Was WWII about what we were told it was about?


Cliffy
Free Thinker
#1
Received this in an email. Thought it was interesting .

Have seen some of these before. So, what has changed in 60 years? The misinformation from the controllers goes on today.

There are many false quotes also attributed to WC in order to support him as a hero. What isn't recorded is how he fled London to the west of London BEFORE each time the German planes came over the UK. He knew precisely when the raids were coming and chose NOT to be with his people - unlike Hitler who stood in his bunker the duration of the war with his people.

History is upside down back the front, as it is today.


Winston Churchill Quotes:

World War 1
"Should Germany merchandise (do business) again in the next 50 years we have led this war (WW1) in vain."
- Winston Churchill in The Times (1919)


World War 2
"We will force this war upon Hitler, if he wants it or not." - Winston Churchill (1936 broadcast)

"Germany becomes too powerful. We have to crush it." - Winston Churchill (November 1936 speaking to US - General Robert E. Wood)


"This war is an English war and its goal is the destruction of Germany."
- Winston Churchill (- Autumn 1939 broadcast)


"The war wasn’t only about abolishing fascism, but to conquer sales markets. We could have, if we had intended so, prevented this war from breaking out without doing one shot, but we didn’t want to."
- Winston Churchill to Truman (Fultun, USA March 1946)

"Germany’s unforgivable crime before WW2 was its attempt to loosen its economy out of the world trade system and to build up an independent exchange system from which the world-finance couldn’t profit anymore. ...We butchered the wrong pig."
-Winston Churchill (The Second World War - Bern, 1960)


"We made a monster, a devil out of Hitler. Therefore we couldn’t disavow it after the war. After all, we mobilized the masses against the devil himself. So we were forced to play our part in this diabolic scenario after the war. In no way we could have pointed out to our people that the war only was an economic preventive measure."
- US foreign minister James Baker (1992)

"Not the political doctrine of Hitler has hurled us into this war. The reason was the success of his increase in building a new economy. The roots of war were envy, greed and fear."
- Major General J.F.C. Fuller, historian, England

"We didn’t go to war in 1939 to save Germany from Hitler...or the continent from fascism. Like in 1914, we went to war for the not lesser noble cause that we couldn’t accept a German hegemony over Europe."
- Sunday Correspondent, London (17.9.1989)

"The enemy is the German Reich and not Nazism, and those who still haven’t understood this, haven’t understood anything." – Churchill’s chief counselor Robert Lord Vansittart (as said to foreign minister Lord Halifax, September 1940)


"Lies come along first, and drag along the gullible.
Truth limps in long afterwards, hanging on the arms of time.”
- Balthazar Gracian
 
petros
#2
It was Britain and France who declared war on Germany
 
Colpy
Conservative
+4
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy View Post

Received this in an email. Thought it was interesting .

Have seen some of these before. So, what has changed in 60 years? The misinformation from the controllers goes on today.

There are many false quotes also attributed to WC in order to support him as a hero. What isn't recorded is how he fled London to the west of London BEFORE each time the German planes came over the UK. He knew precisely when the raids were coming and chose NOT to be with his people - unlike Hitler who stood in his bunker the duration of the war with his people.

History is upside down back the front, as it is today.


Winston Churchill Quotes:

World War 1
"Should Germany merchandise (do business) again in the next 50 years we have led this war (WW1) in vain."
- Winston Churchill in The Times (1919)


World War 2
"We will force this war upon Hitler, if he wants it or not." - Winston Churchill (1936 broadcast)

"Germany becomes too powerful. We have to crush it." - Winston Churchill (November 1936 speaking to US - General Robert E. Wood)


"This war is an English war and its goal is the destruction of Germany."
- Winston Churchill (- Autumn 1939 broadcast)


"The war wasn’t only about abolishing fascism, but to conquer sales markets. We could have, if we had intended so, prevented this war from breaking out without doing one shot, but we didn’t want to."
- Winston Churchill to Truman (Fultun, USA March 1946)

"Germany’s unforgivable crime before WW2 was its attempt to loosen its economy out of the world trade system and to build up an independent exchange system from which the world-finance couldn’t profit anymore. ...We butchered the wrong pig."
-Winston Churchill (The Second World War - Bern, 1960)


"We made a monster, a devil out of Hitler. Therefore we couldn’t disavow it after the war. After all, we mobilized the masses against the devil himself. So we were forced to play our part in this diabolic scenario after the war. In no way we could have pointed out to our people that the war only was an economic preventive measure."
- US foreign minister James Baker (1992)

"Not the political doctrine of Hitler has hurled us into this war. The reason was the success of his increase in building a new economy. The roots of war were envy, greed and fear."
- Major General J.F.C. Fuller, historian, England

"We didn’t go to war in 1939 to save Germany from Hitler...or the continent from fascism. Like in 1914, we went to war for the not lesser noble cause that we couldn’t accept a German hegemony over Europe."
- Sunday Correspondent, London (17.9.1989)

"The enemy is the German Reich and not Nazism, and those who still haven’t understood this, haven’t understood anything." – Churchill’s chief counselor Robert Lord Vansittart (as said to foreign minister Lord Halifax, September 1940)


"Lies come along first, and drag along the gullible.
Truth limps in long afterwards, hanging on the arms of time.”
- Balthazar Gracian



Bull****.

You guys really need to learn a little bit about the discipline of history.

Churchill was prominent in the government of Great Britain for 50 years, and carefully observed throughout his life because of who he was (Randolph Churchill's son). To cherry-pick quotations out of the tens of thousands of recorded statements he allegedly made, and then to paint him completely with that pencil-thin brush is simply "not on". It leaves one with the wrong image of a complicated man, and warps his well-deserved place in the history of the British Isles......

It is like fleas attempting to take down a giant.

Now, one at a time:

Quote:

World War 1
"Should Germany merchandise (do business) again in the next 50 years we have led this war (WW1) in vain."
- Winston Churchill in The Times (1919)

Yep. That was the plan.....read a little history. Germany was a danger to Europe then, as it is today. The Allies intended to prevent German domination of Europe both militarily and economically........so what??

Quote:

World War 2
"We will force this war upon Hitler, if he wants it or not." - Winston Churchill (1936 broadcast)

"Germany becomes too powerful. We have to crush it." - Winston Churchill (November 1936 speaking to US - General Robert E. Wood)

To include this is particularly obnoxious....this is Churchill at his very best. He is prescient in this case..........he saw the danger of fascism, and the threat that Hitler was....and set out to destroy him, while the idiots of Europe claimed "peace in our time" and disarmed.

Quote:

"This war is an English war and its goal is the destruction of Germany."
- Winston Churchill (- Autumn 1939 broadcast)

Yessss....you have a problem with the truth????? What the hell did you expect after war was declared????....it is only lately we've started with the stupidity of maybe, perhaps, sweeter, gentler treatment of our enemies. In 1939, Britain was fighting for survival against a great evil......


Quote:

"The war wasn’t only about abolishing fascism, but to conquer sales markets. We could have, if we had intended so, prevented this war from breaking out without doing one shot, but we didn’t want to."
- Winston Churchill to Truman (Fultun, USA March 1946)

OF COURSE NOT! To do so would have left Hitler in charge of Europe..............THINK fer God's sake.

Quote:

"We made a monster, a devil out of Hitler. Therefore we couldn’t disavow it after the war. After all, we mobilized the masses against the devil himself. So we were forced to play our part in this diabolic scenario after the war. In no way we could have pointed out to our people that the war only was an economic preventive measure."
- US foreign minister James Baker (1992)

What does this idiot have to do with Churchill????
Quote:

"Germany’s unforgivable crime before WW2 was its attempt to loosen its economy out of the world trade system and to build up an independent exchange system from which the world-finance couldn’t profit anymore. ...We butchered the wrong pig."
-Winston Churchill (The Second World War - Bern, 1960)

HUH???? Badly needs context, impossible to judge without it.........who was the right pig???? Stalin perhaps??? Who knows.

Quote:

"Not the political doctrine of Hitler has hurled us into this war. The reason was the success of his increase in building a new economy. The roots of war were envy, greed and fear."
- Major General J.F.C. Fuller, historian, England

Please see above.....if you are going to smear a great man, you could at least use his own quotes.....not those from some after-the-fact apologist, and out of context as well.

Quote:

"We didn’t go to war in 1939 to save Germany from Hitler...or the continent from fascism. Like in 1914, we went to war for the not lesser noble cause that we couldn’t accept a German hegemony over Europe."
- Sunday Correspondent, London (17.9.1989)

"The enemy is the German Reich and not Nazism, and those who still haven’t understood this, haven’t understood anything." – Churchill’s chief counselor Robert Lord Vansittart (as said to foreign minister Lord Halifax, September 1940)

(sigh) the bloody obvious...........the soldiers weren't asking the Germans for their membership cards in the Nazi Party before they shot them.......

