Nuremberg Trials or Nuremberg Lynch Mob
- Thread starter MHz
- Start date
That isn't the title of the thread and at the moment I like their God better than I like the reports coming in on how they treat fellow humans.
We certainly have nothing to show that we act any better than that, although we do expect the ones we just robbed of land, property and the relatives of the whose very life was taken to sit back and thank us for the 'attention'.
Other subjects sure, why bother bringing them up at this site though. You know nothing about the Bible, and I doubt you could argue the merits and objections to the expanding earth theories (other than the one word argument 'wrong').
Really, take Goober's thread about the Religion question as an example. Yours was actually the first reply, as far as adressing the OP, zero other than some useless advice. My post to the OP was #6 and about post #27 this shows up.
"
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBear
There's only two religious types on this forum, that have "virtually" told me how I should live and about how I'm going to hell. Mhz, and ean.
Gh and the other good Christians here, are nothing like what you have just described. Even to me, a member that once went out of his way to be as cruel and mean to Christians as inhumanly possible.
So I say again.
Without conscience."
Not one reply to the OP but time enough to indicate I have said gummybear is going to hell. Pure bull**** from start to finish. Think I'm a liar, I've got lots of post about what I say the Bible teaches, find one that says I have the little prick goint to hell, that is for the ones who are non-believers at the moment Christ arrives. That's it, go get Gerry to give you his version of where gummybear will be going according to a post he made that defines what a Christian is. Myself and another are the 'bad Christians' while his 'friends' are elevated to a position that is above they pay grade from what I have seen of Gerry. I know like Christian like to rally around somebody who has a real distaste for 'Gawd'. The spelling is that way because that helps him make his point about being a non-believer. My version says God will turn him around when it's time. That doesn't mean he has to be anywhere near the front of the group that is gathered.
Moving on it was post #131 before I even mentioned WWII as a reply to a post rather than me just throwing it in there just out of the blue. Of all the posts in that space how many of mine were off topic compared to the others that were also posting? I even passed up on replying to the lie by the toothless wonder.
Gh and the other good Christians here, are nothing like what you have just described. Even to me, a member that once went out of his way to be as cruel and mean to Christians as inhumanly possible.
So I say again.
Without conscience."
Not one reply to the OP but time enough to indicate I have said gummybear is going to hell. Pure bull**** from start to finish. Think I'm a liar, I've got lots of post about what I say the Bible teaches, find one that says I have the little prick goint to hell, that is for the ones who are non-believers at the moment Christ arrives. That's it, go get Gerry to give you his version of where gummybear will be going according to a post he made that defines what a Christian is. Myself and another are the 'bad Christians' while his 'friends' are elevated to a position that is above they pay grade from what I have seen of Gerry. I know like Christian like to rally around somebody who has a real distaste for 'Gawd'. The spelling is that way because that helps him make his point about being a non-believer. My version says God will turn him around when it's time. That doesn't mean he has to be anywhere near the front of the group that is gathered.
Moving on it was post #131 before I even mentioned WWII as a reply to a post rather than me just throwing it in there just out of the blue. Of all the posts in that space how many of mine were off topic compared to the others that were also posting? I even passed up on replying to the lie by the toothless wonder.
Usualy EAO starts them and Mhz just dives right in....Since EAO is MIA ...he has to start his own and he's not too subtle about it
Got a list?
What makes you thing any of my posts are subtle, let alone a thread I start, at least when I don't put an event that cost 1,000's their live in the joke section.
If you are that confused start at the top and read it all, or is this the height of 'your capabilities'. You might want to ask the Rothschild why 6,000,000 was floating around before the camps closed.
'SIX MILLION' FALSEHOOD REJECTED
As for the fearful propaganda figure of the Six Million, Professor Rassinier rejects it on the basis of an extremely detailed statistical analysis. He shows that the number has been falsely established, on the one hand through inflation of the pre-war Jewish population by ignoring all emigration and evacuation, and on the other by a corresponding deflation of the number of survivors after 1945. This was the method used by the World Jewish Congress. Rassinier also rejects any written or oral testimony to the Six Million given by the kind of "witnesses" cited above, since they are full of contradictions, exaggerations and falsehoods. He gives the example of Dachau casualties, noting that in 1946, Pastor Niemöller reiterated Auerbach's fraudulent "238,000" deaths there, while in 1962 Bishop Neuhäusseler of Munich stated in a speech at Dachau that only 30,000 people died "of the 200,000 persons from thirty-eight nations who were interned there" (Le Drame des Juifs européen, p . 12). Today, the estimate has been reduced by several more thousands, and so it goes on. Rassinier concludes, too, that testimony in support of the Six Million given by accused men such as Höss, Hoettl, Wisliceny and Hoellriegel, who were faced with the prospect of being condemned to death or with the hope of obtaining a reprieve, and who were frequently tortured during their detention, is completely untrustworthy. Rassinier finds it very significant that the figure of Six Million was not mentioned in court during the Eichmann trial. "The prosecution at the Jerusalem trial was considerably weakened by its central motif, the six million European Jews alleged to have been exterminated in gas chambers. It was an argument that easily won conviction the day after the war ended, amidst the general state of spiritual and material chaos. Today, many documents have been published which were not available at the time of the Nuremberg trials, and which tend to prove that if the Jewish nationals were wronged and persecuted by the Hitler regime, there could not possibly have been six millions victims" (ibid, p. 125). With the help of one hundred pages of cross-checked statistics, Professor Rassinier concludes in Le Drame des Juifs européen that the number of Jewish casualties during the Second World War could not have exceeded 1,200,000, and he notes that this has finally been accepted as valid by the World Centre of Contemporary Jewish Documentation at Paris. However, he regards such a figure as a maximum limit, and refers to the lower estimate of 896,892 casualties in a study of the same problem by the Jewish statistician Raul Hilberg. Rassinier points out that the State of Israel nevertheless continues to claim compensation for six million dead, each one representing an indemnity of 5,000 marks.
EMIGRATION: THE FINAL SOLUTION
Prof. Rassinier is emphatic in stating that the German Government never had any policy other than the emigration of Jews overseas. He shows that after the promulgation of the Nuremberg Race Laws in September 1935, the Germans negotiated with the British for the transfer of German Jews to Palestine on the basis of the Balfour Declaration. When this failed, they asked other countries to take charge of them, but these refused (ibid, p. 20). The Palestine project was revived in 1938, but broke down because Germany could not negotiate their departure on the basis of 3,000,000 marks, as demanded by Britain, without some agreement for compensation. Despite these difficulties, Germany did manage to secure the emigration of the majority of their Jews, mostly to the United States. Rassinier also refers to the French refusal of Germany's Madagascar plan at the end of 1940. "In a report of the 21st August, 1942, the Secretary of State for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Third Reich, Luther, decided that it would be possible to negotiate with France in this direction and described conversations which had taken place between July and December 1940, and which were brought to a halt following the interview with Montoire on 13th December 1940 by Pierre-Etienne Flandin, Laval's successor. During the whole of 1941 the Germans hoped that they would be able to re-open these negotiations and bring them to a happy conclusion" (ibid, p . 108). After the outbreak of war, the Jews, who, as Rassinier reminds us, had declared economic and financial war on Germany as early as 1933, were interned in concentration camps, "which is the way countries all over the world treat enemy aliens in time of war ... It was decided to regroup them and put them to work in one immense ghetto which, after the successful invasion of Russia, was situated toward the end of 1941 in the so-called Eastern territories near the former frontier between Russia and Poland: at Auschwitz, Chelmno, Belzec, Majdanek, Treblinka etc ... There they were to wait until the end of the war for the re-opening of international discussions which would decide their future" (Le Véritable Proces Eichmann, p. 20). The order for this concentration in the eastern ghetto was given by Göring to Heydrich, as noted earlier, and it was regarded as a prelude to "the desired final solution," their emigration overseas after the war had ended.
'SIX MILLION' FALSEHOOD REJECTED
As for the fearful propaganda figure of the Six Million, Professor Rassinier rejects it on the basis of an extremely detailed statistical analysis. He shows that the number has been falsely established, on the one hand through inflation of the pre-war Jewish population by ignoring all emigration and evacuation, and on the other by a corresponding deflation of the number of survivors after 1945. This was the method used by the World Jewish Congress. Rassinier also rejects any written or oral testimony to the Six Million given by the kind of "witnesses" cited above, since they are full of contradictions, exaggerations and falsehoods. He gives the example of Dachau casualties, noting that in 1946, Pastor Niemöller reiterated Auerbach's fraudulent "238,000" deaths there, while in 1962 Bishop Neuhäusseler of Munich stated in a speech at Dachau that only 30,000 people died "of the 200,000 persons from thirty-eight nations who were interned there" (Le Drame des Juifs européen, p . 12). Today, the estimate has been reduced by several more thousands, and so it goes on. Rassinier concludes, too, that testimony in support of the Six Million given by accused men such as Höss, Hoettl, Wisliceny and Hoellriegel, who were faced with the prospect of being condemned to death or with the hope of obtaining a reprieve, and who were frequently tortured during their detention, is completely untrustworthy. Rassinier finds it very significant that the figure of Six Million was not mentioned in court during the Eichmann trial. "The prosecution at the Jerusalem trial was considerably weakened by its central motif, the six million European Jews alleged to have been exterminated in gas chambers. It was an argument that easily won conviction the day after the war ended, amidst the general state of spiritual and material chaos. Today, many documents have been published which were not available at the time of the Nuremberg trials, and which tend to prove that if the Jewish nationals were wronged and persecuted by the Hitler regime, there could not possibly have been six millions victims" (ibid, p. 125). With the help of one hundred pages of cross-checked statistics, Professor Rassinier concludes in Le Drame des Juifs européen that the number of Jewish casualties during the Second World War could not have exceeded 1,200,000, and he notes that this has finally been accepted as valid by the World Centre of Contemporary Jewish Documentation at Paris. However, he regards such a figure as a maximum limit, and refers to the lower estimate of 896,892 casualties in a study of the same problem by the Jewish statistician Raul Hilberg. Rassinier points out that the State of Israel nevertheless continues to claim compensation for six million dead, each one representing an indemnity of 5,000 marks.
EMIGRATION: THE FINAL SOLUTION
Prof. Rassinier is emphatic in stating that the German Government never had any policy other than the emigration of Jews overseas. He shows that after the promulgation of the Nuremberg Race Laws in September 1935, the Germans negotiated with the British for the transfer of German Jews to Palestine on the basis of the Balfour Declaration. When this failed, they asked other countries to take charge of them, but these refused (ibid, p. 20). The Palestine project was revived in 1938, but broke down because Germany could not negotiate their departure on the basis of 3,000,000 marks, as demanded by Britain, without some agreement for compensation. Despite these difficulties, Germany did manage to secure the emigration of the majority of their Jews, mostly to the United States. Rassinier also refers to the French refusal of Germany's Madagascar plan at the end of 1940. "In a report of the 21st August, 1942, the Secretary of State for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Third Reich, Luther, decided that it would be possible to negotiate with France in this direction and described conversations which had taken place between July and December 1940, and which were brought to a halt following the interview with Montoire on 13th December 1940 by Pierre-Etienne Flandin, Laval's successor. During the whole of 1941 the Germans hoped that they would be able to re-open these negotiations and bring them to a happy conclusion" (ibid, p . 108). After the outbreak of war, the Jews, who, as Rassinier reminds us, had declared economic and financial war on Germany as early as 1933, were interned in concentration camps, "which is the way countries all over the world treat enemy aliens in time of war ... It was decided to regroup them and put them to work in one immense ghetto which, after the successful invasion of Russia, was situated toward the end of 1941 in the so-called Eastern territories near the former frontier between Russia and Poland: at Auschwitz, Chelmno, Belzec, Majdanek, Treblinka etc ... There they were to wait until the end of the war for the re-opening of international discussions which would decide their future" (Le Véritable Proces Eichmann, p. 20). The order for this concentration in the eastern ghetto was given by Göring to Heydrich, as noted earlier, and it was regarded as a prelude to "the desired final solution," their emigration overseas after the war had ended.
I doubt that you could argue your way out of a wet paper bag. If you have that ability, you keep your talents well hidden. You know nothing about materials science, structural engineering, fluid mechanics, or strengths of materials. But that doesn't keep you from posting.
Sure, you can quote from some book called 'the Bible', but it appears that you don't actually understand it.
Based on you first sentence you seem to have about 50 brain cells still working. You would just step through the wet paper, it's not very hard. I love test, too bad it's come from such a simple source.
materials science, does this have to do with pulling on a star so hard if changes it's structure enough that it can no longer produce light?
structural engineering, does this have to do with a floor joist in WTC 1 or 2 b3eing able to distort twi box columns that are many tiome stronger?
fluid mechanics, does this have to do with the difficulties in shoving a lighter material into a pool of liquid that is twice as dense as the 'pushed object'? hint. it would fold and go upwards where there is a less dense area to go.
or strengths of materials, does this have to do with the same issue as the floor joists pulling in the WTC towers, might as well throw in that beam that moved itself to cause WTC7 to fall also.
materials science, does this have to do with pulling on a star so hard if changes it's structure enough that it can no longer produce light?
structural engineering, does this have to do with a floor joist in WTC 1 or 2 b3eing able to distort twi box columns that are many tiome stronger?
fluid mechanics, does this have to do with the difficulties in shoving a lighter material into a pool of liquid that is twice as dense as the 'pushed object'? hint. it would fold and go upwards where there is a less dense area to go.
or strengths of materials, does this have to do with the same issue as the floor joists pulling in the WTC towers, might as well throw in that beam that moved itself to cause WTC7 to fall also.
About the only bone I would throw MHz in this argument is that the above quote is an exageration: the Nazis murdered Jews, as well as homosexuals, communists, trade union organizers, as well as anyone else who might have disagreed with them. There is historical record of the Brown Shirts in the '30s using physical intimidation tactics on political opponents. There is no disputing that the Nazis murdered millions of people (the irony is they probably murdered more Slavs in eastern Europe, whom they also considered "untermensch" or sub human, like the Jews but we always seem to fixate on the Jews... perhaps because many of them were German citizens before the rise of the Nazis).
Not every German was a Nazi and to be honest I would hesitate in saying that even most were. I'll give an anecdotal comparison (which isn't the best but I think is telling) in that my paternal grandparents were both of German descent (Grandma was born in eastern Germany, in what is now ceded to Poland and Grandpa was born in Bruderheim, Alberta, the son of Prussian immigrants) but Canadian citizens. They were both here and married before the war. When I was younger, I had all sorts of questions about the War and if Grandpa served, etc... like many young kids of my generation, I was fascinated by soldiers and WWII was the conflict we focused on. I remember my grandparents talking about it when I was perhaps 8 or 10 and had raised the subject and their response was that "no Grandpa didn't go fight, he had to look after the farm" but then there was some discussion with my parents and at one point comments about " we just kept our mouths shut and looked after our farm. Those that were too mouthy got put away". I now put those comments alongside the fact that the Canadian gov't DID intern Japanese Canadians (mostly from the West Coast) and I can't help but wonder if this wasn't the attitude of many in Germany as well: "keep your mouth shut and do your job or you'll get put away; don't ask questions, just stay out of their way and they'll leave us alone". We can talk about the ramifications and ethics of this kind of attitude but that doesn't change the fact that it existed and still does in many people. Its more a tangent than anythnig else but I also believe that almost 60 years of communist occupation and repression of east Germany as well as the loss of some German territory (my Prussian ancestor's city of Konigsberg is now the Russian city Kaliningrad for example) has more than paid the price for what the German people let happen.
As for the Nazis, many of them WERE animals. Some were political toadies looking to curry favour (which is only marginally less repulsive to me) but they all, and especially the true believers in the dogma, deserved punishments they received. Questioning numbers posted on a site like Wikipedia is assinine: its like convicting someone of a crime based solely on your next-door neighbour's opinion without talking to the people who investigated the crime or examining the facts for yourself.
First let us look at what could have happened and why. Germany declared unconditional war
on the Allies. Therefore once unconditional war was declared, it means the first rule is there is
no rules. Therefore if you examine the situation, we did not have to put anyone on trial when they
unconditionally surrendered. We could have put anyone and everyone on trial and charged them
with what ever we wanted. That is what unconditional means. They were given a trial.
The people were treated humanely and with a measure of respect. Actually none was required
as the surrender was unconditional. In fact Churchill wanted to divide Germany up and hand it out
to various countries in Europe and wipe Germany off the map, but that did not happen either.
In my view Germany got away with the most monster of crimes and we were far too good to them.
Of course the reason for that is, after World War One Germany didn't fair too well and those
resentments led to further problems. For one, I believe the Allies behaved well and with restraint,
had the Russians had their way the German People would have suffered a hell of a lot more than
they did. Germany behaved in a manner totally uncivilized almost unmatched in human history.
Some of the senior officers were spared the death penalty and that is unfortunate, the other thing
that still ticks me is the Catholic Church through the Odessa network, smuggled some of the
worst of the killers to safety in South America, and they got away with their crimes as well.
When looking at the pages of human history it is difficult to look at them without the slightest of
emotion, however it seems to be that some can look at them without any sense of conscience.
There is no excuse for mass murder, whether you are Mr. Hitler or Mr. Stalin or any other of
histories tyrants. When we start looking at things with a sense of oh we created a Lynch Mob,
we open the door with the invitation to have someone do it all over again. What the Nazis did
was uncivilized by anyone's standards.
on the Allies. Therefore once unconditional war was declared, it means the first rule is there is
no rules. Therefore if you examine the situation, we did not have to put anyone on trial when they
unconditionally surrendered. We could have put anyone and everyone on trial and charged them
with what ever we wanted. That is what unconditional means. They were given a trial.
The people were treated humanely and with a measure of respect. Actually none was required
as the surrender was unconditional. In fact Churchill wanted to divide Germany up and hand it out
to various countries in Europe and wipe Germany off the map, but that did not happen either.
In my view Germany got away with the most monster of crimes and we were far too good to them.
Of course the reason for that is, after World War One Germany didn't fair too well and those
resentments led to further problems. For one, I believe the Allies behaved well and with restraint,
had the Russians had their way the German People would have suffered a hell of a lot more than
they did. Germany behaved in a manner totally uncivilized almost unmatched in human history.
Some of the senior officers were spared the death penalty and that is unfortunate, the other thing
that still ticks me is the Catholic Church through the Odessa network, smuggled some of the
worst of the killers to safety in South America, and they got away with their crimes as well.
When looking at the pages of human history it is difficult to look at them without the slightest of
emotion, however it seems to be that some can look at them without any sense of conscience.
There is no excuse for mass murder, whether you are Mr. Hitler or Mr. Stalin or any other of
histories tyrants. When we start looking at things with a sense of oh we created a Lynch Mob,
we open the door with the invitation to have someone do it all over again. What the Nazis did
was uncivilized by anyone's standards.
The Red Cross didn't see any holocost in the work camps during the war. I guess they were anti semites. The holocost only appeared during Nuremburg in conjunction with an outbreak of crushed testicles and broken fingers.
Okay, MHz.......you badly need to get off the hate sites on the net and read some serious history......so, go down to the local bookstore and buy these two:
Start with Niall Ferguson's The War of the World: History's Age of Hatred That will give you an overview.........by a real historian.
Niall Ferguson - Home
Then, once you are in the groove, and have finished with Ferguson......try this one;
The Years of Extermination: Nazi Germany and the Jews, 1939 to 1945 by Saul Friedlander It is the definitive work on the Holocaust. 663 pages of carefully researched historical fact, backed up with 98 pages of notations, and a 75 page bibliography of sources, many of them first hand. The book won him the Pullitzer Prize.
Oh, and Friedlander is a survivor....he was hidden in a monastary by French Catholics, and converted to Catholicism. Both his parents were gassed at Auschwitz.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Friedländer
Now then, when you have finished both of those works, come talk to me. Debunk them if you can, I'll argue with you....
Until then, I simply refuse to take your complete ignorance on the subject seriously.
Oh, I'd lend you my copies, but I'm afraid you'd burn them.
Start with Niall Ferguson's The War of the World: History's Age of Hatred That will give you an overview.........by a real historian.
Niall Ferguson - Home
Then, once you are in the groove, and have finished with Ferguson......try this one;
The Years of Extermination: Nazi Germany and the Jews, 1939 to 1945 by Saul Friedlander It is the definitive work on the Holocaust. 663 pages of carefully researched historical fact, backed up with 98 pages of notations, and a 75 page bibliography of sources, many of them first hand. The book won him the Pullitzer Prize.
Oh, and Friedlander is a survivor....he was hidden in a monastary by French Catholics, and converted to Catholicism. Both his parents were gassed at Auschwitz.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Friedländer
Now then, when you have finished both of those works, come talk to me. Debunk them if you can, I'll argue with you....
Until then, I simply refuse to take your complete ignorance on the subject seriously.
Oh, I'd lend you my copies, but I'm afraid you'd burn them.
Can Silly nut hunt beside DB boobery? DB boobery bores whatever keyword past the wolf. The tense lunatic rocks next to the barrister. DB boobery ices a wit over the circle.
Wouldn't bring food packets to the Jews who were locked up be anti-anti-Semitic? You are right though they were right there, after getting that first permnission slip to deliver food to one camp it was a short time only until manmy other camps were also getting food packets.
9. THE JEWS AND THE CONCENTRATION CAMPS: A FACTUAL APPRAISAL BY THE RED CROSS
There is one survey of the Jewish question in Europe during World War Two and the conditions of Germany's concentration camps which is almost unique in its honesty and objectivity, the three-volume Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War, Geneva, 1948. This comprehensive account from an entirely neutral source incorporated and expanded the findings of two previous works: Documents sur I'activité du CICR en faveur des civils detenus dans les camps de concentration en Allemagne 1939- 1945 (Geneva, 1946), and Inter Arma Caritas: the Work of the ICRC during the Second World War (Geneva, 1947). The team of authors, headed by Frédéric Siordet, explained in the opening pages of the Report that their object, in the tradition of the Red Cross, had been strict political neutrality , and herein lies its great value. The ICRC successfully applied the 1929 Geneva military convention in order to gain access to civilian internees held in Central and Western Europe by the Germany authorities. By contrast, the ICRC was unable to gain any access to the Soviet Union, which had failed to ratify the Convention. The millions of civilian and military internees held in the USSR, whose conditions were known to be by far the worst, were completely cut off from any international contact or supervision. The Red Cross Report is of value in that it first clarifies the legitimate circumstances under which Jews were detained in concentration camps, i.e. as enemy aliens. In describing the two categories. of civilian internees, the Report distinguishes the second type as "Civilians deported on administrative grounds (in German, "Schutzhäftlinge"), who were arrested for political or racial motives because their presence was considered a danger to the State or the occupation forces" (Vol. 111, p. 73). These persons, it continues, "were placed on the same footing as persons arrested or imprisoned under common law for security reasons." (P.74). The Report admits that the Germans were at first reluctant to permit supervision by the Red Cross of people detained on grounds relating to security, but by the latter part of 1942, the ICRC obtained important concessions from Germany. They were permitted to distribute food parcels to major concentration camps in Germany from August 1942, and "from February 1943 onwards this concession was extended to all other camps and prisons" (Vol. 111, p. 78). The ICRC soon established contact with camp commandants and launched a food relief programme which continued to function until the last months of 1945, letters of thanks for which came pouring in from Jewish internees.
RED CROSS RECIPIENTS WERE JEWS
The Report states that "As many as 9,000 parcels were packed daily. From the autumn of 1943 until May 1945, about 1,112,000 parcels with a total weight of 4,500 tons were sent off to the concentration camps" (Vol. III, p. 80). In addition to food, these contained clothing and pharmaceutical supplies. "Parcels were sent to Dachau, Buchenwald, Sangerhausen, Sachsenhausen, Oranienburg, Flossenburg, Landsberg-am-Lech, Flöha, Ravensbrück, Hamburg-Neuengamme, Mauthausen, Theresienstadt, Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen, to camps near Vienna and in Central and Southern Germany. The principal recipients were Belgians, Dutch, French, Greeks, Italians, Norwegians, Poles and stateless Jews" (Vol. III, p. 83). In the course of the war, "The Committee was in a position to transfer and distribute in the form of relief supplies over twenty million Swiss francs collected by Jewish welfare organisations throughout the world, in particular by the American Joint Distribution Committee of New York" (Vol. I, p. 644). This latter organisation was permitted by the German Government to maintain offices in Berlin until the American entry into the war. The ICRC complained that obstruction of their vast relief operation for Jewish internees came not from the Germans but from the tight Allied blockade of Europe. Most of their purchases of relief food were made in Rumania, Hungary and Slovakia. The ICRC had special praise for the liberal conditions which prevailed at Theresienstadt up to the time of their last visits there in April 1945. This camp, "where there were about 40,000 Jews deported from various countries was a relatively privileged ghetto" (Vol. III, p. 75). According to the Report, "'The Committee's delegates were able to visit the camp at Theresienstadt (Terezin) which was used exclusively for Jews and was governed by special conditions. From information gathered by the Committee, this camp had been started as an experiment by certain leaders of the Reich ... These men wished to give the Jews the means of setting up a communal life in a town under their own administration and possessing almost complete autonomy. . . two delegates were able to visit the camp on April 6th, 1945. They confirmed the favourable impression gained on the first visit" (Vol. I, p . 642). The ICRC also had praise for the regime of Ion Antonescu of Fascist Rumania where the Committee was able to extend special relief to 183,000 Rumanian Jews until the time of the Soviet occupation. The aid then ceased, and the ICRC complained bitterly that it never succeeded "in sending anything whatsoever to Russia" (Vol. II, p. 62). The same situation applied to many of the German camps after their "liberation" by the Russians. The ICRC received a voluminous flow of mail from Auschwitz until the period of the Soviet occupation, when many of the internees were evacuated westward. But the efforts of the Red Cross to send relief to internees remaining at Auschwitz under Soviet control were futile. However, food parcels continued to be sent to former Auschwitz inmates transferred west to such camps as Buchenwald and Oranienburg.
NO EVIDENCE OF GENOCIDE
One of the most important aspects of the Red Cross Report is that it clarifies the true cause of those deaths that undoubtedly occurred in the camps toward the end of the war. Says the Report: "In the chaotic condition of Germany after the invasion during the final months of the war, the camps received no food supplies at all and starvation claimed an increasing number of victims. Itself alarmed by this situation, the German Government at last informed the ICRC on February 1st, 1945 ... In March 1945, discussions between the President of the ICRC and General of the S.S. Kaltenbrunner gave even more decisive results. Relief could henceforth be distributed by the ICRC, and one delegate was authorised to stay in each camp ..." (Vol. III, p. 83). Clearly, the German authorities were at pains to relieve the dire situation as far as they were able. The Red Cross are quite explicit in stating that food supplies ceased at this time due to the Allied bombing of German transportation, and in the interests of interned Jews they had protested on March 15th, 1944 against "the barbarous aerial warfare of the Allies" (Inter Arma Caritas, p. 78). By October 2nd, 1944, the ICRC warned the German Foreign Office of the impending collapse of the German transportation system, declaring that starvation conditions for people throughout Germany were becoming inevitable. In dealing with this comprehensive, three-volume Report, it is important to stress that the delegates of the International Red Cross found no evidence whatever at the camps in Axis- occupied Europe of a deliberate policy to exterminate the Jews. In all its 1,600 pages the Report does not even mention such a thing as a gas chamber. It admits that Jews, like many other wartime nationalities, suffered rigours and privations, but its complete silence on the subject of planned extermination is ample refutation of the Six Million legend. Like the Vatican representatives with whom they worked, the Red Cross found itself unable to indulge in the irresponsible charges of genocide which had become the order of the day. So far as the genuine mortality rate is concerned, the Report points out that most of the Jewish doctors from the camps were being used to combat typhus on the eastern front, so that they were unavailable when the typhus epidemics of 1945 broke out in the camps (Vol. I, p. 204 ff)- Incidentally, it is frequently claimed that mass executions were carried out in gas chambers cunningly disguised as shower facilities. Again the Report makes nonsense of this allegation. "Not only the washing places, but installations for baths, showers and laundry were inspected by the delegates. They had often to take action to have fixtures made less primitive, and to get them repaired or enlarged" (Vol.III, p. 594).
NOT ALL WERE INTERNED
Volume III of the Red Cross Report, Chapter 3 (I. Jewish Civilian Population) deals with the "aid given to the Jewish section of the free population," and this chapter makes it quite plain that by no means all of the European Jews were placed in internment camps, but remained, subject to certain restrictions, as part of the free civilian population. This conflicts directly with the "thoroughness" of the supposed "extermination programme", and with the claim in the forged Höss memoirs that Eichmann was obsessed with seizing "every single Jew he could lay his hands on." In Slovakia, for examle, where Eichmann's assistant Dieter Wisliceny was in charge, the Report states that "A large proportion of the Jewish minority had permission to stay in the country, and at certain periods Slovakia was looked upon as a comparative haven of refuge for Jews, especially for those coming from Poland. Those who remained in Slovakia seem to have been in comparative safety until the end of August 1944, when a rising against the German forces took place. While it is true that the law of May 15th, 1942 had brought about the internment of several thousand Jews, these people were held in camps where the conditions of food and lodging were tolerable, and where the internees were allowed to do paid work on terms almost equal to those of the free labour market" (Vol. I, p. 646). Not only did large numbers of the three million or so European Jews avoid internment altogether, but the emigration of Jews continued throughout the war, generally by way of Hungary, Rumania and Turkey. Ironically, post-war Jewish emigration from German-occupied territories was also facilitated by the Reich, as in the case of the Polish Jews who had escaped to France before its occupation. "The Jews from Poland who, whilst in France, had obtained entrance permits to the United States were held to be American citizens by the German occupying authorities, who further agreed to recognize the validity of about three thousand passports issued to Jews by the consulates of South American countries" (Vol.I, p. 645). As future U.S. citizens, these Jews were held at the Vittel camp in southern France for American aliens. The emigration of European Jews from Hungary in particular proceeded during the war unhindered by the German authorities. "Until March 1944," says the. Red Cross Report, "Jews who had the privilege of visas for Palestine were free to leave Hungary" (Vol. I, p. 648). Even after the replacement of the Horthy Government in 1944 (following its attempted armistice with the Soviet Union) with a govenment more dependent on German authority, the emigration of Jews continued. The Committee secured the pledges of both Britain and the United States "to give support by every means to the emigration of Jews from Hungary," and from the U.S. Govermnent the ICRC received a message stating that "The Government of the United States ... now specifically repeats its assurance that arrangements will be made by it for the care of all Jews who in the present circumstances are allowed to leave" (Vol. I, p . 649).
I don't dispute that point at all, unfortunately many that should have been jailed for life (or executed) ended up being given sanctuary by the US and they became the backbone of the American CIA and they are into a lot of very bad ****, still.
YouTube - The CIA and the Nazis-Full Length Documentary
Thanks, any time-limit on when I have to post a few questions to show I've actually read it?
Not my style, even if I am a Christian German.
Manipulative propaganda is my favorite subject. Sometimes I'm busy elsewhere.Usualy EAO starts them and Mhz just dives right in....Since EAO is MIA ...he has to start his own and he's not too subtle about it
I can see far more people missing than approximately 5.7 million Jews. Nazis also deliberately exterminated the Roma, Poles, Slavs, Blacks, Jehovah Witnesses...
I can also see all the other deaths, soldiers, collateral damage (civilians) and other inevitable war carnage. How come you can only see Jewish suffering? What else don't you see?
As a result of deliberately manipulative propaganda over time, the Nazi death and labor camps became collectively known only for Jewish suffering. That suffering of millions of people is now used to provide cover for another group of war criminals who claim to represent all Jews and all "Holocaust" suffering.
I agree with this orthodox Jew and (former?) Zionist:
YouTube - UK Jewish MP: Israel acting like Nazis in Gaza
Many Jews disagree with the Holocaust Industry:
Norman G. Finkelstein The Holocaust Industry
I believe it happened, despite agenda driven interference of empirical historical research. There is too much supporting evidence to deny that millions of people were systematically exterminated. I can also point to many other mass slaughter in recent and ancient history which dwarf this event. But I can't find another example where such an event justifies ongoing suffering today against a group of people who had little to nothing to do with the the excuse
I beg to differ. Not only do we excuse our mass murderers, we seek them out when we are desperate and afraid... The American people re-elected George Bush after it was known he had started an unprovoked war which resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths and millions of refugees... few of whom are accepted into the US BTW.
During WWII one of our war criminals was pulled over for drunk driving on the way back to the airbase. The officer derided him for drinking and driving, "Sir, don't you realize you could have killed someone?". Our war criminal replied, "Young man, I'll have you know I kill thousands of people every night.".
The Nazis were clever and manipulative. They could have bribed sympathetic officials to look the other way... Absence of evidence isn't proof of absence.
Last edited:
Because you're great at it.
Did you see the link you asked for in the thread on Marc Emery?
Or are you going to ignore that link you ignore everything else that doesn't suit your agenda?
Just asking.
The postwar war crimes trials were flawed for sure. But if you're only problem is that you believe the number of murdered Jews was inflated, you're still suspiciously a Jew hater. Because of all the things there were wrong with those trials, how many millions of Jews were murdered is hardly worth all the attention you're giving it.
The Tokyo trials are probably the worst example. In that trial, as the dissenting judge noted, the Allies charged members of the Japanese government and military with war crimes in Asia the Allies themselves had committed for centuries prior and committed continually up until the war began and went right back to committing when they got their colonies back. And for political purposes, in order to keep Japan stable and prevent it from going red, several officials who should have been charged with war crimes were given a free pass, and in the case of Hirohito, the subject of an intensive American PR campaign to absolve of all responsibility, even knowledge, of the crimes committed in his name.
But of course, there aren't any Jews involved in this, so all your efforts in criticizing the war crimes tribunals rest on Nuremberg and revolve entirely around the comparatively unimportant total death toll of the Holocaust. Pretend no one has ever heard of the other victims of the Holocaust, announce those victims like your unmasking a massive cover-up and toss in an irrelevant tangent about Israel and everyone can tell it's not about the truth for you. It's about the Jews.
The Tokyo trials are probably the worst example. In that trial, as the dissenting judge noted, the Allies charged members of the Japanese government and military with war crimes in Asia the Allies themselves had committed for centuries prior and committed continually up until the war began and went right back to committing when they got their colonies back. And for political purposes, in order to keep Japan stable and prevent it from going red, several officials who should have been charged with war crimes were given a free pass, and in the case of Hirohito, the subject of an intensive American PR campaign to absolve of all responsibility, even knowledge, of the crimes committed in his name.
But of course, there aren't any Jews involved in this, so all your efforts in criticizing the war crimes tribunals rest on Nuremberg and revolve entirely around the comparatively unimportant total death toll of the Holocaust. Pretend no one has ever heard of the other victims of the Holocaust, announce those victims like your unmasking a massive cover-up and toss in an irrelevant tangent about Israel and everyone can tell it's not about the truth for you. It's about the Jews.
Do you see any Japanese names on the docket list for these trials?
How about I do this one first as it is going to be shorter, maybe,
Born 1932 and was 14 when he learned of his parents death. Any idea how that info got out during the time the camps were said to be operating. From high-school he went directly into the Israeli army, since he was vice-minister of defense in about 1960 that gives him a pretty solid connection to the IDF.
The book you reference wasn't published until 2007, no publications prior to 1966. Why the gap if it was as important to his life as claimed.
The book in question would be a collection of stories gathered from others who may or may not be trustworthy sources, it is not close to being an impartial eye-witness account of what went on in the camps. To do that the person giving the witness account would be the one whose character would be under examination. If in examining their various testimonies errors were found (I'm not saying there are any at this point) then what does that do to the credibility of the whole book? To me it only means each story has to be thoroughly examined, that isn't any difference for any work that includes information from a 3rd party.
The current relevance of the Holocaust has little to do with the original tragedy or the supposed lessons learned.
The Nazis had a system of classifying people like Apartheid South Africa and Zionist Israel. The leaders of both Nazi Germany and Apartheid South Africa subscribed to the ideas of a "Master Race" and Eugenics. Zionists subscribe to the idea of "God's Chosen People" and divine right.
These man made classification systems are designed to separate people into identifiable groups in order to determine rights and level of inequality. Nazism, Apartheid and Zionism are extreme examples of discrimination. BTW, Zionism isn't the only current example of man's inhumanity toward man, but its one of the most severe and long lasting. Sadly Zionist war criminals enjoy the Harper Government's unshakable support. I'm as sad as if Harper declared unshakable support for Nazi war criminals.
The Nazis had a system of classifying people like Apartheid South Africa and Zionist Israel. The leaders of both Nazi Germany and Apartheid South Africa subscribed to the ideas of a "Master Race" and Eugenics. Zionists subscribe to the idea of "God's Chosen People" and divine right.
These man made classification systems are designed to separate people into identifiable groups in order to determine rights and level of inequality. Nazism, Apartheid and Zionism are extreme examples of discrimination. BTW, Zionism isn't the only current example of man's inhumanity toward man, but its one of the most severe and long lasting. Sadly Zionist war criminals enjoy the Harper Government's unshakable support. I'm as sad as if Harper declared unshakable support for Nazi war criminals.
Last edited: