at these consequences:

- The creation of the state of Israel "Without the Holocaust, there would be no Jewish state." This candid statement was made by a Jew, Robert Goldman (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 19 December 1997, p. 9). Goldman was right. Without the holocaust, the world would never have permitted the founding of a Jewish state in Palestine three years after the war. The colonial era was coming to an end at this time. The British had already decided to give India her independence, while dozens of Asian and African territories were striving to shake off the rule of the White Man. While other powers were rushing to grant independence to their colonies, the Jews in Palestine were allowed to embark on a colonial adventure par excellence, with the blessing of both the West and the Soviet Union. In order to ensure that their state would have a Jewish majority, the Zionists proceeded with ruthless brutality; whole villages were levelled, thousands of Arabs were murdered (Deir Yassein was but one of many massacres), and a great proportion of the Palestinians were expelled from the land of their ancestors. The ones who remained behind have been subject to severe repression ever since. According to the very pro-Zionist Swiss weekly Die Weltwoche (22 October 1992), no less than 15.000 Palestinian political prisoners were languishing in Israeli jails in 1992, and the use of torture was officially sanctioned by the Israeli supreme court in November 1996. As I am writing these lines, Israeli soldiers are shooting unarmed Palestinian demonstrators, many of whom are children, every day.

Jewish terror in occupied Palestine is not actually encouraged or approved by world opinion, but it is tolerated. After all, the Jewish people need a homeland to protect them from a new holocaust, and what are the sufferings of the Palestinians compared to those of the Jews under Hitler? Let us beware of illusions: As long as people in the West believe in the six million and the gas chambers, they will always support Israel in principle, even if they criticise the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians as being unnecessarily harsh.

Without outside assistance, the Zionist parasite state would not be viable. Its chief source of revenue consists of financial injections from America, support from international Jewry and German reparations. According to official sources, the Federal Republic of Germany had paid 85,4 billion Deutschmarks by 1992 (Der Spiegel, 18/1992), but the real sum is much higher. In addition, there have been enormous deliveries in the form of commodities. Nahum Goldmann, long-time chairman of the Jewish World Congress, made no secret of this fact; he wrote:

"Without the German reparations that started coming during its first ten years as a state, Israel would not have half of its present infrastructure. All the trains are German, and the same goes for electrical installations and a great deal of Israel's industry" (Nahum Goldmann, Das juedische Paradox, Europaeische Verlagsanstalt, 1978, p. 171).

In 1999, Germany provided Israel with ultra-modern submarines which can carry nuclear missiles. The Israelis did not have to pay a penny - the submarines were another token of German atonement for the holocaust!

- Jewish Immunity of the Jews from criticism. Before 1945, criticism of Jews was legitimate. Today, that is no longer the case. Even the slightest criticism of Jewish power and Jewish arrogance - for example the heavy influence of the Jews in the mass media of the West, the staggeringly high number of Jews in the Clinton administration, or the impertinent behaviour of the Central Jewish Council in Germany - is immediately shouted down with screams about Auschwitz. The effectiveness of this intimidation is demonstrated by the following fact: The most obnoxious criminal organisation in the world is regularly referred to as the "Russian Mafia" although virtually all bosses are Jewish, often with Israeli passports. This is irrefutably demonstrated by Juergen Roth in his documentation Die Russen-Mafia (Rasch und Roehring, Hamburg 1996). The title of the book translates as "The Russian Mafia", for if it were "The Jewish Mafia", the author would have gone to a German jail, and his book would have been burnt. In today's Russia, five or six out of the seven big "oligarchs" who made their fabulous fortunes with money stolen from the Russian people are Jews. This is never mentioned in the Western media.

- Creating contempt for the German nation. Since 1945, the German people have been branded with a mark of shame. Self-contempt and self-hatred is the prevailing trend, while self-respect and patriotism are held in contempt.

After the 1991 war against Iraq, George Bush senior, who was then president of the USA, publicly spoke of a "New World Order" which he did not care to define. As a matter of fact, the "New World Order" means that America, as the undisputed superpower, can impose its policy and its dubious values on all other countries. And America is nowadays largely ruled by the Jews. (Even if Jewish influence is much less pervasive in the Republican party than in the Democratic one, the Jews still own virtually every major newspaper and most of the television chains so that no Republican president can afford to govern against them. In modern society, nobody can govern against the media, as Richard Nixon learned to his disadvantage a quarter of a century ago.)

c) What would happen if the holocaust were publicly exposed as a fraud?

If the holocaust were publicly exposed as a shameless fraud, if people all over the world learned that, while the Jews undoubtedly were brutally persecuted during the Second World War, there was no attempt to exterminate them, that the death factories, gas chambers and gas vans were a Jewish swindle, and that the six million figure was a fantastic exaggeration, the Zionist-led "New World Order" would be all but finished.