And to answer your question, the 1939-45 War in Europe was to prevent the military domination of Europe by NAZI Germany........which is exactly what we were told.

The entire Op Ed is more than ludicrous, it is odious.

Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

It was Britain and France who declared war on Germany

Uh huh....about two years later than they should have.

You have heard of Poland haven't you? And the mutual defense treaty? AFTER Hitler had gobbled up part.....then all of Czechoslovakia and Austria????
 
petros
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy View Post

AFTER Hitler had gobbled up part.....then all of Czechoslovakia and Austria????

Did they not give a **** about the Austrians or Czechs? Just Pollocks? Why Pollocks? Did somebody in Royals have financial interest in Poland?
 
Dexter Sinister
No Party Affiliation
#5
Like the man said, read some history, paying particular attention to the treaty obligations that were in place at the time.
 
petros
#6
The "Empire" is well know for sticking to the letter of treaties?
 
DaSleeper
+2
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

The "Empire" is well know for sticking to the letter of treaties?

E tu Breezy???
 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
#8
Two words: land claims....
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
#9
Colpy, I hope you didn't blow a blood vessel. History is His Story. I do not hold the reverence for it that you do. To me it nothing but bragging rights after the fact - a bunch of primal chest beating. I'm glad I cut out the part about him having a Jewish American mother. I didn't want you to have an aneurism.
 
bluebyrd35
No Party Affiliation
+1
#10
Hmmm.....I wonder what history will record about the Iraq war?? I suppose freeing up the oppressed will look better than going after the lost access to the oil fields. How will "Weapons of Mass Destruction" play out in history books in 50 years??

There were so many different forces at play then as there are now and no history is ever totally inclusive or accurate.

Imagine what would have occurred if for example,the original heir to the English throne had not abdicated?? He was a fervent supporter of Hitler. Or, if the commonwealth/ English colonies had not supported England when it did declare war??

Actually war was declared against Hitler when he invaded Poland on Sept.1st, but not against Russia when it also invaded Poland 15 days later. The Russians rounded up 10,000 Polish miltary and slaughtered them. Poland was split in two between Russia and Germany.

Nothing is ever as it seems, especially history.
 
WLDB
No Party Affiliation
+3
#11
Weird seeing someone trying to demonize Churchill thereby defending Hitler.
 
Cliffy
Free Thinker
+1
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by WLDB View Post

Weird seeing someone trying to demonize Churchill thereby defending Hitler.

There are two sides to every story. We only got one. Controversy stimulates debate. I don't know what happened since I wasn't there but I have a healthy skepticism about what I've been told is the truth.
 
TenPenny
+1
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy View Post

There are two sides to every story. We only got one. Controversy stimulates debate. I don't know what happened since I wasn't there but I have a healthy skepticism about what I've been told is the truth.

I don't believe that you actually started this thread. Someone else did, and I wonder why you're supporting the conspiracy to pretend it was you.
 
wulfie68
No Party Affiliation
+3
#14
I don't agree with a lot of what Colpy said, but he was generally on the right track.

In 1919, World War I was just over. There was a lot of resentment towards Germany from the Brits, as there always is between combatants after hostilities, and particularly when you look at the cost in lives and the horror of modern weaponry, that was really showcased for the first time. Britain up to that point was a colonial power, but the wars were always distant and never a danger to the Mother Country. World War I was just across the Channel and took a tremendous toll on the population.

In 1936, the expansionist policies of Nazism were already in place. They were in violation of the Treaty of Versailles in terms of the number of men in uniform and troops west of the Rhine. They were backing the Franco-Nationalists in Spain, (look up the Condor Legion). They were posturing about the need to unify Germany and Austria. They were making noise about the Sudatenland in Czechoslovakia. The way their economy recovered from the war reparations and the tanking of the world economy in 1929 and grew was, ironically enough, through the establishment of a military industrial complex, such as people like to accuse the US of having today.

Add to this, Churchill was in opposition in 1939 when war was declared (the "peacemaker" Neville Chamberlain saw all the appeasement overtures to the Nazis fail, even after he and the rest of Europe pressured the Czechs into ceding the Sudatenland and proclaimed grandly "there shall be peace in our time").

James Bakker, Major General Fuller and the Sunday Correspondent all express opinions that are not bourne out by the facts. Germany's economy was strong because of its war machine, and that is why it was dangerous. Lord Vansittart was either expressing a personal prejudice or clueless if he thought, even after the Nazis INVADED Poland, that the war was about economics.

I'll disagree with Colpy in that I don't think Germany in 1919 was dangerous except as the Treaty of Versailles created an environment that was a breeding ground for radicalism. There was rampant factional violence in the 20s and early 30s in Germany between communists, the brown shirts (Nazis) and what remained of the civil authorities. Many Germans welcomed Hitler initially, because he promised to "make Germany strong again" and looked to be able to bring an end to that violence. I also don't think Germany is dangerous today: they are powerful in an economic sense, but I also think the 60 years of Soviet occupation in East Germany and the state of alert in the West for all those years (not to mention the residual effects of being the country to create the Holocaust) have made Germans all too aware of the dangers of armed conflict as a means to power.

p.s. DaSleeper: for centuries Brits have referred to themselves as "The Empire", a reflection of the time that it WAS the dominant empire on the planet. Most do not now, but some ardent nationalist types do long for the "glory days"...
 
WLDB
No Party Affiliation
+3
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy View Post

There are two sides to every story. We only got one. Controversy stimulates debate. I don't know what happened since I wasn't there but I have a healthy skepticism about what I've been told is the truth.

The German side of the story is also well known. As has been said before the Treaty of Versailles can take some of the blame for creating the conditions which allowed for Hitler to come to power. Once Hitler had consolidated his power in Germany, it`s a pretty one sided story as Hitler was determined to have a war eventually.

It`s rather unfortunate that the British (and the rest of Europe for that matter) ignored Churchill`s warnings and the fairly obvious signs Hitler was giving.
 
petros
+1
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by DaSleeper View Post

E tu Breezy???

Better than being sleazy.

Quote: Originally Posted by WLDB View Post

Weird seeing someone trying to demonize Churchill thereby defending Hitler.

Who is defending Hitler? I'm only pointing out the aspects few regard as historic, like every war is financial. None have been for "just causes".
 
WLDB
No Party Affiliation
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post


Who is defending Hitler? I'm only pointing out the aspects few regard as historic, like every war is financial. None have been for "just causes".

I didn`t say you were. I was commenting on the OP.

Also, it would depend how you define a `just cause`.
 
petros
#18
As just. How would you describe a just cause?



Which is Nick and which is George?

What are the odds they have relations in Poland?
 
talloola
No Party Affiliation
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

It was Britain and France who declared war on Germany

imagine that, innocent little germany, with a sweet leader who wouldn't hurt a flea,
it is usually a good idea to prepare to stay alive before the invader kills you, good
on britain for doing that, france waited a bit too long I would say, seeing hitler was
allready deciding to make it 'home', for himself and his henchmen.
 
petros
#20
Hitler never wanted to go to war with Britain. He saw them as equals.
 
Vaessen
+1
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy View Post

There are two sides to every story. We only got one. Controversy stimulates debate. I don't know what happened since I wasn't there but I have a healthy skepticism about what I've been told is the truth.

The story, the "official" history of WW2 becomes more and more ridiculous as time goes on. I have no doubt that it is 90% bullsh!t as we see it today.

Textbooks 30 years ago claimed 500,000 Jews were killed. And that's an astronomical number. Somehow that became 6 million today. There are 525,600 minutes in a year. There were roughly 5 years of WW2, and only about 2 years of really outrageous holocaust style mass murders. For them to have killed 6 million Jews, I'm not saying it didn't happen, it would have had to have taken place at a rate of about 1 every 10 seconds. I don't personally believe that they had the manpower or infrastructure to do that while maintaining their frontlines in the war on three continents. I have my doubts as to the actual truth of the WW2 spinmachine we have telling us history today.
 
TenPenny
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Hitler never wanted to go to war with Britain. He saw them as equals.

I thought everybody knew that.
 
Spade
Free Thinker
#23
These quotes originate from a far-right Christian conspiracy group.

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/nl709.htm

Ain't religion grand?!
 
Goober
Free Thinker
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by Vaessen View Post

The story, the "official" history of WW2 becomes more and more ridiculous as time goes on. I have no doubt that it is 90% bullsh!t as we see it today.

Textbooks 30 years ago claimed 500,000 Jews were killed. And that's an astronomical number. Somehow that became 6 million today. There are 525,600 minutes in a year. There were roughly 5 years of WW2, and only about 2 years of really outrageous holocaust style mass murders. For them to have killed 6 million Jews, I'm not saying it didn't happen, it would have had to have taken place at a rate of about 1 every 10 seconds. I don't personally believe that they had the manpower or infrastructure to do that while maintaining their frontlines in the war on three continents. I have my doubts as to the actual truth of the WW2 spinmachine we have telling us history today.

The Nazi's could process up to 10,000 a day at one camp. 70 K a week - 52 weeks -3,640,000.
Auschwitz, Poland – was that camp – The Nazi’s had many Death Camps –

List of Nazi concentration camps - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Auschwitz-Birkenau
Poland - Look it up along with the sub camps.


33,000 shot in Babi Tar – 3 days –

Babi Yar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And if you were reading 30 k - 30 years ago you were not reading anything that was credible
 
DaSleeper
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by Spade View Post

These quotes originate from a far-right Christian conspiracy group.

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/nl709.htm

Ain't religion grand?!

And the point of that post is..........
 
Vaessen
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

The Nazi's could process up to 10,000 a day at one camp. 70 K a week - 52 weeks -3,640,000.
Auschwitz, Poland – was that camp – The Nazi’s had many Death Camps –

And if you were reading 30 k - 30 years ago you were not reading anything that was credible

I said 500 thousand. That's also the number that the Nazi's estimated they killed, along with another 500,000 or so Gypsies, gays, mongoloids, and the odd Christian. They think they killed a million or so people in their death camps, total.

You say Auschwitz could process 10,000 a day but it's far fetched to think they could round up, and process that many people every day. 6 million people is more people than what populates the Prairie provinces, it's as big as the GTA. I'm not saying that some days they didn't kill 10,000 people but I think that the 500,000 number is far more realistic, of course that doesn't take into account the ones that were not at death camps. They probably shot another half million or so Jews, that wouldn't surprise me.

I just think the logistics of transporting 6 million people to death camps and actually accomplishing killing them while having millions of troops on three continents and trying to sustain a huge war operation, is unrealistic. I think they would have if they could have but it's unlikely that they could have.

And look it up, most history books said about 500,000 Jews were slaughtered in the holocaust 30 years ago. The numbers were changed to show that it was impossible to know for sure but it could be between 500,000 and 2 million, and then that was upgraded to 500,000 - 6 million (maximum) and then after time went along the absolute maximum that was thought to be ridiculously high on completely unrealistic, became the spin number that they go with for effect now.

I just think that if people sit back and logically think of how difficult it would be, man power wise and logistically, they will come to understand that no matter how you look at it, 6 million people is a trumped up number that likely isn't anywhere near the truth.
 
Goober
Free Thinker
+2
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by Vaessen View Post

I said 500 thousand. That's also the number that the Nazi's estimated they killed, along with another 500,000 or so Gypsies, gays, mongoloids, and the odd Christian. They think they killed a million or so people in their death camps, total.

You say Auschwitz could process 10,000 a day but it's far fetched to think they could round up, and process that many people every day. 6 million people is more people than what populates the Prairie provinces, it's as big as the GTA. I'm not saying that some days they didn't kill 10,000 people but I think that the 500,000 number is far more realistic, of course that doesn't take into account the ones that were not at death camps. They probably shot another half million or so Jews, that wouldn't surprise me.

Logistics - The Germans were diverting rail cars to carry Jews to Death Camps instead of moving supplies to their troops – Fact

I am 54 going on 55 - I have read since a child – we started school at about 3 ½ or so – we had a retired teacher in our house – so guess what our parents did -Also read a substantial number of books on WW1 and 2 - Roman Empire – Franco –Prussian War – US Civil War - Egypt - Greece - along with mythology - the encyclopedia Britannica - all by age 12. And quite a few twice as there was lots I did not understand – Yep – I was an early geek for books.
And no where do i recall a credible source mentioning 500 K - Not once.

So list those books the quoted 500 K – I am interested.
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
+4
#28
Oh that's it. The Nazi's weren't that bad, they only slaughtered 500,000 Jews not 6 million. Please. Why does this ridiculous argument always get dragged out?
 
Vaessen
+1
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

Logistics - The Germans were diverting rail cars to carry Jews to Death Camps instead of moving supplies to their troops – Fact

I am 54 going on 55 - I have read since a child – we started school at about 3 ½ or so – we had a retired teacher in our house – so guess what our parents did -Also read a substantial number of books on WW1 and 2 - Roman Empire – Franco –Prussian War – US Civil War - Egypt - Greece - along with mythology - the encyclopedia Britannica - all by age 12. And quite a few twice as there was lots I did not understand – Yep – I was an early geek for books.
And no where do i recall a credible source mentioning 500 K - Not once.

So list those books the quoted 500 K – I am interested.


They may have diverted rail carts but I think you're still Naive about the numbers. That is a crazy operation. The Americans couldn't deal with displacing 500,000 New Orleans residents after Katrina and you're talking about rounding up 6 million people, verfiying that they are Jewish and then placing them in a monstrous national multinational program getting them to death camps thousands of miles away and gassing, burning and disposing of them in a couple of years. It's unrealistic to say the least, completely stupid to be quite honest. How many feet on the ground, policemen, gestapo, does it take to verfiy and round up 6 million Jews, especially while fighting a 3 continent war? there's no way they had the manpower. No way.



"I've checked out Churchill's Second World War and the statement is quite correct” not a single mention of Nazi 'gas chambers,' a 'genocide' of the Jews, or of 'six million' Jewish victims of the war. This is astonishing. How can it be explained? Eisenhower's Crusade in Europe is a book of 559 pages; the six volumes of Churchill's Second World War total 4,448 pages; and de Gaulle's three-volume Mémoires de guerre is 2,054 pages. In this mass of writing, which altogether totals 7,061 pages (not including the introductory parts), published from 1948 to 1959, one will find no mention either of Nazi 'gas chambers,' a 'genocide' of the Jews, or of 'six million' Jewish victims of the war."

Richard Lynn, Professor Emeritus,
University of Ulster, December 5, 2005


plaque on display at the Auschwitz camp until 1989: note the "4 million" victims. Above right: This is the plaque currently on display at Auschwitz (2002) - note the suddenly reduced number of victims to 1.5 million - a casual reduction in the number of deaths by 2.5 million which never appeared in the American "free press"

The following data from the 1929, 1942, 1947, and 1963 editions of The World Almanac and Book of Facts published by the New York World Telegram, on pages 727, 849, 748, and 441, respectively, and from the 1996 edition published by Funk & Wagnalls, pg. 646, proves that six million Jews did not die in Nazi concentration camps.

While it's true that the number of Jews in Europe decreased from 10 to 9.4 million between 1928 and 1941, the entire population of Jews in rest of the world also decreased, and much of that was before they could have been exterminated in camps.

All world almanacs show that during WWII the number of Jews in Europe remained flat, but Britannica Book of the Year reports that the number of Jews in the world increased by 600,000, or 4%.

How could 6 million Jews (40% of all Jews and 64% of those in Europe) have died in the Holocaust if their worldwide population increased by 4%?

A possible explanation is that 584,549 Jews disappeared, and then reappeared AFTER the "holocaust" in order to qualify for "war reparations" against a nation neither Jews nor Israel ever took up arms against. In other words, Jews who didn't admit to being Jews during the war suddenly did admit to being Jews when the money was being handed out.


I just think that the numbers don't add up, and they never did.

Quote: Originally Posted by Retired_Can_Soldier View Post

Oh that's it. The Nazi's weren't that bad, they only slaughtered 500,000 Jews not 6 million. Please. Why does this ridiculous argument always get dragged out?

I never said they weren't bad. It gets drug out because we are discussing how WW2 facts and what we're told are often not in line with each other. It's a good example of that. Saying 6 million makes more of a statement than saying 500,000. Much like saying Iraq had WMDs or that the gulf of Tonken actually happened, which it didn't.

Win the war, and you get to rewrite history. That's what I'm saying. And look at the responses. Look at how people use it to call others antisemitic. And then use it to push an American middle East agenda with Israel as the scapegoat. They are still trying to fight Iran and Ahmedinejad being a holocaust denier is one of their big media spin weapons.

I'm just saying that when you sift through the BS the truth underneath it all is never as bad as what the spin machine makes it out to be.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
+1
#30
Certainly no modern war has any fewer than three sides just like the shell games they are. Can you find the bank, I mean pea.
 

Similar Threads

10
More WWII kid propoganda
by CDNBear | Dec 12th, 2006
6
WWII in color
by I think not | Jan 17th, 2006