The Gas Chamber Lie Won't Fly
- Thread starter einmensch
- Start date
I just don't believe there were gassing or pits of people burned or giant ovens especially when there are shiloads of "holocaust" survivors who worked their terms and were released.
Either these people kissed some serious Nazi ass and turned their backs on their people and families and to reduce their shame and burden of guilt, made stories up or "went along to get along" to cover their own asses or there is "some" truth to "Work Will Set You Free".
Either these people kissed some serious Nazi ass and turned their backs on their people and families and to reduce their shame and burden of guilt, made stories up or "went along to get along" to cover their own asses or there is "some" truth to "Work Will Set You Free".
Nice try. Read up Johnny. I'm not denying there wasn't mass death I just pointed out that responsibility for what happened is far broader than is generally perceived. You won't be the first to walk away having learned something about the past and about yourself.
Enjoy!
2000 years a group of Hebrew Rabbis were corrupt and occultists and had no troubles killing another Jew for their own gain. Back then they were known as Pharisees who are today's Zionist. Those are the ones that pissed off Jesus and were ripping off the people and were tyrants. The Sadducess were the ones being ripped off and "terrorised" by Pharisees with their ties to the Roman army (sound familiar?). Sadducess are today's Rabbinical Jews who are shown above buring the flag of Israel and the Zionist occultists.
READ for pete's sakes.
These groups have been at it for over 2000 years. To the occultist Zionists making a "burnt offering" is no big issue when to you the Rabbinicals aren't equals and are lesser people. They litterally believe their sacrifice of their brethren to God is why there is an Israel today.
By all means let the true Hebrews have their nation of Israel in Palestine where all three great religions lived in peace until the occult "burnt offering" took place.
The true Heebs get along just fine with the Muzzies but the occultists get in their way.
READ for pete's sakes.
These groups have been at it for over 2000 years. To the occultist Zionists making a "burnt offering" is no big issue when to you the Rabbinicals aren't equals and are lesser people. They litterally believe their sacrifice of their brethren to God is why there is an Israel today.
By all means let the true Hebrews have their nation of Israel in Palestine where all three great religions lived in peace until the occult "burnt offering" took place.
The true Heebs get along just fine with the Muzzies but the occultists get in their way.
Last edited:
Yeah Babylon where the Pharisees lost contact with Judeaism wrote the Talmud and deleved deeper into the occult and demon summoning.
The "Star of David" is in reality the "HEXagram of Solomon" used to bring forth demons and is in no way identified with Judeaism.
Symbols and sigils are pagan and baned in the Torah.
The Rabbinicals KNOW that it is occult and try to inform but get run down and labelled as "weirdos" and "conspiracy theorists".
The "Star of David" is in reality the "HEXagram of Solomon" used to bring forth demons and is in no way identified with Judeaism.
Symbols and sigils are pagan and baned in the Torah.
The Rabbinicals KNOW that it is occult and try to inform but get run down and labelled as "weirdos" and "conspiracy theorists".
Pay close attention to the "Maltese Cross" used in conjuction with the hexagram working together in this sigil to ritually envoke dark spirits to assist in their evil.
18th Century B.C. Cuneiform tablets at the time of Hammurabi of Babylon denote the "Bene-Yamin" [Benjamin] or Children of the Right Hand [First secular mention of the Jews} Noted as an "aggressive people threatening urban centers"1 Concurrent with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
A very interesting subject petros, one that I think requires intimacy. If not, then why the constant bombardment in the MSM today and the long history that predates christianity (the alleged source of anti-semitism) by two thousand years at least.
The subject permeates our world and begs understanding but at the same time is taboo in the popular culture.
The subject permeates our world and begs understanding but at the same time is taboo in the popular culture.
The use of the word "Semite" has been conveniently bastardized from the Hebrew "Shem". If you want the word origins use the Oxford Dictionary which says:
Semite
/seemit/ • noun a member of a people speaking a Semitic language, in particular the Jews and Arabs.
ORIGIN from Greek Sem ‘Shem’, son of Noah in the Bible, from whom these people are traditionally descended.
The real theme to the word Shemite is about bloodlines not linguistics or being a Jew. There is no doubt thousands of people who have that bloodline and aren't Jewish (a religious designation).
This anti-Semitism over history is about gaining control from those of the true bloodline placing Talmidic diatribe over the Torah.
Still grasping at straws drunkbeaver? You can call me names all you like but it doesn't change anything. You still haven't refuted a single thing I've posted about it.
You can hope to change the subject, derail the thread, move way off topic and rip on Jews. But you can't refute a damn thing.
So step the **** off with your Jew hating BS and stop trying to turn a horrible action into some out of focus backhand swipe at the victims of the holocaust. Next time you pull this crap I won't be so ****ing nice about it.
The broad scope of it has been discovered indeed but intent is something that has never been established or anything beyond rumour of gas chambers beyond delousing. The story we are given says nothing was ever put on paper about Jewish genocide by the Nazis and was word of mouth with only a few elite insiders knowing the grand scheme of things.
With all those who escaped, worked in intelligence and underground organizations I find it hard to believe there was no specific knowledge of Jewish genocide until spring of 44.
How does calling it a holocaust or ritualistic "burnt offering" show respect to the dead?
So what's the deal? Was it a ritual and a sacrificial offering or was it homicide?
Well it does seem to have resulted in the long sought Isreali state. So in that regard sacrifice is entirely appropriate in my estimation. We are asked to remember the supreme sacrifice of allied troops every year, so mass sacrifice is certainly not a fiction in our world. We also have the Japanese civilians sacrificed for security reasons it would seem and the Bengalis lightly cast into the pit by the British for purely stratigic reasons, sacrifical offerings are by no means things of the spiecies remote infancy. What were the actual goals of the holocaust. Keeping in mind the cooperation between the Zionists and the Nazis before and during the war it seems one is compelled to speculate that all is certainly not as it is popularly portrayed. Comfortable secure sucessful citizens wouldn't seem to be good candidates to embark on an uncertain future in a far away alien land without very compelling reasons. As was noted by numerous Zionist writers of the period preceeding the second world war and as is readily seen in the reluctance of Jews in general to emigrate to Isreal, as I understand it. Homocide, sacrificial offering, is there a difference, dosen't the later require the former? The state of Isreal was entirely impossible to attain without the holocaust, that is the important fact. Who or what benefited? There is always life from death.
Still grasping at straws drunkbeaver? You can call me names all you like but it doesn't change anything. You still haven't refuted a single thing I've posted about it.
You can hope to change the subject, derail the thread, move way off topic and rip on Jews. But you can't refute a damn thing.
So step the **** off with your Jew hating BS and stop trying to turn a horrible action into some out of focus backhand swipe at the victims of the holocaust. Next time you pull this crap I won't be so ****ing nice about it.
Come and get me asshole, you know where I am.
Read the works of Weishaupf, Nietzsche, Pike, Marx, Crowley and Hall. EVERYTHING these people have written about regarding their future, our past and present has came to fruition in really really ****ty ways.
Every supposed "fact" in this post is incorrect.
First of all, historians do not claim there was no paper record of the Holocaust....quite the contrary. The documentary eveidence is overwhelming! saul Friedlander's The Years of Extermination lists 800 sources in the Bibliography......including memoirs, diaries, letters, speeches,.....and collections of German gov't documents....reports, memos, ...the designer of the Auschwitz gas chambers PATENTED the design, for God's sake!
He makes the point that EVERYONE in Germany knew about the Holocaust by the end of 1942.....remember, the "Final Solution" was not really put into gear until late in 1941.
So, your entire view of the situation is based on a false premise.
Time to re-examine.
http://www.nogw.com/download/_07_jewish_dec_of_war_germany.pdf
Thus, the fact - one conveniently left out of nearly all history on the subject - is
that Hitler's March 28, 1933 boycott order was in direct response to the
declaration of war on Germany by the worldwide Jewish leadership just four days
earlier. Today, Hitler's boycott order is described as a naked act of aggression, yet
the full circumstances leading up to his order are seldom described in even the
most ponderous and detailed histories of "the Holocaust".
Not even Saul Friedlander in his otherwise comprehensive overview of German
policy, Nazi Germany and the Jews, mentions the fact that the Jewish declaration
of war and boycott preceded Hitler's speech of March 28, 1933. Discerning
readers would be wise to ask why Friedlander felt this item of history so
irrelevant.
db Colpy is this assertion true? db
Thus, the fact - one conveniently left out of nearly all history on the subject - is
that Hitler's March 28, 1933 boycott order was in direct response to the
declaration of war on Germany by the worldwide Jewish leadership just four days
earlier. Today, Hitler's boycott order is described as a naked act of aggression, yet
the full circumstances leading up to his order are seldom described in even the
most ponderous and detailed histories of "the Holocaust".
Not even Saul Friedlander in his otherwise comprehensive overview of German
policy, Nazi Germany and the Jews, mentions the fact that the Jewish declaration
of war and boycott preceded Hitler's speech of March 28, 1933. Discerning
readers would be wise to ask why Friedlander felt this item of history so
irrelevant.
db Colpy is this assertion true? db
db How about this did Mr Freidlander include it in his books?
In a similar vein, the Jewish newspaper Natscha Retsch wrote:
The war against Germany will be waged by all Jewish communities,
conferences, congresses... by every individual Jew. Thereby the war
against Germany will ideologically enliven and promote our interests,
which require that Germany be wholly destroyed.
The danger for us Jews lies in the whole German people, in
Germany as a whole as well as individually. It must be rendered
harmless for all time.... In this war we Jews have to participate, and
this with all the strength and might we have at our disposal.
However, note well that the Zionist Association of Germany put out a telegram on
the 26th of March rejecting many of the allegations made against the National
Socialists as "propaganda," "mendacious" and "sensational."
In fact, the Zionist faction had every reason to ensure the permanence of National
Socialist ideology in Germany. Klaus Polkehn, writing in the Journal of Palestine
Studies ("The Secret Contacts: Zionism and Nazi Germany, 1933-1941"; JPS v.
3/4, spring/summer 1976), claims that the moderate attitude of the Zionists was
due to their vested interest in seeing the financial victory of National Socialism to
force immigration to Palestine. This little-known factor would ultimately come to
play a pivotal part in the relationship between Nazi Germany and the Jews.
http://www.nogw.com/download/_07_jew...ar_germany.pdf
Certainly neither validates the holocaust as forgivable in any way but it does help to see the power train leading to the horrific events of the second world war.db
In a similar vein, the Jewish newspaper Natscha Retsch wrote:
The war against Germany will be waged by all Jewish communities,
conferences, congresses... by every individual Jew. Thereby the war
against Germany will ideologically enliven and promote our interests,
which require that Germany be wholly destroyed.
The danger for us Jews lies in the whole German people, in
Germany as a whole as well as individually. It must be rendered
harmless for all time.... In this war we Jews have to participate, and
this with all the strength and might we have at our disposal.
However, note well that the Zionist Association of Germany put out a telegram on
the 26th of March rejecting many of the allegations made against the National
Socialists as "propaganda," "mendacious" and "sensational."
In fact, the Zionist faction had every reason to ensure the permanence of National
Socialist ideology in Germany. Klaus Polkehn, writing in the Journal of Palestine
Studies ("The Secret Contacts: Zionism and Nazi Germany, 1933-1941"; JPS v.
3/4, spring/summer 1976), claims that the moderate attitude of the Zionists was
due to their vested interest in seeing the financial victory of National Socialism to
force immigration to Palestine. This little-known factor would ultimately come to
play a pivotal part in the relationship between Nazi Germany and the Jews.
http://www.nogw.com/download/_07_jew...ar_germany.pdf
Certainly neither validates the holocaust as forgivable in any way but it does help to see the power train leading to the horrific events of the second world war.db
There have been many holocausts throughout history. Why is this one so important, so canonized in recent history that it has polarized humanity. As holocausts go it was rather insignificant, yet it is talked about as if it were the only time in history that a holocaust has occurred.
History
“By 1492 there were approximately 100 million Native Americans - a fifth more or less of the human race.” - Ronald Wright Stolen Continents, 1992
“In the end the Great Dying probably claimed a hundred million Amerindians in less than a hundred years...” - Andrew Nikiforuk The Fourth Horseman, 1991
“It is now believed that there were between 90 and 110 million aboriginal people in the Americas, of whom 90 per cent were killed or died in the first century after European contact - incomparably the most appalling holocaust in human history.” - Dangerous Memories: Invasion and Resistance Since 1492
Chicago Religious Task Force on Central America
History
“By 1492 there were approximately 100 million Native Americans - a fifth more or less of the human race.” - Ronald Wright Stolen Continents, 1992
“In the end the Great Dying probably claimed a hundred million Amerindians in less than a hundred years...” - Andrew Nikiforuk The Fourth Horseman, 1991
“It is now believed that there were between 90 and 110 million aboriginal people in the Americas, of whom 90 per cent were killed or died in the first century after European contact - incomparably the most appalling holocaust in human history.” - Dangerous Memories: Invasion and Resistance Since 1492
Chicago Religious Task Force on Central America