Germany would become ungovernable; the German people would feel nothing but hatred and contempt for the politicians, intellectuals and journalists who betrayed and humiliated them day after day. The whole establishment of the country would be hopelessly discredited. This the representatives of the establishment know. On August 15, 1994, journalist Patrick Bahners, commenting on the trial of revisionist Guenter Deckert who was sent to prison for "holocaust denial", wrote in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung: "If Deckert's attitude on the holocaust were correct, the Federal Republic of Germany would be based on a lie. Every presidential speech, every minute of silence, every history book would be a lie. Therefore, he [Deckert], by denying the genocide of the Jews, disputes the legitimicy of the Federal Republic of Germany." The problem could hardly be stated more aptly. Some German opinion makers now openly declare that the Holocaust is the foundation of the post-war German state. This is shown by a quotation from the influential newspaper Die Welt (28 April 1994): "Whoever denies the truth about the National socialist extermination camps relinquishes the foundations upon which the Federal Republic of Germany was built."

But also in other Western countries, the belief in the so-called "democratic system" would be profoundly shaken as people would ask themselves why this charade had to be propped up with censorship and naked terror for decades.

While the consequences of a public exposure of the holocaust as a fraud would be most serious for the Western system as a whole, they would be catastrophic beyond repair for international Jewry and the State of Israel. There would be a world-wide wave of anti-Jewish feeling, and no non-Jew would be willing to support the Zionist parasite state any more. German reparations would stop overnight, and the USA would have to reduce its financial aid to Israel so drastically that it would be bankrupt after no more than a year. The Jews in Israel would be utterly demoralised, as they would instinctively understand that a state founded upon such a colossal fraud has no moral right to exist. Since the holocaust religion, which unites Jews all over the world, would collapse, international Jewish solidarity would be a thing of the past. And the anger of the Palestinians would assume gigantic dimensions as they would understand that they had their country stolen and their sons shot in the name of a lie.

d) The ultimate weapon against Zionism and the state of Israel

At the end of the year 2000, Israel is a besieged country, but from the military point of view, it is still vastly superior to its neighbours, and it enjoys the unconditional support of the United States. Should any of the Islamic states grow strong enough to seriously threaten Israel, it would most probably be attacked and militarily annihilated by America. Russia is not likely to risk a confrontation with the USA for the sake of the Palestinians. We can certainly admire the bravery of the Palestinians resistance fighters who are willing to sacrifice their lives to liberate their homeland from the alien intruders, but realistically, they have no chance to win. The Palestinians have stones and slings. The Israelis have helicopters and tanks. You can't destroy helicopters and tanks with stones and slings.

When fighting one's enemy, one should always look for his weakest spot. The weakest spot of Israel, its Achilles heel, is the holocaust lie to which it owes its existence. The revisionists can give the adversaries of Israel and international Zionism a terrible weapon. It is quite true that many revisionists are by no means guided by political considerations. Some of them - Carlo Mattogno is a good example - are only motivated by intellectual curiosity: They want to ascertain what really happened to the Jews during the Second World War. But even if revisionism is not a political movement, its political implications are tremendous. The revisionists are endeavouring to find out the truth, and truth is the deadliest enemy of Israel and international Jewry. Thus, the revisionists objectively work against Israel and Zionism, even if subjectively their goals are often purely scientific and devoid of any political ambition. This is, of course, the reason why they are persecuted and their books burnt in more and more countries.

In view of the total Jewish media control and the ever-growing anti-revisionist repression in many Western countries, it is very difficult indeed to achieve a revisionist breakthrough. We revisionists are facing an uphill struggle which can only partly be explained by our total lack of financial resources. Fortunately the internet, which the Jews are unable to censure, has greatly improved our possibilities to make the results of our research known to the World, but all the same, we should not cherish naive illusions: Not every citizen of the Western world who is informed about the revisionist arguments will automatically become revisionist and anti-Zionist. The average person in the West - and particularly in Germany - has been so thoroughly brainwashed that a sudden exposure to the truth can provoke a nervous breakdown or stomach cramps. I have repeatedly witnessed this myself. Other people would gladly accept the truth about the holocaust, but as they know that even the slightest suspicion of revisionism leads to social ostracism, economic ruin and legal persecution, they understandably prefer not to get involved. However, if we want to win the war against those whom one of my Russian friends called "the enemies of God and mankind", we have no choice but to destroy the Big Lie, lest the Big Lie destroy us.

The logical consequence of all this is that those countries which are authentically anti-Zionist and real friends of the oppressed Palestinian people should make the breakthrough of holocaust revisionism their foremost priority. A tank costs millions of dollars, yet one soldier can destroy it with a single missile. The revisionists can provide anti-Zionist freedom fighters with a weapon not even a thousand missiles can destroy.

**Hurricane** · March 26, 2003, 10:29

To believe that the Holocaust never happened is like believing we never went to the moon. I feel sorry for them.

Arguing over the details is normal procedure for historians, but this is not that. That guy is a fool. Simple as that.

**BeBMan** · March 26, 2003, 10:31

Originally posted by orange
Well, and again I'm not saying it's true or that I necessarily believe it, according to the guy who wrote the site, there are many reasons including justification of the war and legitiamizing a Jewish homeland.

I don´t accuse you of supporting that...

To the site: well, I read a bit there, of course I can´t comment on many details. But some things read rather simplicistic, eg

If there had been an extermination policy, virtually no Jew would have survived the camps. But the memoirs of "holocaust survivors" fill whole libraries. Professional "survivors" such as Elie Wiesel, who present themselves as witnesses of the holocaust, are, in fact, living proofs that the purported systematic slaughter of the Jews did not take place.

This would mean the existance of "an extermination policy" would grant automatically the death of all Jews, which is quite nonsense. The conclusion "there are survivors, so there was no extermination policy" seems seriously flawed to me (or it is a flat out lie).

**orange** · March 26, 2003, 10:31

Hurricane - did you read even the main points in each section? You're entitled to your opinion, but declaring that he is a fool if you don't read what he says, I would say, makes you a bigger fool than he is.

**orange** · March 26, 2003, 10:34

This would mean the existance of "an extermination policy" would grant automatically the death of all Jews, which is quite nonsense. The conclusion "there are survivors, so there was no extermination" policy seems seriously flawed to me.

Well, he argues that what Wiesel writes about is patently false, IE pits of fire, and that this is added fluff to make the story more gruesome. He also cites a survivor of the camps who survived the gas chamber 6 times. That strikes me as odd.

I think his beef is partially with the high number, as well. He doesn't seem to deny that Jews were persecuted and tortured, but he says that 6 million isn't just an exaggeration, it's outrageous.

**TheStinger** · March 26, 2003, 10:43

Some proper historians argue "only" 4 million were killed in the holocaust. not that this makes any difference. These historians are not arguing that mass genocide took palce though.

**Hurricane** · March 26, 2003, 10:44

Per request, here is a longer answer:

The orthodox holocaust story can not possibly be defended with rational arguments because its absurdity is overwhelming. We are asked to believe in the fata morgana of a vast slaughter in killing factories which left no traces whatsoever - no documents, no bones, no teeth, no ashes - nothing!

Seems he never heard about the Wannsee conference. Or about the thousands of photos. Or documents from the death camps. etc etc. Not to mention all the eye-witnessess.

We are further asked to believe that the Allies, who had a large network of informers all over Europe and a spy in the German leadership (Admiral Canaris, the head of the German intelligence), did not become aware of this gigantic genocide until the end of the war, for if they had known about the mass murder, they would have acted to stop it.

They did know about it.

As the Zionist-controlled system of the "Western democracies" is woefully unable to counter the revisionists with arguments, it resorts to censorship and brute force in order to silence the dangerous heretics.

I think this actually answers it all. Who really has an agenda? The Jews or this Neo-nazi "historian"?

The rest of the rambling is just more of that revisionist bs than any actual facts. I say it again, he has only a pair of so called facts, and they can easily be refuted.

The rest of the passage is just a speech claiming that Israel would never have been created had it not been for the Holocaust. Even if that were true, so what?

**orange** · March 26, 2003, 10:46

These historians are not arguing that mass genocide took palce though.

you mean that mass genocide did not take place?

The guy I link says that nowhere near 6 million bodies have been accounted for, and that there were many, many problems with miscounting, double counting, and using past and present numbers of Jews in an area to fill in the gaps (ignoring immigration, natural deaths, and a low birth rate)

**TheStinger** · March 26, 2003, 10:46

anybody who says Zionist controlled western democracsies shows their true colours

**BeBMan** · March 26, 2003, 10:50

Originally posted by orange
Well, he argues that what Wiesel writes about is patently false, IE pits of fire, and that this is added fluff to make the story more gruesome. He also cites a survivor of the camps who survived the gas chamber 6 times. That strikes me as odd.

I think his beef is partially with the high number, as well. He doesn't seem to deny that Jews were persecuted and tortured, but he says that 6 million isn't just an exaggeration, it's outrageous.

Yes, I read that. But the documents of the Wannsee conference mention ca. 11 million Jews under German rule, so I think 6 million doesn´t seem too much. Thing is, let´s say it would be "only" 1, 2 or 3 million - that is still a horrific number. It would make no sense to exaggerate this number, because it is already huge.

**TheStinger** · March 26, 2003, 10:54

Originally posted by orange

you mean that mass genocide did not take place?

The guy I link says that nowhere near 6 million bodies have been accounted for, and that there were many, many problems with miscounting, double counting, and using past and present numbers of Jews in an area to fill in the gaps (ignoring immigration, natural deaths, and a low birth rate)

I just meant they are not arguing about it.

**Dr Strangelove** · March 26, 2003, 10:55

The army division my Dad served in passed near one of the smaller concentration camp in 1945. After the war his division published a campaign book documenting its participation in the war. There were pictures of its soldiers giving aid to former prisoners. I would post these pictures, but unfortunately after he died this book got scarffed up by some family member and has never resurfaced. Surely there must be many American, British, French, Russian and other allied troops still alive who remember seeing the camps at the time that they were liberated. There were also many German civilians who were forced to view the camps after liberation, some of whom must also be still living now. Their witness should be gathered and displayed to give an irrefutable rebuttal to these holocaust deniers.

Announcement

Revisionism and "Holocaust Denial"

Revisionism and "Holocaust Denial"

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment