Showing posts with label holohoax. Show all posts
Showing posts with label holohoax. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Elie Wiesel Holocaust Winner



Wow, truth on fox news! 

This Holocaust ™ is a winner for all of them, whoever devised this tale I'm sure is a hero to these rats.  It allowed them to steal land murdering millions in the process, get reparations for all of their people, get billions of dollars worth of TV, movie and book deals, allowed them to "win" the most prestigious awards and anytime someone speaks out against their myriad of crimes against the entire planet they can just say "oy vey a nazi holocaust denier" and the dumbass sheeple consider this to be the worst crime ever.


Saturday, November 27, 2010

A Review Of Band Of Brothers

I have watched this miniseries and considered writing my own review. I have put it off for several months and then came across this, I may still do one in the future but for now this is a worthwhile read and a very accurate review of the show.


Full Story With Links


Band of Brothers, the 2001 TV miniseries, was produced by Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks.

Episode 9 was directed by David Frankel and written by John Orloff.

Based on the 1992 book by Stephen E. Ambrose, Band of Brothers. E Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne from Normandy to Hitler’s Eagle Nest, Simon and Schuster (reviewed edition by Pocket Books, 2001).



In ten episodes, Band of Brothers depicts how E (“Easy”) Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne Division, trained in America and England and then fought from D-Day through to the end of the European phase of WWII. It is a technically strong and gripping production. The battle scenes are among the most realistic I have seen, though one must allow for the demands of the cinematic medium — emphasis of a few individuals and spatial compression of combat groups. I am reminded of the grim and gritty street battle sequences in Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan. This review looks at the ninth episode, which does not depict military conflict but is itself something of a black operation in the culture wars.

As our own Edmund Connelly has repeatedly demonstrated, Jewish interests have frequently been pushed by American television and Hollywood films in various ways, often as a backdrop to stories unrelated to ethnicity, like the omnipresent upper class Anglo twit and the Black genius technical expert. The 9th episode of Band of Brothers, titled “Why We Fight”, represents an unprecedented level of ambition — to claim America’s WWII sacrifices as motivated by the desire to save Jews from Nazi persecution, to make America’s sacrifice in WWII all about the Jews, not about Americans doing their duty in a tragic internecine conflict.

The episode opens with a scene of devastation in the German town of Thalem, on April 11, 1945. There is rubble in the streets and townspeople are cleaning up. A group of relaxed G.I.s looks on from a balcony. An impromptu chamber orchestra of old men is playing a Beethoven dirge.

Then a flash-back: “One month earlier, Sturzelberg, Germany”. The war is as good as over. The Wehrmacht has given up the fight. Roosevelt’s death is announced. There are scenes of looting by officers and men; of a soldier having sex with an enthusiastic blond German girl; of drinking. The bridge over the Rhine at Remagen is announced captured.

The company is still under orders, though the men are beginning to think about life back in the States. The company moves out in convoy. A Jewish G.I. — the only Jewish soldier in the series and in the book — talks about his plans for after the war. “I’m going to find a nice Jewish girl.”

Masses of German POWs march by in orderly ranks. An officer says admiringly that even in defeat the Germans look like soldiers. But the Jewish G.I. sees nothing but objects of hate and contempt, standing up in the vehicle and screaming: “You stupid fascist pigs. . . . You ignorant, servile scum!” This displays a sophisticated vocabulary for someone who we are told in the final episode went back to driving taxis after the War. The scene does not occur in Ambrose’s book.

The company drives past a scene of summary executions of three uniformed Germans, who are kicked out of a building, made to kneel, then unceremoniously shot in the head, blood spraying. Their killers then begin to go through pockets. The killers are also uniformed but are not Americans or British. Perhaps Czech troops. The troops of Easy Company are shocked by the murders. They look down grimly, except for the Jewish G.I., who smiles.

A patrol in a forest near Landsberg in Bavaria discovers a concentration camp full of starving prisoners. (A 21-minute clip, including the concentration camp material, is available here.) The 101st did in fact liberate a camp in the area. The Jewish G.I. is the company’s translator. He translates the words of an inmate being interviewed by the commander. This is a work camp for Jews, pause, and Gypsies. The scene in Ambrose’s book does not mention Jews or Gypsies. It is described as a work camp (pp. 262–263).

German civilians in the local town deny any knowledge of the camp but they are not believed by the G.I.s. Food is requisitioned from the local town, from a bakery. We see a fat baker complaining as his entire stock is removed without explanation or payment. In Ambrose’s book there is no such character. Instead an officer finds a store of cheese and has it distributed to the camp inmates without incident (p. 262).

Whether or not there was a baker, the way he is presented is an exemplary propaganda construct of the cheapest Hollywood films. His jiggling neck and self righteous possessiveness stands for all German civilians in the town who, we are led to assume, must have known of the camp. It is implied that they remained knowingly well fed while the Jews starved. An officer threatens the baker with his pistol and accuses him of knowing about the camp. The baker’s unpleasant appearance is another example of Spielberg using hackneyed propaganda technique. It is not enough that a person do wrong. He must also wear a black hat and waxed mustachio.

The G.I.s begin to feed the camp inmates but a doctor warns of the danger of overeating following starvation. The inmates must remain in the camp under medical supervision. The Jewish G.I. is ordered to make the announcement, which he does reluctantly because he knows how much the inmates desire to be free at last. After making the announcement and pleading with the inmates he collapses in tears.

The next day all able-bodied German civilians are ordered to clean up the camp. The scenes of the cleanup are disturbing, as townspeople wade among the corpses.

The wife of a German general, seen earlier in her home facing down an American looter, is now seen pulling at bodies, humbled and distraught.

Flash forward to the episode’s start date, 11 April. Hitler’s death is reported. The company receives new orders: to occupy Berchtesgaden, Hitler’s mountain retreat.

The closing message of the episode reads: “These camps were part of the Nazi attempt to effect the ‘Final Solution’ to the ‘Jewish Question’”.

In fact these were work camps for building jet fighters. As the book states: “It was a work camp, not an extermination camp.” The film makes no mention of the POWs from Russia, Italy and other countries, German communists and homosexuals who also suffered at the hands of the Nazis. Spielberg’s film and many others like it steal the memory of the camps and the sufferings of many nations and relabel them “Jewish property”. This is an obvious lapse of scholarly standards in deference to Jewish sentiment.

The next caption reads: “Between 1942 and 1945 five million ethnic minorities and six million Jews were murdered — many of them in the camps.”

This again distinguishes Jewish suffering inside and outside the camp system. It implies that Jews were not an ethnic minority, which is incorrect. And it omits the ethnic majorities in Slavic lands who suffered inside and outside the camps. The high death toll among Polish and Russian civilians during the War is deemed unworthy of mention in Spielberg’s film. If the forced labour of Jews was an act of genocide, why not pay respects to the Russian, Ukrainian, and Polish nations?

The episode claims the forced work camps for Jewish victimhood. Its lies and distortions must have been deliberate because the script was read by experts. This is a work of black propaganda that exploits fine acting and technical wizardry.

Who did Spielberg choose to direct and write the episode? With David Frankel as director and John Orloff as writer it has the appearance of complete ethnic vertical integration. Was nothing left to chance? The other executive producer was Tom Hanks, not a Jew. But he would have been no counterweight to Spielberg’s ethnic dedication. Hanks is a typical tame Hollywood WASP who has done nothing for his people, produced no equivalent of Schindler’s List.

The series received the recognition it deserved. Orloff’s depiction of the concentration camp was honoured by the American Jewish community, not at all surprising considering that it was written for them. Here he is receiving the award for Best TV film from Sam Rubin at the 2nd Annual Jewish Image Awards in Film and Television at the Four Seasons Hotel in Los Angeles, Ca. Tuesday, Sept. 24, 2002.

More on the book version

The episode’s depiction of the concentration camp differs radically from that in the book. Instead of a concentration camp full of Jews, the book describes a “Displaced Persons’ camp” at Dormagen, containing forced labourers brought from occupied Europe (p. 255). The 101st did liberate the concentration camp Kaufering IV near Landsberg on the Lech in April 1945 but this section of Ambrose’s book is not titled “Why We Fight”. The book and most of the miniseries depicted the experiences of Easy Company. Not the liberation scene. This is based on a film made by the U.S. Army at the time, and supplied to Spielberg and Hanks by the European Holocaust Memorial organization in Landsberg (see links section of the Wikipedia article).

There is documentary evidence of the mixed status and ethnic composition of workers in the Landsberg camps. In October 1944 a local administrator estimated that there were 21 camps with 5,251 inmates working for various manufacturing companies. This included eight separate Jewish camps, with one more under construction. The administrator noted that there were also prisoners of war from Poland, Russia, and France. These figures do not tally with another estimate of just one facility near Landsberg for the period 15 July to 15 August 1944, when the workforce consisted of 9,000 prisoners brought from a concentration camp — many Jewish — plus 3,000 foreign workers and 3,900 German workers. Either way there were a great many non-Jews involved.

The phrase “why we fight” does not occur in the book. Ambrose quotes Maj. Winters as saying: “Now I know why I am here” (p. 263), which was an understandable emotional reaction to the misery of the camp, not a considered philosophical statement, and not one linked exclusively to the plight of Jews. It expressed a humanitarian sentiment. It is not a warrant to rehearse the Holocaust ritual yet again and push aside the men’s true responses and priorities.

The soldiers felt that they were fighting for America, not to end suffering most Americans did not know about until after the war’s end.

Less than one page of text about the camp becomes half an episode in Spielberg’s rendering. In the book there is no mention of the Jewish Holocaust. Yet the series is presented as based on Ambrose’s book. The G.I.s did not see Jews; they saw suffering humanity. Spielberg’s biggest crime is to have rewritten the scene to represent the G.I.s as feeling and thinking like him, focused on his ethnic kin. In effect he claims the Finest Generation for the Jews.

There are also errors of omission. For example the series ignores the praiseful reaction of the G.I.s to Germans, once they began to occupy German territory. There is a story! It could have been told by someone who was sympathetic to the innocent German civilians or merely objective and looking for an interesting tale to tell. The series could have depicted American G.I.s discovering how similar the Germans were to themselves. There are dramatic possibilities in this realization. Intimate moments of self doubt, of stunned realization. Close-up encounters with vulnerable human beings; flawed but very much like Americans. One can imagine a story in which some soldiers realize they have been fighting a sort of civil war. This is not a fanciful construction — it is right there in Ambrose’s book.

The book deals with American-German relations in some details. For example the soldiers began to realize how similar the Germans were to their own loved ones — they began to realize their own ethnic kinship. On one occasion a G.I. was clearing an apartment block so that it could be requisitioned by the company. This was wartime and the G.I.s’ hearts were hardened. The procedure was to go from door to door telling the occupants they had five minutes to vacate their apartments, taking no bedclothes so that the G.I.s would be comfortable.

They came pouring out, crying, lamenting, frightened. “I knocked on this one door,” Carson recalled, “and an elderly lady answered. I looked at her and she stared at me. God, it was a picture of my own grandmother. Our eyes met and I said, ‘Bleib hier,’ or stay here.”(p. 260, emphasis added.)

This is genetic similarity at work — one genotype recognizing a similar other. The old lady did not speak. All the G.I. perceived was her face. There is more along these lines that one would never guess from Spielberg’s series, except for the Jewish G.I.’s compassion for his people in the camps

Ambrose summarizes the American soldier’s judgment of various nationalities during WWII, mostly negative.

He felt the Arabs were despicable, liars, thieves, dirty, awful, without a redeeming feature. The Italians were liars, thieves, dirty, wonderful, with many redeeming features, but never to be trusted.

The French provincials and Parisians had assorted negative traits, while the British were “brave, resourceful, quaint, reserved, dull”. The Dutch were “simply wonderful” though few American soldiers were in Holland.

Wonder of wonders, the average G.I. found that the people he liked best, identified most closely with, enjoyed being with, were the Germans. Clean, hard-working, disciplined, educated, middle-class in their tastes and lifestyles (many G.I.s noted that so far as they could tell the only people in the world who regarded a flush toilet and soft white toilet paper as a necessity were the Germans and the Americans), the Germans seemed to many American soldiers as “just like us” (pp. 248–9).

Americans admired the German civilians who, of their own volition, began picking up rubble the morning after a battle. In that regard they compared the Germans favourably to other Europeans they had encountered. How easy it would have been, how inexpensive, to have the G.I.s utter a few words of praise as they watched German civilians clearing the street at the start of Episode 9.

Ambrose suggests that some of the good impression made by the Germans was due to the comfort provided by their middle class homes. But even Webster, a convinced German hater, could not help but soften. He wrote to his parent in April 1945 that the “Germans I have seen so far have impressed me as clean, efficient, law-abiding people”. They were churchgoers. (Couldn’t Hanks persuade Spielberg to allow just one scene of Germans in church?) “In Germany everybody goes out and works”, unlike other nationalities. “They are cleaner, more progressive, and more ambitious than either the English or the French” (p. 250).

The shock of ethnic recognition experienced by G.I.s as they entered Germany has been discussed elsewhere. Ambrose quotes one author, Glenn Gray, thus: “The enemy could not have changed so quickly from a beast to a likable human being. Thus, the conclusion is nearly forced upon the G.I.s that they have been previously blinded by fear and hatred and the propaganda of their own government” (p. 250).

The only pronounced reference to ethnicity concerns the only Jewish member of Easy Company, Joseph Liebgott. He is seen early in the series objecting to an anti-Semitic outburst by a fellow private. He has no visible Jewish characteristics, unsurprising because he is played by Ross McCall, a Catholic Scotsman. Apparently Spielberg knows when genetic similarity is useful. Because the character played by McCall is so different to the real Liebgott as described in the book, I have referred to the former as “the Jewish G.I.” This is the (miniseries) character who screamed collective insults at German prisoners of war and smiled at the murder of others.

The Jewish G.I. character is given some balanced resolution in the tenth and final installment directed by Mikael Salomon. In July 1945 the division is occupying a part of Bavaria, which includes Hitler’s mountain retreat, the Eagle’s Nest. For much of that episode he is in a vengeful state of mind, occupying a black and white world where all Germans are on the dark side. He even kills a man on the hearsay that he had been a concentration camp commander and personally questioning him (well, he demands his death; another G.I. pulls the trigger). This is true to the book. We detect some softening when the Jewish G.I. translates a speech by a German officer. The officer is about to disband his company, and a watching American officer asks the Jewish G.I. to interpret. At first the translation is delivered mockingly, but the speech ends up winning the respect even of someone twisted by hate. The German officer begins by saying that it has been a long hard war. That he is proud of his men. That a spirit of comradeship has arisen from sharing the same dangers. They had become brothers. Some of the German troops weep. Later we see a friendly conversation between a German and an American soldier manning a checkpoint together, in which the German shows a human face (he recommended the Italian front over the Russian). The closing scene of the episode is in documentary format. A veteran of the 101st Airborne recites the great St. Crispin’s Day speech by Henry V in Shakespeare’s play, echoing the German officer’s words.

Other scenes relating to ethnicity include one in which half a dozen German prisoners of war are murdered in cold blood in the D-Day episode. The murderer is a handsome Anglo with Nietzschean views and homicidal demeanour, who hands around cigarettes to the unarmed Germans and gives them lights before shooting them down without provocation. The killer is not coarse or low class and he speaks standard American English without a trace of provincial or big-city accent. In the last few episodes the character is rehabilitated to become a hero. He is never punished or admonished. What is the point of this invented scene, which does not occur in the book? The closest event in the book is when a few German prisoners are shot while attempting to jump their guards (p. 77). The very different film version associates Anglo ethnicity with mindless, psychopathic aggression.

Despite a scene in which a German POW shows a human face (before being murdered as above), the Germans are once again nameless aggressors. Not much change from the usual Hollywood formula. Among the G.I.s the weak characters are all Anglos. The Italian soldiers have ethnic residues but are mainly regular guys.

Conclusion

The Finest Generation were fallible human beings who were nevertheless as noble a band of brothers as there could be. They fought for their nation’s interests. Most were patriots at a time when America was seen by most citizens as a White republic. The ninth episode of Band of Brothers is an act of identity theft, an attempt to rewrite history to misrepresent the American soldiers of WWII as having different identities and different motivations than they in fact had. The ninth episode and to some extent the whole miniseries is part of an effort to airbrush from the American people’s memory the authentic historical American nation and replace it with a lie that serves leftist ideology and Jewish interests.

How can this sort of outrage occur? Once a group is beyond criticism, let alone censure, its ambition can expand to fill the status vacuum thus created. That privilege is created by the ban on anti-Semitism so broadly defined that it includes reasoned criticism of Jewish political culture. Any attempt to criticize Spielberg or other Jews for ethnic bias would attract the anti-Semitism accusation, unleashing real penalties formal or informal. No other group is so privileged.

The replacement of White Christian historical memories with minority perspectives and sometimes by self-hate fantasies is limited by the inertial quality of those memories. The interviewees at the start of the 9th episode had mixed feelings towards Germans. Only one said that Germans were thought of as evil. One said that he could have been friends with them under different circumstances. All the veterans were relaxed. None got excited or showed hostility. None mentioned the concentration camp liberated by the 101st. None mentioned Nazis. This is congruent with the book’s cursory treatment of the work camp. While the cruel conditions in the camp were deplored, the G.I.s had seen other horrors.

Living memories also limit the chutzpah of the casting director. It is true that a Scot was cast as the Jewish G.I. However the predominance among the actors cast for the film of Northwestern European racial types and Anglo regional accents is accurate, as is the segregation of Negroes to transport duties. It will take one or two generations longer before these aspects can be falsified with impunity. It is reasonable to conclude that this is the direction film is moving when a Jewish producer can tell his White Gentile audience that their fathers fought and died not in defence of their nation but for his own ethnic interests, knowing that he is safe from effective reproach.

Saturday, November 20, 2010

Gordon Duff On The Holocaust

By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor

Last week, 17 men were arrested in New York for defrauding Germany out of $42 million in payments to phony holocaust survivors. Tens of thousands of American Jews had filed for pensions from Germany claiming to be concentration camp survivors. All swore they had been in the camps, told stories about gas chambers, human skin lampshades and such but not a single one had been in a camp at all. The state of Israel claims to have, alive today, nearly one million holocaust survivors.

As many as 90% of these may well be, not only frauds but many could easily be former concentration camp guards themselves, far more likely than surviving death camps. What better place to hide than Israel?

With numbers of camp survivors going up each year, we tend to forget we are talking about death camps. There were few survivors and most of them died immediately after the war. Those alive were found dying and couldn’t be saved, and most of them weren’t Jews but rather Russians, Gypsies, Communists, trade unionists and anti-Fascists.

Look at the numbers. There were only 5.3 million Jews listed as living in Europe, outside the USSR, in 1940. In a rough average, 12 death camps, filled to the brim with gas chambers and crematoriums ran 24 hours a day for 1000 days. Some are said, in testimony of literally thousands, to have killed from 17,000 to 20,000 per day. Lets use the figure, 10,000 per day times 12 camps times 1000 days.

Where do a million survivors come from? I can see a thousand, ten thousand but not 30,000 and certainly not the 15 million necessary to justify the current number of claimed survivors according to typical actuarial tables for healthy adults of the period, those who were not starved and tortured for years. Look at Vietnam veterans. Only 700,000 of 2.9 million survive 35 years after the war. Something is wrong here.

STOLEN VALOR

There are laws in the United States that punish people who wear military medals they didn’t earn or claim other such honors. When veterans discover someone claiming falsely to have served in war, that individual is arrested but also publicly humiliated. They are hunted down like dogs.

There are concentration camp survivors living in America, people who suffered incomprehensibly at the hands of the Nazis. However, there are also, in America we now know, tens of thousands or more who claim falsely to be of the heroic numbers from that period and numbers inside Israel that are unimaginable. Why are these people not punished?

As a Vietnam veteran, I share a common problem with others. For 4 decades, I met veteran after veteran, many were children when the war ended, but each claims some honor tied to military service based on a movie or television show. I have met, over the years, hundreds of such individuals, many at meetings of veterans organizations. I don’t find it horrible or destructive but it is disturbing and I won’t even remotely begin comparing service in Vietnam with the experience of a death camp.

LAST WEEK

Last week, authorities announced that those who had wrongly filed for benefits had been fooled somehow. I can see fooling someone as to whether they had seen a televisions show or not but there is only one American I can think of who imagined he had been in a death camp who hadn’t and that was President Ronald Reagan and he only claimed to have visited. Reagan’s error was based on dementia, not profit or gain. Now it seems, not only do we have tens of thousands of people who have a single false memory, they seem to remember years of horror, incredible detail and all of it is utterly false. There is no comparison, not with Reagan, not with Vietnam veterans, not with anyone.

Reagan’s error, despite the respect he is held in and his obvious illness, was been used to defame him countless times. His error was not only honest but done in the context of human feeling. How many of the others are lying, not only for financial gain but for something less wholesome?

Why then, in the name of all that is holy, did the authorities and news media immediately write this off as tens of thousands of cases of minor lapses in judgement rather than one of the most horrible moral crimes of all time?

There is no greater disrespect for a holocaust victim than this.

REVISIONISTS AND DENIERS

Two thousand people in Europe are in prison today for questioning some part, no matter how minor, of the holocaust. The official story of the holocaust is a compendium of testimony of several hundred thousand people as there was little physical evidence left at the end of the war. Some facilities were reconstructed based on testimony, for historical perspective but in general, it is believed that the Germans destroyed all evidence of death camps and mass graves when they learned they were losing the war.

Thousands of those who find this explanation unsatisfactory and had chosen to disagree, some noted historians, some scientists and some simple troublemakers and activists, have been imprisoned. At the trials, holocaust victims claimed that such questioning harmed them irreparably. However, not one holocaust victim has ever spoken up about the endless numbers of phony holocaust victims who besmirch them every day and have for nearly 65 years. Why is that?

One thing the revisionists claim is that almost every story from the holocaust, including notable books and even world famous holocaust survivors are, in actuality, the worst phonies of all. The analogy of the “phony veteran” is applicable here. After each war, endless numbers of those, who for reasons legitimate or not, felt their contribution to the war effort was less than honorable or noteworthy, claim accomplishments they are undeserving of. It is also known that combat veterans are seldom seen on bar stools at service organizations talking about heroic exploits.

In fact, as Americans are learning more and more each day, combat veterans have great difficulty surviving coming home and are often homeless, incarcerated and commit suicide in huge numbers. It would be easy to extrapolate the same for holocaust survivors. There is no greater potential cause of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in the history of mankind than the concentration camps of World War 2. Not only would survivors kill themselves out of guilt, most would suffer greatly shortened lifespans. This has been amazingly well documented.

This being the case, only a few hundred holocaust survivors could be alive today, not the one million living in Israel.

HONESTY AND TRUTH

Anyone imprisoned wrongly, anyone whose family was killed or whose assets were seized illegally, should be compensated. Anyone wrongly claiming to be part of a group they are not, one this unique in the history of mankind, deserves punishment. Why is this not done? Why is there no normal social pressure to “out” these people and defend the honor of holocaust survivors?

Has anyone ever asked a real holocaust survivor what it is like to see phonies continually on television talking about the holocaust? Do they forgive? We will never know, as it seems nobody cares about real holocaust survivors. The holocaust is brought up when Israel bombs a school or asks for foreign aid but as for the people themselves, these misuses of the suffering of some cheapen human misery and the human condition.

NEVER AGAIN, WHAT DOES IT REALLY MEAN?

If one child was taken away, died in a gas chamber, typhus, shot, it doesn’t matter, one life, this is a holocaust. If it was done because of race, the crime is doubly evil in nature. The lesson of “never again” was meant to be a lesson for all mankind to treat every single life with the same honor and respect, not to use the suffering of some as an excuse for financial crime, self delusion or outrageous acts of aggression.

Instead, the holocaust has become theatre, a stage for two sides to debate, to play, to “lawyer” the world to death. Some feel they should fight the holocaust because it has become a tool of evil. Some defend it because it is a tool of evil also but they believe the world is evil and only evil men are meant to survive.

Picture the death of a single child. Then go to the trial of a “holocaust denier.” Who is evil? Who is good? Do any of them ever think of the single child or only how it died, who signed what or how many Palestinian children could be murdered just like that child, in that child’s name perhaps?

THE REAL WAR

Why ask the question if 6 million Jews died? It is equally possible that 6 million Germans died in the Ukraine and Europe, not soldiers, not in air raids, but in a holocaust type extinction. This is not talked of but it happened. All of us, Jews, Germans, the west, all of us, were silent when Josef Stalin killed twice that number or more. It started before the war and continued after. The human suffering caused by Stalin was immeasurable but is never spoken of, barely touched on except by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and now his books are banned. They fail to conform to popular mythology.

There was nothing pure about the real war as there is nothing pure about wars today. The myths we may or may not make up to protect some are never really to protect anyone. The weak and vulnerable are never protected, only the powerful. This is how the powerful become such and remain that way. We are such liars.

Nobody ever cared about the holocaust survivors only what using their suffering would bring in honor and riches. Is this the truth? Is this the partial truth? Has anyone asked the hard questions, the real questions? Isn’t it time that all the survivors got together? Some voice is needed, a voice that can say “never again’ with authority.

But..”never again”…what?

Monday, October 18, 2010

Simon Wiesenthal Is A Fraud

You know when a mainstream article writes words like this that they are erring on the side of caution. The article goes out of it's way to reassure everyone that the holocaust was real, but I believe this to be important in showing that even the honest mainstream people are seeing the gaping cracks in the story.
__________________________________________________________________________________

Since the early 1960s Simon Wiesenthal’s name has become synonymous with Nazi hunting. His standing is that of a secular saint. Nominated four times for the Nobel peace prize, the recipient of a British honorary knighthood, the US Presidential Medal of Freedom, the French Légion d’honneur and at least 53 other distinctions, he was often credited with some 1,100 Nazi “scalps”. He is remembered, above all, for his efforts to track down Adolf Eichmann, one of the most notorious war criminals.

His reputation is built on sand, however. He was a liar — and a bad one at that. From the end of the second world war to the end of his life in 2005, he would lie repeatedly about his supposed hunt for Eichmann as well as his other Nazi-hunting exploits. He would also concoct outrageous stories about his war years and make false claims about his academic career. There are so many inconsistencies between his three main memoirs and between those memoirs and contemporaneous documents, that it is impossible to establish a reliable narrative from them. Wiesenthal’s scant regard for the truth makes it possible to doubt everything he ever wrote or said.

Full Article Here

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Anne Frank Tree Topples



I think this is a fitting symbol since no matter what they do or how hard they try, the lid is off the Holocaust™ myth. They have thrown people in prison for daring to have an opinion contrary to what the jews media says.

Even against severe penalty though the Truth surges forward with all the money and power in the world they can't stop it, which is quite reassuring.  The greatest friend of Truth is time.

Story

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Why Hollywood Ignores Hiroshima (and Dresden)

The short answer is because all you are supposed to know about WWII is that Hitler was evil and killed millions of poor innocent hardworking jews for no reason, he was the monster of the century. The US entered the war and committed no atrocities whatsoever. This of course is because Germany is to be the great evil of WWII and by default the US the savior, this is how the jews are able to extract billions in hoaxacaust reparations the world over and perpetuate the "oy vey ve are so persecuted" BS.

Now obviously the following writer doesn't really nail the real reason, but the fact that he asks the question is at least a start.

I recall talking to someone a few years ago who was talking about North Korea and how they should get off their high horse about obtaining nukes and how dangerous Kim was. Who are we to say of all the nuclear countries in the world we are the only one to use them, and on civilians no less. Of course when the US mass murders civilians in a foreign land it's either justified or swept under the rug, but if a foreign power kills civilians than they are a rogue, terror state and a threat to world peace. This is the epitome of orwellian double speak.

Source

American cinema is omnivorous. It has swallowed almost every subject from the trivial to great historical events, and then spewed them up. However, there is one subject it has refused to tackle directly: the bombing of Hiroshima and its consequences.

As it is now 65 years since the horrific event, the omission seems even more astounding. Is there is an element of collective guilt because the US is the only country ever to have used a nuclear weapon on a civilian population? It cannot be because the subject is too appalling to depict, since many other horrendous happenings have been portrayed graphically in American films.

The only references that American cinema, commercial or otherwise, has made to Hiroshima have been oblique. During the cold war, MGM produced Above and Beyond (1952), based on the experiences of Colonel Paul Tibbets, the pilot of the Enola Gay, the first aircraft to drop an atomic bomb. The film makes the oft-repeated argument that the bombing was justified because it contributed to the ending of the second world war, yet it seemed more concerned with the effects it had on the pilot's relationship with his wife.

Previously, in 1947, MGM had released The Beginning Or the End, which dramatised the Manhattan project. After the success of the tests, we see the Enola Gay and her crew drop the bomb, the mushroom cloud, and scenes of the entire city burning – from a vast distance, of course. Yet, the sanguine message of the movie is that America can be trusted to use this new weapon for universal good. Among the extremely rare moments in American films that allude to the bombing of Hiroshima is the climax of Steven Spielberg's Empire of the Sun (1987), where a beautiful special effect lights up the sky. But nowhere in American cinema do we see one victim of the bomb, one burning corpse, one person dying of radiation, one deformed child.

In the opening dialogue of Alain Resnais's masterful Hiroshima Mon Amour (1959), the reference to which all other films on the subject must incline, a French actor in Hiroshima for a film, tells her Japanese lover that she has seen everything in Hiroshima – the exhibits in the museum, the news footage of the injured and dying. However, he keeps insisting, "You saw nothing in Hiroshima. Nothing."

American cinema has seen nothing in Hiroshima. Nor has it ever tried.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

Climatology And The Hoaxacost

"Sadly we need disasters like this (BP oil spill) to show people. Some people don't believe in climate warming - like those who don't believe there was a Holocaust." - Paul McCartney

Newsflash Paul, the facts don't support global warming (now conveniently called climate change) or the "holocaust". If there were mountains of evidence supporting the jewish side of the holocaust story why then is it illegal to question it?

It is literally illegal and punishable by years in prison for "denying" the holocaust, yet you are encouraged (by academia and pop culture) to deny the Son of God. What a perverse world we live in today.

Climatology which thanks to the internet has been COMPLETELY debunked, is still touted around as fact and those that think differently are demonized. With the power of the internet though we show these people for the fools that they are and no longer are the words from their mouths taken as the gospel truth.

Saturday, June 12, 2010

Another Holoco$t Lie Debunked

Source

MONTREAL - A closer look at a bar of swastika-engraved soap purportedly from the Second World War has confirmed it is not made of human remains.

Analysis performed by a laboratory in southern Ontario specializing in older items reveals the soap tested negative for human or animal DNA, Montreal police said Wednesday.

Insp. Paul Chablo said police received the results this week, a few months after sending the beige bar of soap to be analyzed.

"The results were negative and the conclusion is clear: no detectable quantity of DNA was found to be present within the bar of soap," Chablo said in an interview.

"It's just a regular bar of soap."

Chablo said police investigated following a complaint and amid rumours the soap may have been made of human fat made from Holocaust victims.

"The Holocaust was a traumatizing experience for the Jewish community and it's something that cannot be taken lightly," Chablo said.

"And when you're talking about having human remains in soap, it is to a certain extent criminal, so it had to be investigated."

There have been stories over the years that the Nazis produced soap from the victims of the Holocaust, but the allegations have been debunked by historians and scientists.

This latest bar of soap was seized from a Montreal curiosity shop a few months ago following a media frenzy.

The storeowner said he bought it from a former soldier and that it was from Poland circa 1940.

B'nai Brith Canada sent a representative to the shop to investigate and filed a police complaint.

In a March interview with The Canadian Press, shopkeeper Abraham Botines said he had no idea whether the soap was actually made of human remains but that he simply wanted to sell it because he no longer wished to keep it.

It's not uncommon to see Nazi memorabilia for sale. It is not illegal to sell items bearing a swastika in Canada.

The soap sparked a controversy in the Jewish community as groups called the potential sale of the item "offensive."

Now, the director of the Montreal Holocaust Memorial Centre says there is no point in preserving such an item and that it has no historical value.

"If anything, it was an object that glorified, rather than educated about, the Holocaust," said Alice Herscovitch.

"What it shows is that people try to profit from the Holocaust as they try to profit from anything else."

Botines, who is Jewish, said he failed in previous attempts to sell the bar to a Holocaust museum. He had recently been seeking about $300 for the item.

Chablo said police don't plan to pursue any charges and the soap will be returned.

Saturday, May 29, 2010

Another Phony "Holocaust Survivor"

by Ian Mosley

Somebody seems to have let their old Yiddishe grandpa escape from the kosher nursing home, and he’s embarrassing not only the family but the Tribe.

An article from the Wausau Daily Herald reports: “A public presentation in Wausau by a man who claimed to have survived Auschwitz has been canceled as family members have come forward disputing the veracity of his story. Gunther Skaletz was scheduled to speak publicly Tuesday evening at Wausau East High School, hosted by a Wausau group A Walk in Their Shoes. In a statement Monday morning, the group said it could not verify or confirm allegations that Skaletz was lying, but that it was canceling the event due to a ‘cloud of controversy.’ Skaletz, who lives in Manitowoc and is a frequent speaker for schools, churches and other Wisconsin organizations, claimed in his book that he was sent to and later released from the Nazi death camp Auschwitz, conscripted by the German army and forced to fight the Soviets… then captured and sent to a Russian work camp, from which he escaped. In addition to the public event Tuesday, Skaletz was also scheduled to speak to classrooms today and tomorrow. Those events have also been canceled.”

The Germans didn’t trust the Jews, that’s why they were locking them up in labor camps during the war. The claim that he was drafted into the German army straight out of Auschwitz is just not believable. I suspect he was spinning more and more fantastic yarns, and someone finally checked with the relatives, who quickly put an end to his career as a Holocaust lecturer.

And if this Jew were willing to volunteer himself as a “Holocaust survivor” to lecture to impressionable young public school children, how many other Jewish fraudsters are out there pounding a guilt complex into young Gentile heads spinning Holocaust tales that have no basis in fact?

However it came about, the fact remains that someone in Wisconsin seems to have doubted and questioned, and not only gotten away with it, but a Holocaust fraudster was removed from the public stage. Needless to say, this story has received no national coverage at all, but maybe it’s the beginning of a trend. One can only hope so.

How long are we expected to continue fighting the Second World War? When, oh when, will these Jews finally decide they have milked enough out of it and give it a rest?

Thursday, May 27, 2010

Everybody Draw Holocaust Day


In response to "Everyone Draw Muhammad Day" muslims have hit back with "Everybody Draw Holocaust Day" where as far as I can tell they are doing great work in bringing much needed attention to the holocaust hoax.

In this case I don't necessarily ascribe to the proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" since I don't care to live amongst muslims anymore than any other non White group. However they are in no way as big a threat to White Western society as the jews. I certainly do take seriously the fact that there are 1 billion of them worldwide, but the fact remains their influence in world affairs as well as their impact on White society pales in comparison to the death grip the jews now enjoy.

I encourage everyone to check out "Everybody Draw Holocaust Day" you might learn something new but if nothing else you will certainly piss off the nation wreckers.