[John Friend talks with Germar Rudolf on Holocaust revisionism and why there were no homicidal gas chambers in the German camps.

— KATANA.]

_______________________

The Realist Report

John Friend with

Germar Rudolf

Click the link below to John’s blog post:

The Realist Report – Germar Rudolf

Click here to listen to the: audio

The Realist Report Description

Published on Nov 5, 2020

The Realist Report – Germar Rudolf
November 5, 2020 Realist Report 14 comments

Check out Germar’s personal website.

On this edition of The Realist Report, we’re joined by the courageous revisionist Germar Rudolf. Germar and I discuss his background and experience in the revisionist movement, the main conclusions he has drawn from his revisionist work, his excellent Holocaust Handbooks website and much more!

Please consider making a donation for Germar’s legal defense.

__________________________

CONTENTS

John’s Introduction

Germar’s Background and His Start in Revisionism

Paul Rassiner, the French Founder of Holocaust Revisionism

Discovering the Leuchter Report

Starting My PhD at Max Planck Institute in Stuttgart

The Leuchter Report — Jumping the Gun

Zyklon B — How Stable over Time?

A Trip to Auschwitz for Samples

Having Max Planck Institute Build a Little Gas Chamber

Writing an Expert Report for Use in Holocaust Denial Court Cases

German Court Breaks the Law and Denies Expert Testimony

German Lawyers Prosecuted for Filing “Holocaust Denial” Motion

Fleeing Germany and Starting a Publishing Enterprise

Italian Scholar Carlo Mattogno World’s Foremost Expert

Why the Focus on Auschwitz?

Gas Chamber Stories from a Tiny Number of Survivors

Your Main Conclusions About Auschwitz?

The Facilities and the Chemical Evidence Shows That It Didn’t Happen

Auschwitz was a Death Camp, but Not a Murder Camp

History of the Camp — Planned as a POW Camp for Russians

Plan B — Use Jews as Forced Labour

Lack of Sanitary Facilities Leads to Typhus and Catastrophe

Hundreds Die Each Day

SS Personel Succumb to Typhus

Dr Wirths

High Ground Water Levels Require Bodies to be Burnt

Introduction of Delousing Facilities Including Microwave Devices

Responsibility for the Deaths Lies with the Reich

Starting July 1942 Most Jews Were Not Admitted to the Camp but Sent Elsewhere in the Region

Death Book Records vs Four Million

Total Auschwitz Deaths About 100,000

Genocide Does Not Require Gas Chambers

The Genocide Charge Doesn’t Go Away

Your Current Legal Problems

Personal Website and Holocaust Handbooks Website

Comments at the Realist Report

See Also

PDF

Version History

__________________________

TRANSCRIPT

(55:25)

[00:00]

John’s Introduction

top

[Jim Rizoli, in Oct 2015, interviewed the now late Professor Robert Faurisson. Prof Faurisson, one of the “fathers” of “Holocaust” Revisionism passed away on Oct 22, 2018, aged 89.

— KATANA.]

_______________________

Jim Rizoli

Interviews

Prof Robert Faurisson

Oct, 2015

Click the link below to view the video on YouTube (may not be available in some locations):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqRLnpJ_8ek&t=1838s

Also here on Bitchute:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/FbVcINOtox9k/

YouTube Description

Extraordinary Revisionists

Certain features have been disabled for this video
In response to user reports, we have disabled some features, such as comments, sharing, and suggested videos, because this video contains content that may be inappropriate or offensive to some audiences.

Jim Rizoli, Robert Professor Faurisson interview.

Published on Nov 9, 2015

__________________________

TRANSCRIPT

(114:46)

[00:00]

[Intro song] No one knows what it’s like to be a bad man, feel the sadness, behind the light, …

[00:33]

Jim: It’s a pleasure to meet you! I’ve seen a lot of your videos. I read your information, and I’m just amazed to see what you’ve been through. And I have a lot of questions for you. And I would like to ask you all these questions I have laid out for me. And the first question I’d like to ask you is, I would think anyway that you are the “patriarch” of the revisionist movement! Wouldn’t you say that?

Prof Faurisson: Yes, with brothers, my friends.

Jim: Okay. [chuckling] All right. First of all, where were you born?

Prof Faurisson: So, I was born in England, near London, in a place called Shepperton.

Jim: OK. All right.

Prof Faurisson: I was born to a Scottish mother and a need a French father.

Jim: All right.

Prof Faurisson: My father was working in a shipping company, in Fenchurch street, London. Excuse me?

Jim: What year? The year you were born?

Prof Faurisson: Oh, 1929. After Jesus Christ!

Jim: [laughing] OK! So you didn’t know Jesus?

Prof Faurisson: I’m nearly 87.

Jim: 87! Oh, okay, very good! All right. Well, you are getting up there. That’s good! Where did you go to school?

Prof Faurisson: At the beginning it was in Singapore, in an English school. A beautiful English school! I think it was 1934, ’35.

Jim: OK.

Prof Faurisson: Then in Japan, in Kobe in an American school. And then I came back to France. And my mates would mock me because of my English accent! Our shores. So I decided not to speak English any more!

Jim: Okay.

Prof Faurisson: And that’s why I have to ask you to pardon me my poor and broken English.

Jim: I think you speak just fine! You speak better than half the people in my country. [laughing]

Prof Faurisson: Oh really!

Jim: Yeah! We have are some problems with people speaking English in my country!

Prof Faurisson: I understand.

Jim: Let me ask you this, about your education. Can you tell us about your education?

Prof Faurisson: So my education was really in France and only in Catholic schools.

Jim: Okay.

Prof Faurisson: And I have to say something which is perhaps sad for you. I don’t know. It happens that I am in [word unclear] but I’ve always been in Catholic schools.

Jim: OK.

Prof Faurisson: And especially in a Jesuit school in [word unclear].

Jim: Okay, all right.

Prof Faurisson: And then I was also in a Catholic school, a very famous one in Paris, called College [word unclear].

Jim: Okay. Very good.

The big question here is, how did the “Holocaust” issue come into play with you? When did you start, or how did you start getting interested in that issue?

[04:15]

Prof Faurisson: I’m going to be perhaps a little bit long. Excuse me.

Jim: That’s fine! You can talk as long as you want. My cameras are working, everything’s fine, so I might just move this down just a little bit, but that’s fine. All right. So you can tell us exactly, all about your “Holocaust” issue days. How’s that?

Prof Faurisson: Yes. So during the war itself I was totally anti-German. And I had a little trouble, because of that. In 1939 I was ten. In 1945, end of the war, I was sixteen. Now I’m going to tell you something which happened in 1942. In 1942 Pierre Laval*, he was the Prime Minister of Marshall Petain.

[* Pierre Jean-Marie Laval (28 June 1883 – 15 October 1945) was a French politician. During the time of the Third Republic, he served as Prime Minister of France from 27 January 1931 to 20 February 1932, and a second time from 7 June 1935 to 24 January 1936.

Laval began his career as a socialist, but over time drifted far to the right. Following France’s defeat and armistice with Germany in 1940, he served in prominent roles in Philippe Pétain’s Vichy Regime, first as the vice-president of the Council of Ministers from 11 July 1940 to 13 December 1940, and later as the head of government from 18 April 1942 to 20 August 1944.

After the liberation of France in 1944, Laval was arrested by the French government under General Charles de Gaulle. In what was widely regarded as a flawed trial, Laval was found guilty of high treason, and after a thwarted suicide attempt, he was executed by firing squad. His manifold political activities left a complicated and controversial legacy, resulting in more than a dozen conflicting biographies of him. SOURCE: Wikpedia]

And he said in a speech. He said:

“I hope that Germany will win this war!”

And he added:

“Because otherwise it would be the victory of communism in Europe!”

And I was incensed, because he had said that he wished the victory of Germany. Because, myself, I was hoping the victory of the French, the Gaulists, the English, Churchill. Of the Americans, of course, and I have to add, it’s very important, I wished the victory of Stalin!

It happens that by being on the side of the Americans, I was also on the side of the Soviets! And remember, it was in a Jesuit college that the priest came into place where I had written on my pulpit, “Mo a Laval” [sp] which means “Death to Laval”. And he mocked me and he said, in front of my mates. He said, … I’m going to say it in French first. Okay?

 

“Oh fo Faurrisson [word unclear]”.

 

“Oh you Faurrisson! With your English people who are running like rabbits in the desert!”

 

It was because the English in Tobruk, Benghazi and places like that were having a difficult time with the German troops of Rommel. Okay, so I was on the side of those people.

And one day, exactly on the 8th of May 1945 which was the capitulation of Germany, if you remember.

My father entered my room, my bedroom, that I shared with my brother Phillipe, and he said in French. He said:

“Robert, es-tu heureux?”

 

“Robert, are you happy?”

And I remember that I was a little bit embarrassed by that question. And I said:

“Yes.”

But, suddenly, I don’t know why, I thought for the German people, for the German soldiers. And I thought to myself.

“Now that they are vanquished. They have been fighting so hard, I have to respect the vanquished. I am on the side of the victor. I have to respect those people. And I’m going to protect them! And I want to understand what really happened.”

Do you understand that?

Jim: Yeah! Yeah, no, I understand.

Prof Faurisson: And I decided in a way to be like a referee, trying to see what really happened. And I didn’t want to be any more, anti-German, or pro-Stalin, and so on.

And I can say that this very day, I was 16, I decided to revise history! Which means to have a second look, a third one, and so on. And to check and to double check and to be “fair”!

Do, you know, that “fair”, we cannot translate it into French. It’s so typically British, “fair”. Try to be fair with the vanquished!

So, I remember that in college [word unclear] where I was, many of my mates didn’t understand my opinion about all this. And some of them thought that I was a “Nazi”! I was absolutely not a “Nazi”! [laughing] I wanted to understand, that is all!

And it happens that I read a book by a man called Paul Rassinier. And Paul Rassinier wrote a book called, the title is extraordinary, “The Lies of Ulysses”. Ulysses, of course, Homer. A story told by Homer. Ulysses, you see, was among the victors. When he came back home, a long time after, he told plenty of stories about his experience of war.

And, especially about his sufferings He had, really, let’s say hundreds of sufferings, that he told the people a [word unclear] of stories about his sufferings. It’s normal in a way, it’s human.

So, Paul Rassinier himself, had been a Resistance [a member of the French Resistance] and he had been in two German concentration camps.

And when he heard the stories about gas chambers, and so on, he said:

 

“Oh! This is strange! Because in the camp where I was, there was no question of gas chambers. I am going to see, how is it that so many people are talking about gas chambers in Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora.”

And then, he checked, he tried to check for Auschwitz and other camps. And he was very surprised to see that we had only “testimonies”! No proof. No real proof was brought, like in a criminal case.

Let’s suppose that there is next to the place you are yourself, a crime. Automatically the judge, a magistrate will decide that there will be a forensic report. He will never say:

“Oh, I have so many witnesses that I don’t need such a report.”

No! He needs a report. And sir, I can tell you sound thing extraordinary.

Since 70 years, we had only one! One forensic report. We needed that. Thanks to a forensic report, you can see what was a “gas chamber”, how it functions, what was the place of the crime. What was the weapon of the crime, an extraordinary one!

And we don’t have that! We and only one report, it was a French one about a camp in France called Struthof*, near Strasbourg.

[* Natzweiler-Struthof was a German-run concentration camp located in the Vosges Mountains close to the Alsatian village of Natzwiller (German Natzweiler) in France, and the town of Schirmeck, about 50 km (31 m) south west of the city of Strasbourg.]

And the forensic report was done but Dean of the Faculty of Pharmacy, in Paris. And we know the result. The report disappeared!

That we know, thanks to three other doctors, we know what were the conclusions of Struthof. The conclusion was:

“No hydrocyanic acid.”

Because Zyklon B is hydrocyanic acid. None in the so-called “gas chambers”. None in the chimney! And none in the bodies of 86 jews, supposed to have been gassed!

Jim: Now where is that report today? Who has that report?

Prof Faurisson: The report should have been, should be today, but I’ve been and I’ve checked, and there is no report in a place called Meaux, a place for the [word unclear] You see? Where they have all those documents. And considering the results of Professor Rene Farbe, nobody else decided in 70 years to have a forensic report! Because they knew that it would be too dangerous.

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: And I think that very few people know that, because they think that we have witnesses, so we don’t need anything else!

Jim: Right!

Prof Faurisson: No! We need first a forensic report.

Jim: Now, let me let me get into your situation with the Zundel Trial. How did you get involved with Zundel Trial and all that? What happened there?

Prof Faurisson: Yes. I met Ernst Zundel, who is an extraordinary man! An exceptional man! I think in 1979, in Los Angeles. Because in Los Angeles, for the first conference of historical revisionist organization. I mean, myself a conference.

See: The World’s First Anti-Holocaust Convention — Instauration Dec, 1979

And I remember a lady saying:

“Oh, this is dynamite!”

I am going to tell you why dynamite. I go back to Zundel. I will certainly not forget him!

I had been in Auschwitz in 1975. I am going to give you an idea of the way I made my investigations.

I saw, what is called “Crematoria I” with the supposed gas chamber to kill people. Immediately I saw that it was not, certainly not a gas chamber! Because you had a tiny little door with partly a glass. And the door would open on this side, so that the corpses, cadavers would have been there blocking the door.

Jim: So it opened inwards, it opened inwards, right?

Prof Faurisson: Yeah. And you see with the glass [the glass window in the door] you do this with your elbow. And hydrocyanic acid, you know what? It goes at twenty metres from there to the SS [word unclear]

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: So, it’s a totally impossible! But investigate, follow me there. I went to the Museum of Auschwitz, and I said to the people. There I am.

“I am a professor in Sorbonne, I am interested in Auschwitz, and I want someone of you people to help me in my investigation. But I want the top of the top of you people!”

And they said “okay”, and a man came. His name Marshar Wick [sp].

And we had a conversation in German. I said.

“Are you ready to help me?”

And he said:

“Jawohl!”

And he would always say “Jawohl!” [chuckling], except once where he said “Ja!”. So watch for this, which is coming.

And I said:

“Ich habe ein Problem!”

 

“I have a problem! Come with me!”

And I brought him to a place right in front of the Krema I (Crematoria I), which had on one side a supposed gas chamber. On the other side the place of the furnaces, for the cremation.

And the door, another door, not the little one before. The door was open and everyone could see an oven, a furnace. So, from where we were, I told them only, I asked him a question only, with one German word.

I said:

“Echt?”

Which means, “authentic?”

And he said:

 

“Jawohl!”

I said:

“Come with me.”

He came with me. I put my finger on the opening, and I showed him that there was no, I think you say “soot”?

Jim: Yeah. Soot.

Prof Faurisson: And then the man suddenly, his face changed. And he said:

“Rekonstruiert.”

Which means, “reconstructed”.

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: Now wait a minute. A reconstruction doesn’t mean that with have a lie there. Because it could be fair, it could be honest. But it could also be not fair and not honest. And I had an idea. You need to have ideas! And to express them right, you see.

I said suddenly, looking at his face, I said:

“Also hast du Pläne?”

Which means, “Therefore, you have plans?” And he said:

“Ja.”

Jim: Yeah [chuckling].

Prof Faurisson: And I said:

“Wo sind die Pläne?”

 

“Where are the plans?”

And he said:

“You would have to go and see Mr Iwaszko. The [person] responsible for the archives.”

But the next day I had to go back to France. So I came back in March, 1976.

And this is what I have been on the 19th of March, 1976. I went to see Mr Iwaszko. I brought in a bottle of alcohol. He didn’t say anything. He [word unclear] me, nothing. I said:

“I’ve seen Mr Marshar Wick, and I want to see the plans.”

Of those supposed gas chambers. Because not only in Crematoria I, Crematoria II, III, IV and V. I want to see them. He showed me a big table. Okay, I sat down and I wait. And the man brought me documents and documents of the trial of the poor Rudolf Hoess, who had been one of the three successive commandants of Auschwitz. And, it was about the trial, and it was all in Polish! I said:

 

“Oh! Bad luck for me. I don’t understand Polish at all.”

And so by looking, and looking over, I saw little, tiny little photos, with captions in German. And I understood the plans, of all those places! And I paid in zloty [Polish currency]. I paid for 116 photos. I came back to France. I was very pleased! But I had to wait and wait, and wait, to have the photos.

Anyway, to make it short, I didn’t know where I could publish! The internet did not exist. It was impossible! I knew that it was dynamite! What could I do? And finally, a friend of mine told me:

 

“I know a Spanish journalist. He could come and perhaps publish your stuff.”

The journalist came with someone helping him, okay.

And I said:

“You see, you can take photos, but I don’t want any photo of me. I don’t want my face in your magazine!”

He said:

 

“Yes.”

And so on, and went away. And a few months after, I discovered the magazine with a title, with of course, my face! And the title:

“Defense Lawyer of Hitler!”

I was the “defense lawyer of Hitler”! And the troubles began at that time. And I worked very, very [word unclear] very, very long time in a place called “Centre de documentation Juive Contemporaine”, “Contemporary Jewish Documentation Center”* Okay, it’s in Paris.

[The Centre de documentation Juive Contemporaine (CDJC, Contemporary Jewish Documentation Center) was clandestinely created in France to document the persecution of the country’s Jews during the Second World War. It is a key component of the Shoah Memorial.

The CDJC — Centre de documentation juive contemporaine, or Contemporary Jewish Documentation Center — was the seed from which the Shoah Memorial eventually grew. Its founders’ determination to document the genocide of Europe’s Jews during the war is still one of the main missions of the Shoah Memorial, a museum, documentation center and memorial at the same time.

The foundation of the CDJC dates back to April 28, 1943, when industrialist Isaac Schneersohn clandestinely brought together around 40 Jewish activists and community leaders in his Grenoble apartment to discuss the idea of creating an archive.

The goal was to set up an organization that would collect evidence on the persecution of the Jews in order to bear witness and demand justice after the war. A few years later, they achieved their aim when Nuremberg trial prosecutors relied on documents from the CDJC archives. Source: Http://www.memorialdelashoah.org/en/archives-and-documentation/the-documentation-center/the-history-of-the-cdjc.html]

And this is, I want to tell you, that I said when I entered the place for the first time, I said to the man:

“I want a photo of a gas chamber.”

And the answer of the man, was:

“We have many testimonies! We have many books.”

I said:

 

“A photo!”

And he said something else, like that. And I said:

“A photo!”

And he said:

“Sit down!”

And for 60 minutes I waited for a lady who was going everywhere trying to, find a plan, not a plan, excuse me, a photo of a gas chamber. And there were no photo, at all. Because he felt that I knew something about the topic, and [chuckling] it was dangerous for them.

Jim: Right.

[28:29]

Prof Faurisson: And, you see, I worked very much and I decided to the United States for our conference, where I met Zundel. And so I am coming back to Zundel.

My English being so bad, I decided to find someone to read the paper of my conference. And this man was Ernst Zundel! And, it was in Los Angeles in 1979. And I came back very often to the United States, because what I wanted to see was an American gas chamber.

You see, an American gas chamber — I visited one in Baltimore [word unclear] An American gas chamber, is, was, because they are no more, was functioning with hydrocyanic acid.

And what I saw was something extraordinary! To kill only one man, it was in iron [the construction of the chamber]. It was thick like that. The windows were something called “aircrete”, which means “very strong”.

And there was a pier in the center. Why a pier? And I’m going to give you immediately the answer. It’s rather easy to kill someone with hydrocyanic acid. But the question is, how can I kill someone without killing myself?

Jim: Right!

Prof Faurisson: How can I enter a place, where I have the corpse of someone which has so much hydrocyanic acid, because hydrocyanic acid penetrates everywhere!

You see, it’s fantastic how it penetrates! And stays there. And you cannot touch it. So how could medical doctor and two people helping him, how could they get into the place? So, I have know time to explain will try to explain that. It’s [word unclear].

Jim: So the so whole point was, that you saw that the gas chamber, they say was a gas chamber at Auschwitz, the crematory I, the gas chamber combination. You saw that there was no way they could gas anybody in a building like that. And when you came here to the United States, you saw a real gas chamber and now you can see, well this is the way you do it. The way they had it, you could not do it.

Prof Faurisson: Exactly.

Jim: Right, okay.

Prof Faurisson: And you see it was a terrible thing, because as soon as did this, I got into real problems. And my wife, and my children, and now some of my grandchildren. You have to be ready for that, okay?

Jim: Well tell tell us what, …

Prof Faurisson: I have to say something about American gas chambers.

Jim: Okay, go ahead.

Prof Faurisson: How is it. In this gas chamber you had [word unclear] which move, you see.

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: To get after the killing of the man, to get all the gas you have something on the top for aspiration [extraction] of the poison. And the poison gets into, in French what we call [word unclear], which is a place where you neutralize hydrocyanic acid. Okay? And the stuff which is supposed to be neutralized is sent into pipe and then into a chimney. The chimney must be higher than all the penitentiary.

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: And the day of an execution, the guards have no right to be on the top [guard towers]. It’s so dangerous, you see.

And when you see that I would say it’s finished! You understand that it’s finished! Now what about the pillar, the central pillar. This is the explanation. The people are so afraid that the hydrocyanic acid could get outside, could [word unclear] everything for the installation, you see, that they try to make a depression [a lower pressure that outside the chamber]. A depression, you understand? Okay. If you make a depression all this could crumble [collapse] so you had to put a pillar to make it strong.

Jim: Okay.

Prof Faurisson: Something else. Very important. Hydrocyanic acid is explosive! The Germans, … I have found documents and documents about all that. They talk about “Explosionsgefahr”, “danger of explosion”.

And, do you know why the man that you are going to kill is, how do you say “ligoté”, which is “strapped”, …

Jim: Strapped, yeah.

Prof Faurisson: Very strongly! Why? It’s because if this man gets loose, he might create static electricity.

Jim: Sparks. Right.

Prof Faurisson: And you would have an explosion.

Jim: Yep.

Prof Faurisson: But I remember when I visited [chuckling] this gas chamber in Baltimore, I had an explanation, not only from the director, but even from inmates helping the gassing procedure, and so on. And they said that the day you have an execution, or an exercise also, everybody is afraid. Everyone could be poisoned, or gassed, or killed, and so on.

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: And we have this silly story of the confession of Hoess. And how did they get this confession? So, I made a discovery about that. Do, you know, that I could make you confess to whatever I wanted?

Jim: Yep.

Prof Faurisson: And you could get me confessing whatever you want, without touching. Nothing! There is a way, a fantastic way! You forbid the man to sleep. One day is possible, two days, …

Jim: Oh, I see what you are saying. You are saying you have it so he doesn’t sleep, he stays up all the time?

Prof Faurisson: He cannot sleep.

Jim: Oh okay. Yeah. Deprive him of sleep.

Prof Faurisson: Yes. You don’t even need to touch the man, you need to make noise, and so on. Because those dirty people, they confessed in a book how they did manage to get those confessions. And said that with a stick when he was like that, they would waken the poor man.

Jim: Yeah.

Prof Faurisson: And the stupidity of the story. Hoess confessed that when the people inside the gas chamber stopped screaming, they understood that they were dead. So, they put a ventilation, they push a button for a, how do you say, “ventilation”, …

Jim: A fan, a ventilation fan.

Prof Faurisson: A fan. And immediately they would get into the place. And “immediately” is the German word, “sofort”. It’s a terrible word. Immediately they would enter the place, eating and smoking! Which means without even a gas mask!

Jim: Right! Makes no sense.

Prof Faurisson: And smoking, you could have an explosion.

Jim: Yeah, right.

Prof Faurisson: You see, so those confessions are nothing!

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: They are lies only!

Jim: Now he said 2 1/2 million people were killed that way, didn’t he? Didn’t he say, 2 1/2 million?

Prof Faurisson: Yes, different figures. They got different figures from him. As, you know, about the figures it’s a fantastic story. So if you are very careful and if you want to see the figures given only for Auschwitz and Birkenau, it begins at 9 million!

Jim: Oh! Wow!

Prof Faurisson: Yes. Then you have 8, 7, I don’t remember if you have 6.

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: But what we got for a very long time, was four million.

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: And suddenly in 1990 they decided to destroy this monument [plaque] with four million killed.

And then they put one million and a half! Suddenly. And then the historians got down one million, then you had someone like Pressac, a friend of the Klarsfelds, who said 700,000, and then you had a man giving 510,000. Nothing you see. There’s no sense.

Jim: How many do you think died, in the camps. Can you explain that to us? What do you think are the real figures?

Prof Faurisson: I cannot answer your questions, Sir.

Jim: Okay.

Prof Faurisson: And I’m going to tell you why. It’s because I would need to go into a place called [word unclear] where you have many many documents. And I cannot go to this place. It’s impossible. It would be forbidden.

Jim: Okay.

Prof Faurisson: Now do you want me to tell you the reactions in France first, and then in the world, about my discoveries?

Jim: Sure! Yeah. Go ahead.

Prof Faurisson: Yeah, okay. So all this I put in a long paper. The title is “The Victories of Revisionism”.

And it was published on the internet on December 11, 2006. And I gave all sorts of reactions of the people who were against us. And it’s extraordinary the admission. Yes, extraordinary! I must say that in 78 [1978] I was attacked, physically attacked!

Jim: Where did that happen when you were attacked?

Prof Faurisson: Oh, I was attacked ten times! So the first part is important. Two in Lyon where I was a professor at the University of Lyon. Two in Vichy where I live. Four in Paris.

Jim: Wow!

Prof Faurisson: And two in Stockholm. In Stockholm I ran away so quickly that they were not even able to catch me!

Jim: Wow!

Prof Faurisson: Surprisingly, we have this on camera. You could check it.

Jim: Okay. Wow!

Prof Faurisson: So, I was attacked, especially one day in Vichy. They nearly killed me!

Jim: Yeah, wow!

Prof Faurisson: I was saved by a young man. I didn’t know this man. He was a fisherman. He was a student I was told. And he was nearly one meter ninety [190 cm/6’ 3” tall]. And the day after the attack, he saw my name in the newspaper and he said to the police, that he regretted to have saved my life! [chuckling]

Jim: Oh! Wow!

Prof Faurisson: And so, the newspaper, the most important in France, is Le Monde. And they had to publish something, they had to say a professor has been attacked! They tried to not say why.

Jim: Wow.

Prof Faurisson: So, we have in France what we call, the “right to reply”. But it is a very difficult one to angle. In answer I said:

“Why don’t you say to people why I was attacked?”

And I said:

 

“For years and years I’ve been sending you papers about the problem of the gas chambers. How is it that you don’t publish it. You should do it”.

Jim: Yeah.

Prof Faurisson: And so, they were obliged to publish it, and it was a terrible hullaballoo!

Jim: Wow! What year was that? What year did you publish that?

Prof Faurisson: I published that, … Oh! Good question. I published that in Lavetour [sp].

[45:00]

People of the extreme Left. They published my stuff. So the question was, I said very simple:

“Show me, or draw me a Nazi gas chamber!”

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: Why did I say, “or draw me”? Because some people might say:

 

“We cannot show you something that the Germans have destroyed.”

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: So I say okay, okay, so show me what the Germans have destroyed! I want to see.

And can you imagine the number of articles, of things like that, which appeared at that time. It was seventy eight, seventy nine.

Jim: Okay. Now let me ask your question. When you published this information, did that affect your job as a professor!

Prof Faurisson: Oh! It was finished for me!

Jim: Wow!

Prof Faurisson: It was a disaster!

Jim: Did they fire you?

Prof Faurisson: My specialty I must say, the university, one of my two specialties was appraisal of texts and documents, literature, history major. You see it was my specialty.

I would train my students to look at a documentary. Very short. Three times. Once with the sound. They without the sound. And then again, with the sound.

And they were so surprised, to see for example, they show you in those films, they show you cadavers, corpses. And they talk about people being killed! So you think you are seeing people who have been killed! But they are in the same shape, all of them. You could see that they died from typhus.

Jim: Right. Sure. Natural causes, or diseases. Yeah, I get you.

Prof Faurisson: And you have to story, very interesting of Bergen-Belsen. Bergen-Belsen was a camp on the west, and the British were coming next to Bergen-Belsen. Where it was a disaster. Because of the bombings. Because no more Zyklon B as pesticide. Nothing to eat and even no more water. It was a disaster!

So the Germans decided something very strange. Not well known. They decided to go with a White flag to the troops of Montgomery, and say:

“Now be careful. You are approaching a place where you have typhus and so on. Don’t liberate the prisoners! It could be a disaster even for your troops.

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: For us, for the civilians, and so on. And the British decided to collaborate with the Germans!

And they went to this camp, and this camp, it was a very sandy place. Sand, Sand. So they could put the bodies in the sand. Do you understand?

Jim: Yeah.

Prof Faurisson: And they wanted to know how many people had been buried like that. And they decided to make six big places to put back the bodies once they have a figure, a number. OK? So they took out the bodies, they counted them and a bulldozer pushed to the place where German woman of the Army were obliged with naked hands to throw the bodies into the new place.

And the bulldozer, you see it so quickly, that most of the people think it’s a German bulldozer, with a German driver. That it was a kind of industry to kill the people every day!

And to make it more possible to believe in that, you had even pictures with the driver, you cannot see his head! You cannot see it is a Tommy [British soldier]. That it is a British driver. People think it was a German industry!

Jim: Right.

[50:52]

Prof Faurisson: Because you must know something. All this topic about, how do you say that, those things and so on, had already been used during WWI! French and English propaganda would say that the Germans were an English [word unclear] of terrorists, or [word unclear] like that. Fabricating terrors and so on.

So the same story was taken for WWII, but they added “gas”.

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: Gas, when it was, be careful, when it was American, or Western propaganda. But for the Russians, nobody knows that. I described that. Let me tell you this. The Soviets liberated Auschwitz on January 27, 1945. So I had the idea to get someone to go and see the Pravda. “Pravda” means “truth”. The newspaper, the communist newspaper. And I said:

“You begin please on the 28th of January and see when they are going to talk about Auschwitz. On the 28th nothing! 29, nothing! 30, nothing. 31, nothing. First of February, a little thing. And then suddenly on the second of February the biggest discovery of the Soviets! Did, you know how, according to the Soviets, the people were killed in Auschwitz?

Jim: No.

Prof Faurisson: You cannot imagine. They were killed by electricity!

Jim: Oh, okay. I got it. Yeah.

Prof Faurisson: And the bodies were full on something, which would bring them to a big furnace and so on.

Jim: So that was the first lie. The big lie.

Prof Faurisson: Yes. So you had gas, then electricity!

Jim: [chuckling]

Prof Faurisson: Wait a minute. You had steam! Which is the case for Treblinka. Treblinka, you had a document called “PS3311”. And this document is about Polish testimony about what happened in Treblinka. In Treblinka, in this document. And this document, be careful, had automatically the value of a proof, according to the charter of the International Military Tribunal, Article 21. Every Article of that kind had not to be proofed. It was the “truth”. Fantastic!

It’s thanks to that, that the Nuremberg Tribunal said that Katyn [Katyn Forest mass murder of Polish officers, etc., ] was made by the Germans! Everybody know that it was done by the Russians, of course.

And about Treblinka they said in detail that those poor Jews were killed in steam chambers. There was a well, there was a pipe, there was a boiler, and there was a chamber, very slippery! The Jews would fall down you see! [laughing] A silly story!

Jim: Right, right.

Prof Faurisson: You have only silly stories.

[55:28]

Jim: Now have you been to Treblinka?

Prof Faurisson: Yes! I’ve been to Treblinka. Good question! You are going to see why. Did you know the there is a film by Claude Lanzmann, called “Shoah”? Do you know that?

Jim: The “Shoah”?

Prof Faurisson: “Shoah”, means the “Holocaust”.

Jim: Yeah.

Prof Faurisson: “Shoah”. Nine hours and 25 minutes.

Jim: Wow!

Prof Faurisson: I’ve taken notes during all that time. And there is especially Treblinka. And in Treblinka he would explain you this. That the Jews of Warsaw were brought to Treblinka. Treblinka, a place where they were immediately gassed! All of them!

And Lazmann filmed a man supposed to have been a witness. He was a locomotive driver. He was the man who would every day bring, like that, the Jews to their death in Treblinka! With gas. No more “steam”. And you could see this man, he was a very important witness of “Shoah”. Other witnesses also, but this on the locomotive driver.

Sir! I went to Treblinka and near Treblinka I found the locomotive driver. And we made a film about all this. A part of what he told us. And he was speaking about this. And suddenly I asked him a question. I said:

“So, everyday you were yourself were bringing Jews like that to their death!”

And he said:

“No!”

 

“How can you say no?”

 

“No!”

 

“But when did you know that they were killed?”

 

“Oh”, he said. “After the war.”

This is the big witness.

Jim: Yeah. Wow!

Prof Faurisson: And I found in Treblinka a very interesting man, a peasant. And I wrote many things about this, and I took dimensions of the place and so on. And you could see that it was an impossible story!

Jim: Sure. Oh yeah.

Prof Faurisson: And I wrote about that.

Jim: Well they say, what 800 – 950, 000 people were killed there, right?

Prof Faurisson: There are always different figures.

Jim: I know, I know it.

Prof Faurisson: Which is normal in a way. Okay.

Jim: And there is nothing at Treblinka now. There is nothing there! I mean, …

Prof Faurisson: There is nothing there! [chuckling] You see, did you hear anything about a priest called Patrick Desbois? He wrote a book called, “Shoah by Shooting”* or something. [“The Holocaust by Bullets“] I’m not able to put it into English. “La Shoah par balles”. Okay. And this man was a priest, decided one day to make an investigation like that, about those poor Jews killed in Ukraine, especially. And he told us:

“I have found many, many pits.”

And he said:

“Eight hundred of them, and the total of the dead was one million and a half.”

Oh! Sir. This is a joke! A total joke! A shameful one! This priest tells us that first he visited a rabbi in England. And the rabbi said:

 

“You must not trouble the dead! Don’t open whatever. Because they are saints!”

The Hebrew word was “sekiden” [sp]. They are sacred, don’t touch them. So [chuckling] this Patrick Desbois goes from one village to another and he asks all people to come and he shows you a field or a forest, or whatever. And people are like that you see. [motioning to indicate tears coming down his face] They are crying. And they say:

 

“Yes, in this place so many people, so many Jews were killed!”

And that is it. You cannot see even one corpse!

Jim: I know! I know!

[* See: Patrick Desbois and the “Mass Graves” of Jews in Ukraine by Carlo Mattogno.]

[61:55]

Jim: Let me ask you about your situation now the Zundel Trial, and how you came and in contact, and all that with Fred Leuchter? How did that come about?

Prof Faurisson: Yes. So I came to help Zundel in 1985, 1988, 1992. Okay. He is really a friend. And I decided to help him. So, I came to Toronto even in 1984, 84, 85, and so on. And I came with 5 big trunks of documents.

Jim: Wow!

Prof Faurisson: Imagine that at the airport! [chuckling] Yes. And I was at Zundel’s house working day and night. And I attended, of course, those two trials. And I was admitted as an expert. You know that you have to ask to be an expert. And it was extraordinary! Because, to make it short I would say that in 85, we “killed” historian number one of the “Holocaust”, Raul Hilberg!

Jim: Yeah, Raul Hilberg.

Prof Faurisson: We “killed” also, I can’t remember his name, the witness number one. It’s not as interesting as that. And in 88, remember Fred Leuchter testified. So I’m going to talk about the first one, 85.

Jim: Okay. That is fine.

Prof Faurisson: We had this man. He came like this, very sure of himself, and it was a disaster! Raul Hilberg. Raul Hilberg had published a book in 1961, called “The Destruction of the European jews”. On page 177 he said there had been two orders from Hitler to kill the Jews! Oh! Two orders? Really?

And the first order was:

“Go and kill them where they are!”

Russia and so on. And the second one:

“Collect all those people and put them in places to kill them.”

And surprisingly there was no footnote! No text! Nothing!

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: Coming out of the blue like that! Two affirmations. Usually Hilberg would always put footnotes. Be very precise. And there is nothing! Okay? And I was helping an extraordinary defense lawyer, Doug Christie.

Jim: Right. Doug Christie.

Prof Faurisson: And I used to work in the evening, during the night until 3, or for in the morning. And when he woke up he would find the question he had to put, and the documents. And he was there, a magnificent man, and I was on his side, on my chair. And I had little stickers, like that, yellow stickers. And every time I thought a question should be put — because it was long, you see. I would put a sticker on his desk. And you should have seen the face of Hilberg, with the yellow stickers! [making a face of shock and dread]

Jim: [chuckling].

Prof Faurisson: And I had the idea to ask Doug Christie to ask him a very simple question. Because I knew that this man was what I call, a “man of paper”! He was a professor of paper, and paper, and papers! And I said to Doug Christie:

“You are going to ask him which camps he visited. But don’t put the question like that. Give him a list of camps. Take Buchenwald. Did you visit this camp? How many times? And how much time every time?”

We started with Buchenwald, and he said:

“No.”

And the second one, he said:

“No.”

And the third one, he stopped us. And he said the had visited none!

Jim: Wow!

Prof Faurisson: Except! Except for a visit, a no official visit for his speech, or ceremony. So he was a man who had not even taken care to go and see where were this gas chambers! Even destroyed, because even destroyed it’s very important to see the dimensions, and so on.

And it was a total disaster, because we found something that he had said in 2000, wait a minute, yes the first one I said was in 1985. So in 1983, he had said somewhere, that finally there was no document, nothing. It was the German bureaucracy who had decided, suddenly, without any order whatsoever to kill the Jews! That to not write anything down, but to work by these, remember those words:

“By an incredible meeting of their minds! A consensus by mind reading!”

Jim: [chuckling] I know!

Prof Faurisson: I remember the day he said that. Once we were back at Zundel’s house there was the big table. And we were numerous. And I said:

“My friends! Do you know that today we are going to enter a new era! Because when I need a pot of coffee, or water, whatsoever, I will not even have to say, ‘I want coffee, or water’, because we are, all of us, to work by an incredible meeting of minds, consensus, mind reading!”

Jim: [laughing] Right! Right, telepathy!

Prof Faurisson: Now if it was incredible, sir, why should I believe? You say yourself that it was “incredible”! Okay? Now, how could we explain this change in Raul Hilberg?

I have an explanation. It’s because — we are going back to France — when there was this fantastic story everywhere, the Jews decided, some Jews decided to make a big international conference in Paris. In the Sorbonne, where I had been a professor. And to show the destruction of the European Jews, the “Holocaust”, the “Shoah“, and so on. And it lasted I think, four days, which is very much.

So I went to see the organizers of this conference. There were two of them. And I said:

“It’s against me. It’s against Faurisson! So I would like to attend this conference.”

And the first man said:

 

“No! No question!”

And I said:

“Even if I say that I will not talk? Say anything.”

 

“No! You cannot negotiate that!”

And to when I saw the second one, he told me exactly the same thing. So you see, you had a big international conference against me, and I had no right to go and attend this. And the only reaction of the professors was on the 21st of February 1979, when a journal, once more, they published something called “Une déclaration d’historiens”, “A Declaration of Historians”. There were 34 of them, French professors of history, and so on.

Let me find what they decided. It was in 79. If I can find it. Okay. Yes, there we are. Thirty four French historians, signed a lengthy joint declaration in reply to my technical arguments, and so on. [chuckling] And, blah, blah blah! French are good at “blah, blah”!

Jim: [laughing].

Prof Faurisson: Yes! You see!

Jim: [chuckling] I don’t know, I’ve only talked to one Frenchman, and it’s been you! [laughing].

Prof Faurisson: [chuckling] Okay! And the conclusion of those people. Because you see that my arguments were technical! Physical! You call that? What’s the name? Sorry, I cannot remember, you see. An American expression. Oh, okay. But you see? It’s technical.

Jim: Yep.

Prof Faurisson: And the conclusion, listen sir! Don’t fall down from your chair!

Jim: I won’t!

Prof Faurisson:

“One must not ask oneself how technically such a mass murder was possible. It was technically possible, since it happened.”

Jim: [loud laughing]

Prof Faurisson: Are you pleased?

Jim: [laughter] Yeah, that is their big explanation! Right?

Prof Faurisson: The big explanation! And see, we are today, 2015. No explanation, whatsoever.

Jim: Let me ask you something. I want to ask you about, getting back to Raul Hilberg. The fact that you blew him out of the courtroom, is it true that he didn’t show up for the next trial, right?

Prof Faurisson: Yes, that is right. That’s right.

Jim: Because you embarrassed him so much, tight?

Prof Faurisson: Yes. I congratulate you for that. Because when there was the second trial in 88, he was asked by the Jewish organization to come back. And Doug Christie had a brilliant idea. And it could only happen in a kind of British court. In France it would be impossible. He said:

“So you had an exchange of letters. Can we see the letters?”

And the judge decided that yes, he had to show the letters.

And in the letters you could have seen a little boy, saying:

“Oh! I have been worst in this place in 85. It was awful! I don’t want to, …! No! No Mama I don’t want to go back!”

Jim: Yeah. You really ashamed him. He was shamed. He couldn’t show his face again. Right?

Prof Faurisson: Yea. You see he was, … because I don’t want to attack too much those people. They are what I call, “believers”! They believe! They might be sincere. Sincere, even when they change the things to test, [word unclear] and so on. Because I had so many examples. I am going to give you a few of those examples.

You had a German doctor, Johann Paul Kramer, who was [word unclear] in Auschwitz for some time. And he had a diary. And when he saw the Americans, he said:

“See my diary. I didn’t do anything bad.”

And in this diary, you had this.

“For the first time I’ve been present to a ‘special action’.”

“Besondere Aktion” in German. And he said:

“I was present. It was outside.”

Meaning, not in a room whatsoever. It was outside. Probably to receive the convoys of people who are arriving in Auschwitz. Something like that. And you had the word “draussen” [word unclear] And I was lucky enough to read it because it was in Gothic characters. I learned German in Gothic characters, d-r-a-u-s-s-e-n.

And when Mr Klarsfeld — you know to man? I suppose? Mr Klarsfeld published his big book called “Memorial” about the Jews deported from France. He put this thing of Dr Kramer, and he put the translation on the left, and he said:

 

“I have been present at a ‘special action’, …”.

And he titled it:

“… In a gas chamber.”

See, instead of “outside” he put this.

Jim: Hmm!

Prof Faurisson: And they are constantly doing the same thing!

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: For instance, everybody knows that the Germans had a “Final Solution” of the Jewish question. Okay?

Jim: Yeah.

Prof Faurisson: And we are told the it means “killing of Jews”. So, I’m sorry sir, the Germans sometimes would write this like that. But they had shortened it. The real phrase, which was, … “We want a, ….” How do you say that?

Jim: It’s “removal”. They wanted to remove them.

Prof Faurisson: Wait a minute. I’ll find it. Excuse me, … I’m going to try to find it.

Jim: Well, I know they wanted to deport them, and get rid of them. I know that. They didn’t want to kill them, they just wanted to get them out of there.

Prof Faurisson: No. They wanted a “territorial final solution”! Territorial! Ty want a territory for the Jews. It could be Madagascar, it could be Uganda, it could be Russia.

Jim: Right.

Prof Faurisson: And they thought even at a time that it could be Palestine. But they decided “Oh! No! No Palestine.” because of the valiant, the noble and valiant Arabic people.

Jim: Right. They didn’t want to have a conflict with the Arabs. I understand.

Prof Faurisson: Yes. But you see it was a “territorial solution”.

Jim: Yep. Deportation. My next question. Let’s get back to the Zundel Trial and your relationship with Fred Leuchter. How was that?

[82:52]

Prof. Faurisson: Yes. So I said to Ernst Zundel. [word unclear] The trial came. I said:

“We need a specialist of American gas chambers.”

And finally we sent Fred Leuchter and so on. And we had this answer. The best one is a man called, Fred Leuchter. So Ernst asked me:

“Will you go and visit him in Boston?”

And I said:

“Yes.”

And I went to Boston, and I was in a hotel, and I saw the man in the snow [?] and I said to this man. I tried to see if this man knew something about the German, supposed gas chamber. And I asked him some questions. I said:

“So what about the gas chambers?”

And he said:

 

“Oh yes.”

 

He believed in the gas chambers. He believed in the German gas chambers. Never he had a doubt about that.

And I said:

“You have seen one?”

 

“No.”

 

“But how would you figure this out? How would you see a German gas chamber?”

I remember he told me:

“So if I see a big building with bricks and so on, and guards.”

He began with the guards.

“And have you long distance.”

I don’t remember exactly. At a very long distance. And I said:

“Why do you say the guards would be at a very long distance?”

He said:

“Oh, because the problem you see, is when the gas gets out of the chimney, because of the wind, you know, where to put the guards on the side, …”

And so on. And I showed him my documents. Where you could see that the in the furnace in Crematoria one, you could see that it was “Leichenhalle”, which means a place to put the bodies, a mortuary. And in the others, Crematoria II and III, you had “Leichenkellar”, cellars for cadavers. So you had it. And I remember that I had showed that to a man in France building crematories. And he was with someone, and I remember, he said:

 

“Oh! That is seven, eight metres thing.”

And I told him:

“What do you mean by that?”

Because this one is seven metres, and the other one is eight metres. He said:

“It was typical of a crematory. You need to metres for a cadaver in the mortuary. And two metres also, and in between three, or four for the, …”

How do you say, for the “chariot”? To bring the bodies, .. I don’t remember the English, …

Jim: You mean, how you bring them in there?

Prof. Faurisson: To bring the, …

Jim: You are talking about a trolley, the trolley thing?

Prof. Faurisson: Yes. Something like that. So it was typical!

Jim: Right.

Prof. Faurisson: It was typical. Not only you had to [word unclear], but it was typical.

Jim: So you didn’t go to Auschwitz with Fred, he went there himself. And he came up with all the information.

Prof. Faurisson: That is right. That is right. And I showed him the plans and so on. And he felt that, he said something that he “smells a rat”.

Jim: Oh! Yeah. Smells like a rat!

Prof. Faurisson: Yeah. And he thought that it was interesting. And he went to see, he was invited by Ernst. And they decided that he would go to Auschwitz, Majdaneck, and all the places. He did a perfect work. And his conclusion was that not only was there no gas chamber, but it was impossible.

Jim: Right.

Prof. Faurisson: Totally impossible.

Jim: Right.

Prof. Faurisson: And I want to say something about his statement in court. He was very impressive! I’m going to tell you why he was impressive. Because he was asked, by the judge, or someone. He was asked a question and he would always wait a few seconds before giving an answer. And I asked him:

 

“How is it that you do that?”

And he said:

“Because I’ve been taught to do that. To count to ten before giving an answer.”

So at the beginning it’s a little bit funny, to say is it a simpleton? And finally it was very impressive to see how much he was careful in choosing his words, and so on. And, I think it was in the 20th of April, 1988, it was devastating!

I was in court, of course, and the jews coming go to us like that you see [with head down, hunched over]. They were in a bad state.

Jim: Sure.

Prof. Faurisson: Really. Yes. It was their “Stalingrad” you see!

Jim: Well that was an important document. The Leuchter Report was very important, because that helped to get Ernst off, Ernst Zundel off, would you say? Or what?

Prof. Faurisson: Oh, I think so. Yes. There’s no doubt about that.

Jim: Yeah. Well let me just finish up with this point here. Do you think that Revisionist is making headway today in the world. What do you think about that?

Prof. Faurisson: I think we are making many progress. You see an example of plenty [word unclear] victories there. And another one, which is very important, I want to talk about it. But it is necessary tiny little pieces aft tiny little pieces.

Jim: Yeah, yeah.

Prof. Faurisson: It cannot be spectacular. No! Don’t wait for what we call, “the big event”. No. It is not coming go. Certainly not. It’s going to be very slow, and it is very slow. But there is no sigh of retreat! It’s be coming go more and more difficult for those people.

And you see, back to the internet. You can do something very simple. You take a monthly, jewish monthly and more, every three months and you can’t the number of times you have “gas chamber”. Gas chambers are disappearing. [I’ve noticed this —K]

Jim: Yeah.

Prof. Faurisson: They say any word but, they don’t won’t too much “gas” you see. “Gas” is becoming rare!

Jim: Sure, yeah. Well, you know, you are one of my favourites now. You are in my “League of Extraordinary Revisionists”. I’ve already interviewed Fred Leuchter, and now I’ve interviewed you. And I’m going to try and see if I can interview all the other people that have been instrumental in exposing the “Holocaust”. I consider it a hoax. That is what I call it, anyway.

See: Jim Rizoli Interviews Fred Leuchter: His Story, His Way — TRANSCRIPT

And I think it is important that people especially now, in our day and age now they have to see the people who preceded us Revisionists now the younger ones, who are trying to get the message out now. Because we are getting stopped every which way, when we bring this up. I mean, in my town they stopped me completely from bringing my message out on cable shows on TV.

But in the internet we are trying, we are trying to do it through the internet. The internet is the means to doing it, so hopefully we can get more people to understand it, and see what’s going on. It’s tough! It’s really hard! The jews really don’t want this to be known. And your interview with me today, I’m sure they are not going to be happy about that either [chuckling]. They just don’t want the message out.

Do you have anything you want to conclude with saying?

Prof. Faurisson: Yes.

Jim: Sure. Let me hear you.

[94:06]

Prof. Faurisson: You see plenty of proofs, for instance you have a jewish professor who said, … listen to this:

“Sources for the study of the gas chambers are rare and unreliable!”

Jim: Right.

Prof. Faurisson: Fantastic! I thought that they were never said so strong. I know that is what he had to say. You have another one who said about Krema I, that so many people are visiting. He said:

“Everything in it is false! Faurisson exploited those fabrications all the more easily since they didn’t want to answer him!”

It was in 1995. See, I had to wait a long time to see this. “everything in it is false!”

Now, you have a jew, I should give you the name of the man who said, let me see, … the man who in 1988 said:

“Source for the study of the gas chambers are at once rare and unreliable!” is Arno Mayer.

Jim: Okay, I’ve heard of him.

Prof. Faurisson: But the man that I quote sometimes, “The Last Mohican”. The last one trying to defend the story is Van Pelt.

Jim: Oh, Van Pelt. Yeah.

Prof. Faurisson: The jew. And he said that in Auschwitz they were spending a lot of money to get it “alive” in a way. But he suggested that no money should be spent for that. And that nature should sum back. And the journalist told him, the journalist of the [words unclear] said:

“If you want to prove the deniers, what you have to prove, if you do that you have nothing.”

And his reply was:

“99% of what we know doesn’t find it’s physical evidence in Auschwitz!”

Jim: Right.

Prof. Faurisson: It’s fantastic!

Jim: Yeah. They even admit it. Yeah.

Prof. Faurisson: Yeah. And you see if the myth of the gas chambers crumbles, everything crumbles! It’s finished!

Jim: Right. Well hopefully that day will happen in sum point in time. We should keep trying. What are you doing now, yourself? You are retired obviously, what do you do with your time now?

Prof. Faurisson: Working day and night! Because [chuckling] the lie is still alive!

Jim: Sure.

Prof. Faurisson: And I have to defend myself. You see I am constantly treated in France as a “liar”, a “falsifier” and even a professional “falsifier”!

Jim: Wow!

Prof. Faurisson: Which is strange! I am going to tell you why. Because I’ve had so many, so many trials, and I have so many still today. You imagine my life!

Jim: Yeah.

Prof. Faurisson: Not once has a tribunal said that I was a liar. That I was a falsifier! Let me give you an example. In 1983 on the 26th of April I was in Paris in a courtroom and even in the very courtroom where Marshal Petain had been sentenced to death, it was impressive. And I had against me, I remember, twelve defence lawyers in black! You see, I don’t need to tell you what those people were! They were against me!

And I had myself two lawyers. One of the Right and one of the Left. The lawyer of the Left had been found by Jean Gabriel Conbendict, the brother of the famous Conbendict, a jew! He was on my side!

Jim: Wow!

Prof. Faurisson: Yes! Many jews had been on my side. And finally said:

 

“Oh don’t talk about that. Let us forget, …”.

And so on. And we were in court and something very strange happened. They wanted to condemn me for being a “liar”, and so on. About the twelve, only one tried to prove that the gas chambers had existed. He had been in been in Warsaw, he had been in Auschwitz, he had been in Israel, trying to find a proof. He didn’t find anything!

And I had all those documents of this man. I remember that he begun with one, and he said at the end, which was so surprising. He said:

 

“Yes! You are going to tell me it’s not very good.”

Or something like that. I was surprised. And the second one, the third one, and he want away. And I learned that he had been on a bench crying. And he had his wife to come to be with him, and so on. And it was a disaster for him. But anyway, I can tell you what was the results of this. And I need my paper for that.

Jim: Sure.

Prof. Faurisson: So it was in 83. On April 26, 1983. And the court decided that in the writings of Faurisson on the gas chambers there were, I quote:

“No trace of rashness. No trace of negligence. No trace of having deliberately over looked anything, nor any trace of a lie. And as a consequence the appraisal of the value of the findings of the gas chambers defended by Mr Faurisson is a matter, therefore, solely for experts, historians, and the public.”

You could have said, “Oh! Victory!” now be careful. We are in France! [smiling] And as soon, in every of those trials, as soon as they say Faurisson is very serious in his words, they add;

“But the people against him are of good faith!”

Jim: Yeah, right.

Prof. Faurisson: Or they say:

“But we feel Faurisson is malevolent!”

Do you understand that?

Jim: Well, bad, yeah.

Prof. Faurisson: Every time! We had a very important man in France called Badenbare [sp] a jew, who dared to say one day, recently he said:

 

“When I was a lawyer, I got Faurisson sentenced for falsification.”

So I lodged a complaint against him and I proved that it was totally false. That even the tribunal said that I was very serious in my work, and so on. But anyway, the tribunal decided that Badenbare [sp] had failed in trying to bring proof of what he had said, but he was of “good faith”!

Jim: Hmm, yeah.

Prof. Faurisson: They are always of “good faith” and I am merely always “malevolent”.

Jim: Well, that is how it always going to be.

Prof. Faurisson: It’s so easy.

Jim: Let me ask you a question. Do you have a favourite book, or book that deals with the “Holocaust” that you recommend people to read? What is your favourite book?

Prof. Faurisson: Yes. The most famous, the brilliant, but a little bit difficult read, is the book of Arthur Butz. B-U-T-Z.

Jim: Okay, yeah.

Prof. Faurisson: And this book, I have I think [looking on his shelves]. Do I have this book? Yes. “The Hoax of the Twentieth Century”.

Jim: Right. Okay.

Prof. Faurisson: And not only this book has been printed for the first time in 1976. And at that time I met Butz. He was very impressive, this man. I call him, don’t say it, but I call “Dr Genius”! He’s very impressive! And he published an edition recently, I think in 2003, and later on, perhaps. And with three, or four additions. And it’s marvelous! [chuckling] And I remember the story of the elephant. I’m going to tell you the story of the elephant.

Butz said how strange, something extraordinary happened between, during the War that nobody noticed it at the time. They noticed it only aft the War. You see it’s like saying that at my home, in my cellar, I had an elephant. It was there but I didn’t know that it was there! The elephant went up — the staircase was strong enough — and it went into the room where I reading. I didn’t notice him. And he went through the window — he didn’t break it — and he went into the street. It was noon, there were plenty of people. Nobody noticed the elephant. But if you want to see him go and see him, you will see him in the zoo! [chuckling]

Because, you see, people, very important never during the war mentioned that! Churchill, never!

Jim: Right.

Prof. Faurisson: Eisenhower, never! DeGaulle, never! And so on! The Pope. I wrote a book about the Pope. The title was “The Revisionism of Pious XII”. He had the experience of the First World War. He knew what was war propaganda. He found all this once more with those gas chambers, crematories, and so on.

Jim: Yeah. How many books have you written?

Prof. Faurisson: Oh! I’ve published nine, nine, or ten.

Jim: Wow!

Prof. Faurisson: Now it’s first something called, “Memory in Defence” against those accusing me of falsifying history. And I have little books, answer to Pressac, answer to Vincent Niquent [sp] a book on the [words unclear] a booklet. And then I have something called “[word unclear] Revisionist”, “Revisionist Writings”. And it’s now seven volumes.

Jim: Wow!

Prof. Faurisson: Three others should come.

Jim: Okay. So there’s your book, “Just Who is Robert Faurisson?” and can you get that on Amazon?

Prof. Faurisson: I don’t know at all if you can get it. Try to get it anyway! [chuckling] I wanted to show you this. [pointing at the cover illustration] See how cautious, slow, and prudent is the one hvg this, because the balloon is ballooning.

Jim: Oh yes. I see what you are saying. You are popping it. Yes, I get it. [laughing]

Prof. Faurisson: It’s dangerous!

Jim: Yes I understand. Well you have really influenced a lot of people. I’ve read a lot of books, I’ve seen your videos and you have been a big inspiration for me! I’m going to try to use all this information just to get more people interested in the subject.

Prof. Faurisson: Good.

Jim: It just takes time. A lot of people don’t know about the topic. And I think it’s important. Well, listen I think we have really covered a lot of topics today. You have done very well. You have given us a lot of information.

Prof. Faurisson: Yes. But I am very, very tired and my English is a disaster!

Jim: Oh! I think you have done great! I mean, I have understand everything you have said!

Prof. Faurisson: I don’t think so. I would have so many other things to say.

Jim: Okay.

Prof. Faurisson: For instance, let me tell you something about the six million.

Jim: Okay let’s talk about that. That is fine.

Prof. Faurisson: This is not a discovery of mine, absolutely not! But, it’s very simple. The story of the six million, that comes from something which began in, probably 1880.

Jim: Wow!

Prof. Faurisson: Something like that. It was first in New York City in the New York Times. And in other places also. It was a way to get money. It would say something awful is happening in Russia, in Poland, in Hungary, in these sort of places. “Six million of our brothers are dying!”, “There is a “Holocaust”!” you have even the word. “Bring the money!”

Jim: Sure! Yeah. It’s all about money!

Prof. Faurisson: And I could tell you something about Nuremberg Trial. I would like to talk about the Nuremberg Trial, which was so disgusting!

Jim: Well, do you want to do the another time? Would you like to do that another time?

Prof. Faurisson: Perhaps another time, but I’m not sure, because I have more and more tired. And, you know, sir, when this will be made public, I will sued once more!

Jim: You think so?

Prof. Faurisson: Sure!

Jim: Wow! Anyway, I think we talked a lot, enough today. If there is another time you want to talk about anything in particular we can do this. I’m getting a little better at this. And we can go from there. How does that sound?

Prof. Faurisson: Okay. Goodbye.

Jim: Okay. You take care now. God bless you! All right we will see you. Bye!

[Produced by Jim Rizoli, September 2015]

[114:46]

END

===============================================

See Also:

The World’s First Anti-Holocaust Convention — Instauration Dec, 1979

An Open Letter to New Jersey’s Governor

Historians or Hoaxers?

House of Orwell

Misha: Surviving with Wolves or …

Bradley Smith’s Smith Report # 1

The Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies

The Plum Cake

Auschwitz: Myths and Facts

Powers and Principalities XI – Ewen Cameron, MK-Ultra, Holocaust Revisionism — TRANSCRIPT

Tales of the Holohoax – A Historian’s Assessment – Part 1

The Holocaust Lie — Made in America

Probing the Holocaust: The Horror Explained — TRANSCRIPT

Jim Rizoli Interviews Prof Robert Faurisson, Oct 2015 — TRANSCRIPT

Holocaust Eyewitnesses: Is the Testimony Reliable?

Alain Soral – My Homage to Robert Faurisson, Oct 2018 — TRANSCRIPT

Inside Auschwitz – You’ve never seen THIS before! — TRANSCRIPT

Amazion Bans 100s of Holocaust Revisionist Books!

AUSCHWITZ – A Personal Account by Thies Christophersen

Jim Rizoli Interviews Bradley Smith — TRANSCRIPT

London Forum – Alfred Schaefer – Psychological Warfare – TRANSCRIPT

The Realist Report Interviews Eric Hunt — TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice Radio – Germar Rudolf – Persecution of Revisionists & Demographic Disaster – Part 1— TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice Radio: Nicholas Kollerstrom — TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice TV – Ingrid Carlqvist – Scandal in Sweden When Ingrid Questions the Unquestionable — TRANSCRIPT

The Realist Report with Carolyn Yeager on Johnson vs Anglin debate — TRANSCRIPT

============================================

PDF Notes

Version 1 —

* Total words = 11,813
* Total images = 26
* Total A4 pages = xx

(Available later)

Version History

Version 9: Jan 28, 2020 — Added See Also links.

Version 8: Jan 3, 2020  — Re-uploaded images for katana17.com/wp/ version.

Version 7: Nov 3, 2018  — Added last 20 minutes of transcript. Added 2 images. Corrections to text and formatting. Transcript now complete.

Version 6: Nov 2, 2018  — Added 11 more minutes of transcript. Added 5 images. Total transcript complete = 94 minutes.

Version 5: Oct 30, 2018  — Added 21 more minutes of transcript. Added 3 images. Total transcript complete = 83 minutes.

Version 4: Oct 29, 2018  — Added 7 more minutes of transcript. Added 4 images. Total transcript complete = 62 minutes.

Version 3: Oct 28, 2018  — Added 5 more minutes of transcript. Added 4 images. Total transcript complete = 55 minutes.

Version 2: Oct 27, 2018  — Added 5 minutes of transcript. Added images.

Version 1: Oct 25, 2018  — Published post. 45 minutes of transcript complete.

[In this video, “Probing the Holocaust — The Horror Explained Part 1” some of the most iconic propagandistic film footage used to convince the post-war public that the Germans had carried out an extermination policy against the jews (and others), is analysed in the context of those camps and their conditions that prevailed as the war came to an end. The truthful explanation reveals that the public has been deeply manipulated and deceived by the explanations given in that footage.

This video, although dealing with only one part of the “Holocaust” narrative, forms part of a larger analysis by Revisionists that proves beyond doubt that the “Holocaust” is in fact an ongoing hoax of world historic proportions.

For people new to this view, one question that usually comes forward is; how? How could something so massively accepted by the media, governments, churches, academia, and so on, be false, a hoax? The answer is that the alleged victims of the “Holocaust“, the jews, are in fact the very people, as in “organised jewry“, that run our governments behind the facade known as “democracy“. In other words the alleged victims are the very perpetrators of this ongoing hoax of world historic proportions. These people were the “behind the scenes” instigators of both World Wars, and many other wars and false flags, right up to now.

Another question is; why? Why would organised jewry need to create such a hoax, known as the “Holocaust“? The answer is that it:

1) Fulfils jewish religious prophecy of a “Holocaust” or “burnt offering” of six million jews. This will then apparently lead to the return of a jewish Messiah and the establishment of jewish rule over the world.

2) Provided a sympathy pretext for the establishment of the jewish State of  Israel despite it resulting in the Palestinians being dispossessed of their lands through terror.

3)  Demonizes any form of  White nationalism. At first only the “Nazis” were blamed for the “Holocaust“, but then all Germans were, and now the blame for the “Holocaust” is placed on all Whites. Any White group, political party, organisation, etc., that attempts to look after White racial interests by, for example, rejecting mass non-White immigration, is implicitly, or on a sliding scale, explicitly accused of being “Nazi“.

Organized jewry uses their hoax “Holocaust” as a shield against any criticism of their world-wide aggression, and also as a sword to attack and guilt-trip Whites into not defending their right to exist and reject the takeover of their countries by the Third World.

The “Holocaust” needs to be exposed for what it is, a diabolical lie of historic proportions. It also needs to be exposed because that lie is being used by organised jewry as a major part of their arsenal of psychological weapons to genocide Whites out of their homelands and out of existence in the long term — KATANA.]

_______________________

Probing the Holocaust

The Horror Explained

Part 1

By

Germar Rudolf, Eric Hunt

Dec, 2017

Contents

__________________________

The Horror Explained

Abstract

“The Holocaust” is widely known as the murder of six million Jews by Nazi Germany, many if not most of them in gas chambers deceptively disguised as shower rooms.

We have all seen the terrible imagery of dead prisoners taken after concentration camps were liberated. This documentary reviews some of the most memorable of these images, which were taken in camps such as Dachau, Nordhausen and Bergen-Belsen. A closer examination of this imagery we’ve all been exposed to reveals a very different story than what we were made to believe. Surprisingly, a large number of the bodies we were shown were the direct result of Allied bombing and strafing attacks, rather than victims of a systematically planned Nazi exterimnation policy.

Probing the Holocaust: The Horror Explained (Part 1) presents surprising information which shed a new light on the horrific imagery and enables many viewers for the first time to truly understand what transpired in Germany during and at the end of the war. Watching this presentation with an open mind will surprise you and leave you asking questions of your own.

Download this video documentary:

• ProbingTheHolocaust-Part1-HB25.mp4 (1 hr 36 min 40 sec; 833 MB, 1920×1080, compressed)
• ProbingTheHolocaust-Part1.mp4 (1 hr 36 min 40 sec; 12.7 GB, 1920×1080, uncompressed)
• ProbingTheHolocaust-Part1-HB25-EnglSubtitles.mp4 (1 hr 36 min 40 sec; 889 MB, 1920×1080, compressed, with English subtitles)
• ProbingTheHolocaust-Part1-HB25-GerSubtitles.mp4 (1 hr 36 min 40 sec; 898 MB, 1920×1080, komprimiert, mit deutschen Untertiteln)

Download subtitle files:

• probingtheholocaust-part1-subtitles-english.srt (141 KB)
• probingtheholocaust-part1-subtitles-deutsch.srt (161 KB)

__________________________

Copyright Notice: This movie has been released to the public domain for educational purposes only. It may be copied and distributed free of charge only. No commercial use is permitted. If copied and distributed, no changes to the movie are permitted without the prior written consent of the author/director of the movie.

Note: This video replaces Eric Hunt’s Questioning the Holocaust: Why We Believed, Part 1, which had a number of quality issues.

To watch the video over at Inconvenient History please click here:

Probing the Holocaust: The Horror Explained 

Transcript

(96:40 mins)

It’s something we were told throughout our entire lives: Six million Jews, and large numbers of non-Jews, were murdered by the Nazis:

[Clips from various film footages:]

“Eleven million people died in Nazi Germany’s death camps. Six million were Jews.”

“An estimated six million Jews were killed during World War II.”

“Hitler murdered six million Jewish people”

“six million Jews”

“six million died”

“six million people crying from the grave…”

The term Holocaust commonly refers to the systematically planned and executed extermination of six million Jews by Nazi Germany during World War Two. Mainstream historians agree that, of these six million Jews, approximately three million were killed in gas chambers.

The vast majority of them, they say, were killed or died in six extermination centers in Polish territory. Here is a break-down of these three million alleged gas chamber victims by each of the six camps.

These numbers are an average of figures found on the websites of two of the most reputable Holocaust research institutions, the US Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., and the Yad Vashem Museum in Jerusalem.[1]

The Holocaust is so important that the United Nations even decided to create a dedicated memorial day for it. Every January 27th, the day when the infamous Auschwitz Camp was occupied by the Soviet Red Army in 1945, the whole world is reminded to commemorate the victims of the Holocaust.[2]

In 2017, on the occasion of this International Holocaust Remembrance Day, the White House under U.S. President Donald Trump released this statement:[3]

[“It is with a heavy heart and somber mind that we remember and honor the victims, survivors, heroes of the Holocaust. It is impossible to fully fathom the depravity and horror inflicted on innocent people by Nazi terror.

Yet, we know that in the darkest hours of humanity, light shines the brightest.‎ As we remember those who died, we are deeply grateful to those who risked their lives to save the innocent.

In the name of the perished, I pledge to do everything in my power throughout my Presidency, and my life, to ensure that the forces of evil never again defeat the powers of good. Together, we will make love and tolerance prevalent throughout the world.”]

Stop the video to read it, if you like. There is nothing unusual about the statement, except maybe the fact that Jews aren’t mentioned in it. That triggered quite some vitriolic reactions, for instance from Jonathan Greenblatt, the current head of the Jewish Anti-Defamation League. He tweeted on that same day that Trump did not even mention Jews,[4] which triggered a deluge of similar attacks on the U.S. President for not having expressly mentioned the six million Jewish victims of the Holocaust.[5]

The White House countered a day later that it wasn’t just Jews who died in the Holocaust, but that five million gentiles were killed, too,[6] who also deserve equal remembrance, referring to an article which had appeared two years earlier in the Huffington Post.[7]

That in turn unleashed a series of attacks on the president and that 2015 article, claiming that this “five-million-gentiles” victim figure is bogus and vastly over-inflated. Among those, I may quote here The Times of Israel’s take on this death toll:[8]

“It’s a statement that shows up regularly in declarations about the Nazi era. […] It is, however, a number without any scholarly basis. […] The ‘5 million’ [non-Jewish Holocaust victims] has driven Holocaust historians to distraction ever since Wiesenthal started to peddle it in the 1970s. […]

Yehuda Bauer, an Israeli Holocaust scholar […], said he warned his friend Wiesenthal […] about spreading the false notion that the Holocaust claimed 11 million victims – 6 million Jews and 5 million non-Jews.

‘I said to him, ‘Simon, you are telling a lie,’’ Bauer recalled in an interview Tuesday. ‘He said, ‘Sometimes you need to do that to get the results for things you think are essential.’’

[…] Wiesenthal […] told them that he chose the 5 million number carefully: He wanted a number large enough to attract the attention of non-Jews who might not otherwise care about Jewish suffering, but not larger than the actual number of Jews who were murdered in the Holocaust, 6 million.

It caught on: […]

Deborah Lipstadt, a professor of Holocaust studies at Emory University in Atlanta, wrote in 2011 […] ‘this number is simply inaccurate, in fact made up […].’”

Deborah Lipstadt went over the top, however, by accusing Trump of flirting with Holocaust denial.[9]

So, here we seem to have a case where a prominent Jew, the late Simon Wiesenthal, inflated the number of Holocaust victims for political purposes.

But did Wiesenthal really invent that number? And was he the only one exaggerating numbers?

During and right after the end of the Second World War, a number of war propaganda movies were filmed with the support or even under the control of the U.S. government. Throughout these propaganda movies, there are many references to the thousands and even millions of victims of National Socialist barbarism – yet none of these films ever single out Jews as the primary victims of a “Holocaust.”

[05:11]

The most infamous among those propaganda movies was titled Die Todesmühlen,[10] which was designed for, and eventually shown to, German audiences as a tool for shock-and-awe re-education. It was later also released in an English edition: Death Mills.[11] Both movies mention as the death toll of National Socialist persecution 20 million without making any specific reference to Jews:[12]

“But these eleven hundred were a small fraction of the twenty million men, women and children murdered by the Nazis. 20 million human beings, equal to the population of 22 American states. 20 million corpses.”

In fact, the narrator insists that the victims were:

“of all the nations of Europe, of all religious faiths, of all political beliefs, condemned by Hitler because they were anti-Nazi.”[13]

This is only the most prominent example. There are more which highlight that death toll claims of National Socialist persecution have a history of exceeding the six million, and that Jews have been mentioned with regularity as only one among many victim groups.

This issue is also not just a matter of journalists and propagandists making up wild figures. In 2015, in a book about the forensic examination of mass-murder locations of the Holocaust, a British archaeologist who has been working with the leading scientists in the field for several years wrote, quote:[14]

“The exact number of people killed during the Holocaust remains unknown. Some scholars have suggested a figure of around 11 million. Of these, it is estimated that approximately six million Jews were killed but the number of Roma, Sinti, disabled people, political prisoners and others killed cannot be estimated with complete certain[t]y.”

She provides no source for that claim, though. So maybe she merely repeated what she had heard through Wiesenthal’s grapevine? But is it really Wiesenthal’s? Interestingly, the very same Washington Holocaust Museum that, according to just-quoted article in The Times of Israel, issued a statement on Trump’s text emphasizing the centrality of the annihilation of the Jews to the understanding of the Holocaust, had announced in 2013 in a press release that their research has revealed that:

“The Nazi Holocaust may have claimed up to 20 million lives,”

while leaving the 6-million Jewish death toll basically unchanged.[15] This would mean that as many as 14 million non-Jews died in the Holocaust, not just five.

I may also point out that 20 million is not the ceiling of death-toll estimates. For instance, an article of Sept. 21, 1992, from Germany’s most prestigious daily newspaper, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (p. 13), illustrates in a very useful manner the kind of topic we are dealing with and the problems that are related to it. The title of the article translates to “Traces of the Crime; Shoes, Shoes, even Children’s Shoes.” It is a report written by a student about his visit to the Stutthof concentration camp not far from Danzig, in postwar Poland, that has been turned into a museum. The author, in his fourth sentence, states that he cannot imagine what an extermination camp might look like and talks of, quote, “installations in which ‘6 million Jews and a total of 26 million detainees […] were killed,’” unquote. So here we have a combination of the general 20 million victims plus six million Jews.

At the end of his account the author writes that he found himself facing, quote;

“the remains of the most brutal genocide, the highly modern killing machines of the time, the cruelest crime of humanity,” unquote

By putting things that way, one of the most highly regarded newspapers in the world has given its definition of the Holocaust. The annihilation of a total of 26 million people by the National Socialists in ultra-modern killing machines is the cruelest crime in the history of humanity.

So, how many victims were there now? Six million Jews plus a few others, or eleven in total, or twenty, or even twenty-six million?

At most one of these figures can be correct, but with all this speculation going on, it may turn out that they are all wrong. But if that is so, what is the truth? Can you tell?

One thing is for sure: we obviously cannot believe everything we hear about the Holocaust, because the things we hear often contradict one another.

[09:56]

Let’s start at the beginning, with the documentary “Nazi Concentration and Prison Camps” that the Americans introduced during the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1945 as proof of Nazi atrocities. Psychologically speaking, it was one of the most powerful pieces of evidence submitted, because a picture tells more than a thousand words. Here are some scenes about the Dachau Camp. Dachau was one of the first major camps the Americans captured toward the end of the war:[16]

“Hanging in orderly rows were the clothes of prisoners who had been suffocated in a lethal gas chamber. They had been persuaded to remove their clothing under the pretext of taking a shower for which towels and soap were provided. This is the Brausebad, the shower bath. Inside the shower bath, the gas vents.”

Actually, what you are seeing here are not gas vents but recessed light fixtures.

“On the ceiling, the dummy showerheads. In the engineer’s room, the intake and outlet pipes. Push buttons to control inflow and outtake of gas. A hand valve to regulate pressure. Cyanide powder was used to generate the lethal smoke.”

Interestingly, on August 19, 1961, a letter to the editors by German mainstream historian Martin Broszat was published in Germany’s biggest weekly newspaper Die Zeit stating, among other things:

“Jews or other inmates were gassed neither in Dachau nor in Bergen-Belsen nor in Buchenwald. The gas chamber at Dachau was never fully completed and taken into ‘operation.’”

On January 24, 1993, the famous Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal wrote in a letter to the editors of the U.S. military magazine Stars and Stripes in the same vein:

“A gas chamber was in the process of being built at Dachau, but it was never completed.”

Thus, between the 1960s and late 1990s, the Dachau Museum had a sign displayed inside the Dachau gas chamber stating:

“Gas Chamber, disguised as a shower room never used as a gas chamber.”

Today, however, this sign is no longer there. Instead, a less-visible text on a sign outside that room states:

“Gas chamber

This was the center of potential mass murder. The room was disguised as ‘showers’ and equipped with fake shower spouts to mislead the victims and prevent them from refusing to enter the room.”

Currently, the US Holocaust Museum itself admits, quote:[17]

“There is no credible evidence that the gas chamber in Barrack X was used to murder human beings.”

Barrack X was the official name for the crematorium building where that sinister room was located.

One of the leading books by mainstream historians on the gas chamber question, the 1993 collective tome Nazi Mass Murder, states on page 202:[18]

“It has not yet been conclusively proved that killings by poison gas took place at the Dachau concentration camp.”

And on page 203, we read:

“But during the trial there was only one witness, a Czech physician assigned to care for the prisoners, Dr. Frantisek Blaha, who declared that experimental gassings had taken place in the Dachau gas chamber.”

Blaha signed an affidavit on January 9, 1946, in which he described his experience with the Dachau gas chamber. It is in German, but an English translation was read into the record during the Nuremberg Tribunal as follows:[19]

“Many executions by gas or shooting or injections took place right in the camp. The gas chamber was completed in 1944, and I was called by Dr. Rascher to examine the first victims. Of the eight or nine persons in the chamber there were three still alive, and the remainder appeared to be dead. Their eyes were red, and their faces were swollen. Many prisoners were later killed in this way.”

And that’s it. If Blaha was the only witness on trial testifying about the gas chamber, and if he had no experience whatsoever about the gassing procedure, then how did the American documentary makers know that the victims;

“had been persuaded to remove their clothing under the pretext of taking a shower for which towels and soap were provided” ?

Only a few days after the liberation of the Dachau Camp, a number of U.S. Congressmen visited the camp. Here they are shown inside the gas chamber. And this is footage taken in 2016. As you can see, the ceiling of that room is rather low. In fact, the room is roughly 2.15 meters or seven feet high. Why do I mention this? Because an official U.S. commission investigated what had transpired at Dachau, and in a report to the U.S. Congress dated May 15, 1945, compiled by David Chavez, we read, among other things, that in this room “the ceiling was some 10 feet in height”[20]

[15:32]

How can anyone confuse seven feet with ten feet? But that’s not all, because that report continues as follows:

“The supply of gas into the chamber was controlled by means of two valves on one of the outer walls, and beneath the valves was a small glass-covered peephole through which the operator could watch the victims die. The gas was let into the chamber through pipes terminating in perforated brass fixtures set into the ceiling.”

However, the ceiling did NOT have brass fixtures, but merely zinc-plated iron showerheads. Furthermore, as can be seen in this photo of a spot where a showerhead had been removed by the Americans as a piece of evidence, these were merely fake showerheads – or rather watering can rosettes such as this – that were not connected to anything. Already the documentary we watched earlier said that there was:

“A hand valve to regulate pressure.”

But there’s a problem. Zyklon B, which was allegedly used for the murder, was not a gas under pressure that could be fed into pipes. It consisted of gypsum pellets soaked with liquid hydrogen cyanide, the active ingredient in Zyklon B. When such a can was opened, its poison evaporated slowly.

In addition, from many cases of accidental poisoning with hydrogen cyanide, and from executions with that poison as they were carried out in several U.S. states during the 20th century, we know that the victims Blaha claimed to have examined cannot have succumbed to Zyklon B. Such victims do not have red eyes. They do not have swollen faces. Actually, if they show any symptoms, it is a pinkish-reddish discoloration of their skin as shown here.

It is clear that the Americans, when making their documentaries and congressional reports, were jumping to a lot of conclusions, contradicting each other and the material facts in the process. But what’s the truth here?

The tubing shown in the American documentary is really impressive. Such heavy tubing with cast-iron hand valves are commonly used for piping large amounts of chemical liquids or pressurized gas. The design of this tubing was investigated by the French officer Capitaine Fribourg a week after the camp’s liberation. Here is a sketch drawn by him showing how the piping worked. According to this, fresh air was sucked in through this intake vent, which protrudes through the roof. This intake pipe is subsequently led through a heat exchanger located over the gas chamber in the building’s attic. Here, the air is heated by the building’s hot-water heating system. After that, the now-insulated pipe is split into two and led out of the attic area into the room behind the gas chamber, where both pipes are led in a semi-circle, each of which equipped with the hand valves shown. Leading back into the attic area over the gas chamber, Fribourg shows the pipes being merged back into the outgoing pipe, but that would make no sense at all, because then the air would go nowhere. Therefore, that’s a mistake. In fact, a report compiled by German architect Axel Will in the early 2000s, a copy of which we received from the Dachau Museum, described in detail that the layout actually looks like this. Will wrote:

“Air is drawn in via a pipeline of 400 mm diameter extending over the roof, and is then led through a steam-operated heat exchanger. The pipeline is insulated behind the heat exchanger. It is split into two lines by means of a y-branch pipe, and leads with two pipes of 200 mm diameter into the room adjoining the gas chamber. There the airflow can be adjusted with a valve each. Both these and the other two valves of the ventilation system are made of massive cast iron and carry a $ sign in a circle. Such valves are common in gas pipelines but not in ventilation systems.

Behind the valves both pipelines are again led back into the attic area above the gas chamber and merged back together into one pipe. This pipe enters a sheet-metal shaft, which again goes through the adjoining room and leads the heated air to the air intake at the floor of the gas chamber.

This sheet-metal shaft is not insulated. This raises questions. Design logic suggests that this shaft would be the suitable location to add substances [such as Zyklon B] to the heated air prior to entering the gas chamber. The examination of the sheet-metal shaft has so far not revealed any opening for such a manipulation. Yet the missing insulation points to such a possibility.”

[20:13]

So much from architect Will.

The air exhaust system starts with two openings in the ceiling. From there, the two non-insulated exhaust pipes merge into one, and are led toward the wall to the room behind the gas chamber, where the pipe splits up into two again. Then it is led outside in a semi-circle equipped with two hand valves, and led back into the attic area, where it is merged again into one pipe, as can be seen in this photo taken in the attic of that building. Then that merged pipe is fed into the electric blower that drives the whole operation, here visible in another attic photo, and from there out the exhaust chimney, which exits the roof here.

Now, if that gas chamber was meant to be operated with Zyklon B, it would have been smart, as architect Will correctly suggested, to equip the sheet-metal shaft running down the wall of the adjacent room with some trap door – hinted at here with blue lines – allowing for Zyklon B to be inserted into some kind of basket inside the shaft, hinted at here with the red meshwork. That way, the constant stream of warm air would have evaporated the poison gas quickly and would have spread it out inside the room rapidly. But, as architect Will correctly observed in his report, there is no trace of any provision to that effect.

So, the poison was neither administered using the false showerheads, as the congressional report claimed, nor using the ventilation system, as the U.S. documentary that was shown during the Nuremberg Tribunal suggested. But how else could it have been done? Here is the story as we are told today:

“they would pour Zyklon B down these slots right here, and onto the floor.”[21]

“Rocks with Zyklon B could be inserted from the outside”[22]

Here are some photos of these slots from the inside and from the outside. So, the entire sophisticated ventilation system did not serve any other purpose than moving air around. Why then was it so complicated? It makes no sense at all! It would have been much easier to simply feed the heated air directly into the shaft going into the chamber, as shown here, and to feed the exhaust pipes directly into the blower, using the blower’s speed to adjust for any needed change in air volume. For now, this entire ventilation system seems to be a nonsensical mystery.

But that’s not the only one. Fact is, that neither the congressional report nor the postwar documentary mentions these Zyklon B slots. In fact, David Chavez, the main author of the congressional report, had compiled an earlier version of this report that did not get submitted. It stated:[23]

“Gas Chamber. Gas tight doors. Wooden shed believed to contain pump or compressor.”

This wooden shed located just outside the alleged gas chamber can be seen in many photos and film footages shot right after the liberation. It was located where today the two Zyklon B slots are located. But according to Chavez, it did not contain any slots, but rather some not clearly identified equipment.

The French officer Capitaine Fribourg describing the facility on May 25, 1945 as he claims to have seen it on May 5, 1945, hence, a week after the camp’s capture by the Americans, also mentioned the wooden shed as follows:

“Right next to the shower room, adjacent to the building, is a palisade some 2 meters high fencing off a space of 2 m wide. It was not possible to get inside due to the presence of a pile of decomposing corpses stacked up against the palisade.”

and

“behind the palisade is said to have existed or exists a compressor group (?)”

He also described two slots in the wall obscured by this shed from the outside as follows:

“At about 75 cm from the ground, 2 hoppers connect the shower room with the outside (palisade side). Each hopper ends on the inside with a grate, and on the outside with a movable shutter system.”

That’s also what we see there today. Fribourg even included those hoppers in one of his sketches.

If we look at the outside of this wall in that location today, we can see these strange features. It may have been the electrical outlet for the device operated in that shed.

Looking closer at the Zyklon-B slots, we notice that the mortar around them is not original. The original mortar used to build Barrack X contains coarse gravel rather than sand, while any mortar used around the Zyklon-B slots, and on later repairs and patch-ups, as we can see them here, are made of mortar containing fine sand. Here we can even see how some of the new mortar flowed over the old mortar.

[25:01]

On the inside, it is apparent that the tiles around those slots have been damaged. In fact, a simple test with the finger nail shows that these rough surfaces aren’t even tiles. They are plaster made to look similar to the tiles around them.

In other words, those slots are not part of the original building. They were added later on by hacking holes through the existing wall.

Who did that change, and when was it done? Chavez didn’t mention them, and neither did the U.S. documentary on Dachau of May 3rd. Fribourg saw them two days later, but he did not claim that they were used to throw in Zyklon B. That wouldn’t have been a good idea anyway, because a large amount of the gypsum pellets would have gotten stuck on the grill on the inside. But what were those slots used for? Or is it a post-war forgery?

And if that is so, what else is?

Here is one hint. This footage was recorded on October 25, 2017 from the website of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. When searching their video archive for the term “gas chamber” the first result is this video. It’s titled “Exhumation; inspection of gas chambers; Lt. Hodges.”

This is footage taken after the liberation of Paris of an alleged “Gestapo Torture Chamber” near the Eiffel Tower. In the description, we read:

“World War II interiors of gas chamber used by the Germans in the execution of prisoners. Demonstrating method of securing prisoners in gas chambers. Various Close-ups, pipes leading into room.”

And;

“hand prints and scratches dug into cement wall of gas chamber by the victims.”

Here are those ominous pipes. They are rather fancy, but not very functional. Most of all, they would have been within reach of the victims, and wouldn’t have survived very long, because they would have been demolished very quickly. Also notice all those windows illuminating this room. How long would those window panes have lasted if the victims inside trashed the place and tried to break out?

For that footage, they even pumped some innocuous, but dramatic-looking smoke through the pipes.

Here are the handprints in the cement, allegedly created by gassing victims during their death throes. Needless to say, handprints can only be made in fresh mortar, and only insane people would use a room as an execution chamber whose walls had just been plastered.

These gas pipes and handprints are not evidence of Nazi atrocities, they are evidence of a deliberate Allied psychological warfare campaign to demonize the defeated Germans. Because this hoax is so obvious, no mainstream historian has ever taken that claim seriously. That does not prevent the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum from presenting it to an unsuspecting audience, though. Unfortunately, most people just accept whatever the government, media, or religion tell them to believe.

So, what was necessary for the Americans, who had liberated Paris several months earlier, to create that footage? First of all, they must have had a plan. Then, they must have had at their disposal the necessary hardware to create the film set: pipes, smoke-generating devices, and some workers able to install that hardware and to create a cement wall with handprints.

In contrast to that utterly unknown Gestapo torture chamber in Paris, Dachau was one of the best-known German concentration camps. It was the first one to be opened right after the Nazis came to power. When the Americans finally moved in in April 1945, this camp had dominated the fantasy of Nazi opponents for more than a decade. So, did the American psychological warfare executives have a plan? You bet they did! And did they come with hardware and workers to put that plan into action? If they did it in Paris in January 1945, they surely were even more likely to pull it off at Dachau, which was a much more promising propaganda stage.

So, let me ask again: why are these fanciful pipes in Dachau so impressive and even intimidating, but at the same time so completely useless and pointless?

Before we jump to conclusions, let’s look at some wartime documents. First, there are the two photos shown earlier taken some time in 1944. On both, we can see the ventilation chimney that’s part of the gas chamber’s aeration system. So at least that exhaust chimney was built by the Germans prior to the end of the war. Next, among the few original documents available on that building, there are two blueprints of special interest. This one shows a cross section through the gas chamber. It shows that the ceiling is indeed only some 7 ft high, not 10 ft, as the rest of the building.[24] Next, a section enlargement of this document shows the floor plan of the gas chamber.[25]

[29:51]

As we can see, both doors are 90 cm wide and consist either of two doors each, one opening inward, the other outward, or of a swinging door. Either way, such an arrangement would not have been suitable for a gas chamber, as swinging doors could neither be made gas tight nor panic-proof, and in case this layout consisted of two doors, the inner one opening inward could not have been opened if dead bodies were piled up against it inside the chamber. Such an arrangement is actually common for morgues. For instance, the blueprints of the morgue in the old crematorium at Auschwitz show the same type of door design.

Today, this room is equipped with two heavy steel doors of the type that were quite common for air-raid shelters. The doors are one meter wide and set in steel frames. The same doors are shown in the U.S. footage recorded on May 3, 1945, hence just five days after the camp was captured by the Americans. They were therefore most likely built in there long before the Americans arrived. Also, one of the walls actually consists of two layers with a hollow space in between, which is typically used as insulation, something also seen at the above-mentioned Auschwitz morgue.

Hence, it looks like this room was initially meant to serve as a morgue. In fact, the striking feature of this building is that, if we discard the idea that this alleged gas chamber served as a morgue, this building has no other room of a suitable size equipped with a ventilation system.

But if that is so, what about the weird, oversized piping? And what about those heavy doors? And what about the shafts on the outside, evidently added after the building was completed?

And what about the peephole in the rear wall which Capitaine Fribourg described in his report? He even drew a sketch of it. It slanted rather steeply downward, hence it wouldn’t have allowed anyone to see anything except for maybe the feet of a few people standing or lying close to that hole.

The hole inside that gas chamber that is said to have been the other end of that peephole can be seen to this day, although it is way higher than what Fribourg reported, who in his sketch placed the peephole below the second little port visible on that wall, close to the floor. Today, neither the peephole’s exit nor the switches are visible in the adjoining room. The switch panel and switch box are shown in the footage recorded on May 3, 1945 for the U.S. documentary. But that documentary neither shows nor mentions that peephole. There is, however, a photograph of that area from May 1945 showing not only the switch panel and switch box plus some of the insulated pipes and hand valves, but also a crude opening in the wall just beneath the switch panel. If we compare that image with a still of the footage just shown, we see:

a) that the lid of the switch box to the left has disappeared;

b) and more importantly, the upper, rugged edge of the hole in the photo should also be visible in the still, but it isn’t. Therefore, somebody must have hacked that hole in there after the documentary was shot.

Here is how that hole looks on the inside, seen from the gas chamber. It does indeed angle upward. In the background you see bricks and mortar used by the museum to close up that gaping hole in the adjoining room. Inside this tube runs an electric cable put in there when the room was prepared as a museum exhibit.

What we see here is the fact that, since the camp’s liberation on April 29, 1945, quite a few people seem to have tampered with the evidence of this suspected crime scene. It’s difficult to assess what this hole was really used for. A peephole, however, would have been installed in the doors, as was and is common for air-raid shelter doors, rather than hacked through a thick brick wall, and it most certainly would not have slanted downward.

So, is the Dachau gas chamber a post-war fraud? Considering that the camp was liberated on April 29 and that the gas chamber was inspected by four members of the U.S. Congress only 3 days later, on May 2nd, this seems to be not enough time for a major fraud.

In fact, there is evidence pointing in a different direction. Most importantly, there is a letter in the German Federal Archives by Dr. Sigmund Rascher to Heinrich Himmler dated August 9, 1942, which reads:[26]

“As you know, the same facility as at Linz is being built at the Dachau concentration camp. Since the ‘transports of invalids’ end up in certain chambers anyway, I ask whether the effect of our various combat gases can be tested on people who are destined for that anyway? So far, all we have are experiments with animals, or reports on accidents during the production of these gases. Because of this paragraph, I am sending my letter marked ‘Secret.’”

Dr. Rascher was the infamous doctor who conducted medical experiments on inmates at Dachau, which were among the crimes prosecuted by the American occupational powers after the war in the famous “Medical Case” of the Nuremberg Trials of War Criminals. While there was plenty of evidence for a variety of experiments on human guinea pigs such as exposure to low air pressure and extended submersion in cold water, tests of combat gases at Dachau were not among the charges. There was simply too little evidence to make that case.

[35:16]

We may speculate that Dr. Rascher had indeed tried to re-rig the morgue of Barrack X for the potential testing of combat gases, with those shafts perhaps simply serving as air-intake shafts for a better ventilation, since the room had no windows. But since Dr. Rascher was arrested by the German police in April 1944 and eventually executed for a number of crimes, child abduction and murder among them, that project, if it ever existed, ended up being abandoned at that point at the latest. When the Americans arrived a year later, the room was nothing more than a morgue, filled with the victims of diseases and malnutrition, which could not be cremated due to the lack of fuel.

For the time being, any answer to the question what these strange objects were meant for remains speculation to a large degree, because almost the entire original paperwork regarding the planning and construction of that building – cost estimates, progress reports, blueprints, invoices etc. – have disappeared from the Dachau camp archives. Only a few, not very informative documents are left, such as the ones we just saw plus a few others. So, either the Nazis destroyed them because they had something to hide, or the Americans confiscated and/or destroyed them, because they wanted to prevent anyone from figuring out what that room really looked like and was used for.

At Dachau, imagery of a gas chamber disguised as a shower room was driven into our minds.

Dachau is where the world came to believe the rumors and saw what we believed to be evidence of well-engineered German machinery, capable of gassing with precision and efficiency.

So, if that gas chamber wasn’t what we are told, or at least wasn’t used at all for mass executions, why were there massive amounts of clothes hanging in its vicinity when the Americans arrived?

“Hanging in orderly rows were the clothes of prisoners, who had been suffocated in a lethal gas chamber. They have been persuaded to remove their clothing under the pretext of taking a shower for which towels and soap were provided.”

Actually, these are clothes airing outside the Dachau disinfestation chambers. The narrator merely claims that this is the clothing of homicidal gas chamber victims. Then they deceptively cut to the shower room door, making the viewer believe they are the same door; the one with the obvious written gas warnings on it and the supposed gas chamber, disguised as a shower room, designed to trick those entering.

The hoaxers showed film of these disinfestation gas chambers for fumigating clothing, located at the end of the building. They claimed these doors, clearly marked with warning signs and skull and crossbones, were used to gas prisoners.

This is where the disinfestation chambers are and the doors clearly marked with warnings. But the “shower room,” the alleged gas chamber, is located a few rooms away. The deception was to trick the average viewer into thinking, the clearly marked delousing chamber door with skull and crossbones located at the end of the building was the same as the shower room door. This dirty deception continues to this day.

For example, take this 2012 documentary on Dachau by filmmaker Levi Mierau. After showing the gas chamber and describing how it allegedly worked, he, too, deceptively cuts to the disinfestation chamber while continuing his narration about homicidal gassing. Watch it:[27]

“A door labeled shower bath went into a large room, which is meant to deceive, since the room was not actually a shower room but a gas chamber. The room consisted of outlets in the walls, floor and roof.”

Stoooop! Outlets in the floor and roof? These showerheads weren’t an outlet for anything, and those six drains in the floor are actually real drains, which indicates that the room was originally designed to handle a lot of water, not gas.

Fast forward a few seconds, we have this footage:[28]

“Rocks with poison gas pellets named Zyklon B could be inserted from the outside. Since the gas chambers were only built during the camp’s last months, only seven were killed in the gas chambers used as test subjects.”

So, while showing the disinfestation chambers, Levi deceptively talks about gas chambers, in the plural, used to kill seven people.

[39:50]

The same kind of deception is committed by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum on its website (capitalization added):

“View of THE door of THE gas chamber in Dachau.”[29]

“An American soldier stands outside of THE gas chamber in Dachau” [30]

“View of THE door to THE gas chamber at Dachau next to a large pile of uniforms.”[31]

“THE door to THE gas chamber in Dachau. It is marked ‘showerbath.’”[32]

“View of THE door to THE gas chamber in the Dachau concentrations camp. A sign above it identifies it as a shower.”[33]

The US Holocaust Museum uses the singular “the” to imply, both of these doors were the same door of the same homicidal gas chamber, disguised as a shower room.

They show the outside of the clothing fumigation chamber doors, located at the end of the building, then show the inside of the shower room door, located all the way over here. There are four disinfestation chambers, not one.

But they chose photographs which show one door and used the singular “the” and mix it with images of the shower room. You can see the disinfestation chambers had warnings not to enter and marks designating when clothing fumigations started and when it was safe to open the doors again.

Here they refer to this as “a” gas chamber,[34] of course ignoring that it was one of the four used to delouse clothing.

The photograph’s caption reveals the early propaganda lies, still perpetrated today.

“Gas Room – People were hung up in here.”

These hooks were not used to hang people in gas chambers. They were just hooks for clothing, of course.

“View of the hooks outside the door to the gas chambers in Buchenwald.”[35]

First, this isn’t even Buchenwald. This is a photo of a Dachau delousing chamber.

The original caption reads:

“Buchenwald was the home of Ilse Koch, wife of the commandant. She was known as the ‘bitch of Buchenwald,’ an insult to every dog who ever lived. She had her inmates tattooed in various designs, then had them killed, then skinned and their hides tanned to make book bindings, lamp shades, and other articles. I saw these things! One story has it that she enjoyed sexual intercourse with her victims – this may be apocryphal. These ‘meat hooks’ were used on the bodies of humans!”

Just about every claim in this miscaptioned photo is false. This example illuminates the typical hysterical propaganda common at the time and still repeated today by a government-funded institution. In reality, these alleged “meat hooks” are just hangers for clothes to air out after passing through the fumigation chambers.

This complex machinery sure looked like it would be something we’d expect in German-designed death chambers. But because this equipment could NOT be used to introduce Zyklon-B fumes into the chamber, today we are told the Germans instead just dumped the pesticide pellets onto the room’s floor through these vents in the outside wall. This is quite odd, because the disinfestation chambers right down the hall actually did have advanced specially designed mechanisms to properly heat and circulate cyanide gas from the Zyklon B pesticide pellets.

This was called the DEGESCH circulatory device made by the manufacturer of Zyklon B.[36] A member of a clothing fumigation crew would put a can of Zyklon B into the holder. A built-in can opener operated from the outside with a crank would open the can. The pellets would drop down a chute into a basket where hot air would be blown through to speed the release of cyanide gas from the pellets. The pesticide would be spread throughout the clothing fumigation chamber, and when finished, the gas would be removed from the chamber and fresh air blown in.

One should be very skeptical upon learning that today the official story is that the Germans, rather than using something like this specially designed device used in the clothing delousing chambers right down the hall, simply poured Zyklon B pellets through holes in the wall. Such a procedure would have been very detrimental, because once those pellets were inside the room, they could not have been removed, unless the room had been cleared of all the corpses. Since Zyklon B releases its poison for an hour or more, depending on temperature and humidity,[37] this means that any effort to swiftly ventilate the room after an execution would have been in vain.

Hence, these shafts, if they were added during the war within the framework of Dr. Rascher’s testing frenzy, may simply have been designed to assist the ventilation of that room.

Anyway, this is not exactly the advanced German engineering we are constantly propagandized with, is it?

In the face of overwhelming evidence that this room was never used to gas anyone, mainstream historians now claim that the inmates employed to build this gas chamber managed to sabotage its completion by dawdling on the job for some three years, or so we read in the original French edition of Paul Berben’s “official history” of the camp, quote:[38]

“The Dachau gas chamber, however, never functioned because to a certain extent, it seems, of sabotage carried out by the team of prisoners given the job to build it.”

[45:13]

So, the narration of the Nuremburg trial evidence film “Nazi Concentration Camps” was completely wrong. This clothing did not belong to inmates suffocated in the gas chamber. This was just clothing which passed through the real gas chambers for delousing clothes and was airing out.

This deceptive narration of the Dachau segment is an important part of the falsehoods in the Nuremberg trials film evidence center piece.

This bizarre practice of calling shower rooms gas chambers continues to this day. We can see on the website of Israel’s Holocaust Museum “Yad Vashem” a photograph of the actual inmate shower room at the Dachau Camp captioned:

“A gas chamber after the liberation.”[39]

This is just another real shower.

“Flossenbürg, Germany, Gas chambers, which were called showers.”[40]

This claim is repeated on the “HistoryWiz” web site “The Final Solution”. The photograph is captioned:[41]

“The final destination for those who could not work, the gas chamber – here, the gas chamber at Flossenburg.”

The hoaxers pulled the same old trick angle in the camera to block out the many windows of this real working shower room. The top official authorities today concede this room was a real shower, never used to gas anyone. Moreover, no mainstream historian has ever claimed that there was a homicidal gas chamber at the Flossenbürg Camp.

This doesn’t stop Israel’s Holocaust Museum and others from spreading gas shower nonsense. The “HistoryWiz” website presents an important quote:

“To be ignorant of history is to remain always a child. – Cicero”

That certainly holds true for those who childishly and ignorantly believe showers were gas chambers.

A major reason we believed in the stories of the showers of death is the terrible images of corpses taken at the end of the war. But those horrific images of emaciated and dead prisoners are not proof of an extermination program.

“This special presentation of the Oprah Winfrey Show is brought to you with limited commercial interruption. It is supported in part by the new AT&T, committed to education.

I am here in Poland at the Auschwitz death camp, where it is estimated that 1.1 to 1.5 million people perished here in the Holocaust.”

At an early age, you were probably already exposed to a program like this.[42] Documentaries such as this one are specifically aimed at young people. You can even see this copy was taken from a website called “School Tube”. Videos like this shock their audience by showing atrocious imagery which, if it were fiction, would be rated unsuitable for children.

“That evil has a name: The Holocaust. A systematic mass murder meticulously planned and executed by Nazi Germany that brutally wiped millions of people off the face of the earth. More than six million of those human beings were Jewish.”

But since this imagery is real, it is not rated unsuitable for children, although it is even more traumatizing exactly because it is real. However, hardly anyone, let alone a child, has the ability or experience to analyze the context of this imagery. This horrific film footage of emaciated corpses is presented with no context other than the claim that they are proof of a systematic extermination policy.

“The Holocaust. A systematic mass murder meticulously planned and executed…”

These images, however, were taken at the very end of the war. Mainstream historians claim, however, that any extermination activity had ceased in those camps in October of 1944 at the latest, based on an affidavit by German SS officer Kurt Becher, in which he quoted an order allegedly issued by Himmler in September of 1944 as follows:[43]

“I prohibit any annihilation of Jews with immediate effect, and on the contrary order the nursing of weak and sick persons. I hold you (with this, Kaltenbrunner and Pohl were meant) personally responsible for this, even if this order is not strictly followed by subordinate departments.”

Both Kaltenbrunner and Pohl were top officials of the concentration camp system. No trace of that Himmler order has ever been found, but that’s beside the point I want to make here. When we look at what was really going on in those camps, we are in for a surprise. Here is a chart showing the number of inmate deaths at Dachau as recorded first by the German authorities and then by the Americans. It clearly shows that mortality exploded at a time when Hitler’s extermination policy is said to have been abandoned. The same happened at the Bergen-Belsen Camp, where mortality exploded only in early 1945, as can be seen from this chart exhibited today at the Bergen-Belsen museum.

[50:12]

The reason for that was severe overcrowding combined with the disastrous collapse of food and water supplies as well as medical care and hygienic measures, which taken together caused malnutrition, starvation, and fatal diseases such as typhus and dysentery to spread out of control.

In those months, the Allies bombed Germany’s entire infrastructure to smithereens, including the supply lines into the camps. Shipments of medicine, sanitation supplies and food into the camps, power plants and water treatment plants were systematically bombed, and in some cases, they even bombed the actual camps. Not only Jewish concentration camp prisoners struggled and perished during the final months of World War II. For months upon months, the German civilian population was the target of an unprecedented fire-bombing campaign by the western Allies. From Hamburg to Dresden, tens of thousands of innocent German civilians were deliberately targeted and murdered. Women and children were burned alive, and terrified families suffocated from poison gas in bomb shelters. They don’t ever show you these pictures, do they? You should ask why, though.

Anyway, many Germans who survived became refugees running for their lives, and also struggled to feed themselves.

In the east, German civilian populations were also fleeing the invading Soviet army which was torturing and murdering civilians en masse. The Red Army raped untold numbers of German women from young children to the elderly.

Using these horrific images, the catastrophic last days of a collapsing Germany surrounded on all sides and bombed to smithereens, as proof of deliberate extermination camps is the dirty trick that is the main reason people believe in the Holocaust.

It’s why many react strongly against those critically investigating mainstream Holocaust claims. After all, we all saw the bodies, right? These images were taken in camps liberated by the western Allies, primarily Dachau, liberated by the Americans, and Bergen-Belsen, liberated by the British – camps which are today admitted, even by mainstream historians, not to have served as extermination or death camps.

Today, all of the so-called death camps or extermination camps are claimed to have been in Polish territories conquered by the Soviet Union.

Early witnesses originally claimed these western-liberated camps also had homicidal gas chambers, disguised as shower rooms. However, British and American doctors performed thousands of autopsies on some of the corpses the Allies discovered in those camps.

Russell Barton, an English medical student who had spent a month in Belsen after the camp’s liberation and had investigated the reasons for the camp’s disastrous conditions toward the end of the war, stated, quote:[44]

“German medical officers told me that it had been increasingly difficult to transport food to the camp for some months. Anything that moved on the autobahns was likely to be bombed. […]

I was surprised to find records, going back for two or three years, of large quantities of food cooked daily for distribution. I became convinced, contrary to popular opinion, that there had never been a policy of deliberate starvation. This was confirmed by the large numbers of well-fed inmates. […] The major reasons for the state of Belsen were disease, gross overcrowding by central authority, lack of law and order within the huts, and inadequate supplies of food, water and drugs.”

[53:46]

Here is an interview Dr. Barton gave to the late Ernst Zündel some ten years after this article had been published:[45]

“You were on the scene in Belsen as a young man.”

“Yes. I went with a group of medical students. We arrived in Belsen on May the second 1945, and I first went to the camp on May the third. Himmler ordered the camp to be ceded on April 11th in order to stop typhus, which was an epidemic spreading throughout Europe. The British came in; a tank division came in on April the fifteenth at three o’clock, and they did their best to segregate the typhus[-infected] and the dying from the other.”

“How many people were in the camp at the time when the British took over the camp?”

“I think there were about fifty-seven or sixty thousand. The British bombed everything, and the Americans, that moved on the roads. So getting food there was extremely difficult. The water supplies became contaminated with sewage, and the administration in the camp more or less broke down. The distribution of food in the individual huts was left to the inmates, and the inmates, we found out – we were fooled at first, but this was after May, after I got there. The inmates… one particular group was in control; they would take what they wanted and then leave whatever food there was left to the rest of the hut. So that meant, perhaps ten powerful people would gobble everything, and three hundred and fifty would have whatever was left. There were, I’d say, all nationalities, mainly Polish and Russian. Most of them were Jewish.”

“Were there men and women?”

“Yes, there were men and women, and children.”

“And were they segregated?”

“Segregated.”

“Segregated camps. And that was still segregated when you got there?”

“Yes.”

“Even, let’s say, if the German camp administration had made maximum effort, and had been given everything at hand, could they have prevented this?”

“There was no cure for typhus at that time. The British put DDT, which is an insecticide, over everything and everybody, and in that way, I think, the typhus was contained. But it was a great danger. People don’t realize it was typhus. It was… I supposed 50, 60 percent of the people died of typhus.”

“Why are these bodies naked? I mean, some of them are so emaciated. Why don’t they have their clothing on?”

“Well, they did. When they were pushed outside the huts, they had clothing on. But clothing was so scarce – everything was scarce – that the inmates would immediately rush out and take all the clothing off, because it was a pity to waste it. That’s why they were naked.”

“Did you see, when you got there two weeks after the British army took over, any evidence of gas chambers, the way propaganda has said that the Germans had in these camps? Or was there any claim made to that effect?”

“No. I don’t think it was ever thought there was a gas chamber in Belsen-Bergen. People were dying at 500 a day, by the way, a rate of 500 a day.”

“Even under British administration…”

“Under British administration, yes. And what was happening mostly, the English soldiers were giving people their food, people half starved, had very thin stomachs. The stomachs would burst, and they’d die. The inmates said that the conditions there, this is what inmates said, that conditions weren’t too bad until the end of ’44. And then this mass immigration… But by the time they put in another 50,000, fully 50,000, of course…”

“Were you there during the time when the bulldozers were actually putting these bodies in the graves, in these long trenches that we’ve seen?”

“The bulldozers… the bodies were being thrown in. They would put… a truck went around every day and picked up the bodies outside the hut, and then they would take them to where the bulldozer had dug the grave, and they would throw them into the grave.”

“You are a man born in England. You published this article, I believe, for an English publication. And the London Times picked up on what you have published here?”

“That’s right. This was published in November 1968. I was asked to write it. I was solicited. I had no intention of so doing.”

“Nobody ever interviewed you from any German magazines or papers?”

“Oh no. No, no.”

“To this day?”

“Not to this day.”

“Did anybody ever, officially from Germany, come and contact you for a kind of historical documentation, of the [???German Federal] archives in Koblenz and places like that?”

“No.”

“No. Never?”

“Never.”

Similar to this is the account given by Dr. Charles Larson, a U.S. forensic pathologist working for the U.S. Army’s Judge Advocate General. Right after the war, Dr. Larson performed autopsies on hundreds of victims in some twenty former concentration camps. In 1980, a newspaper article appeared reporting about his wartime experience. We read there:[46]

“Larson has talked little publicly about the war experience. One reason for his silence has been that his autopsy findings conflicted with the widely held belief that most Jews in Nazi camps were exterminated by gassing, shooting or poisoning.

‘What we’ve heard is that 6 million Jews were exterminated. Part of that is a hoax,’ Larson said. […]

Never was a case of poisoning uncovered, he said.”

[59:27]

Larson’s biographer wrote the following about this episode, quote:[47]

“In one grave the bulldozers uncovered an estimated 2,000 bodies, many of which were subjected to autopsy examination by Major Larson. All of those autopsied had died of various conditions such as emaciation with starvation, tuberculosis, typhus or other infectious diseases.

For the next ten days, many nights with only an hour or two of restless sleep, Larson worked among the dead. He performed about 25 autopsies a day and superficially examined another 300 to 1,000 bodies. He autopsied only those bodies that appeared to have died questionably. ‘Many of them died of typhus,’ Dr. Larson told me recently.

At Dachau Larson’s work – the profile of the prisoner population that his autopsies projected – indicated that only a small percentage of the deaths were due to medical experimentation on humans. It indicated that most of the victims died from so-called ‘natural causes’ at the time; that is, of disease brought on by malnutrition and filth which are the handmaidens of war.”

Today, these particular camps are admitted not to have had homicidal gas chambers at all. So, none of the corpses seen in these images were gassed. What you see in these images are prisoners who died from disease, as well as a lack of appropiate food, water and medical supplies. A large part of their condition was due to the Allies bombing supply lines to the camps.

Allied fighter planes even bombed and strafed trainloads full of prisoners as they were being evacuated to different camps. Those prisoners who weren’t hit by bullets or bombs were without appropiate supplies for days until arriving at their destinantion.

The liberation of Dachau concentration camp is dramatized in the film Shutter Island. The Americans liberating Dachau came across what became known as “The Dachau Death Trains”. They saw bullet holes in the sides of the trains and dead prisoners inside in terrible condition, believing the Germans locked starved prisoners inside the trains, then machine gunned them, the Americans turned their fury to the capture of German guards.

“The guards surrendered, we took their guns, and we lined them up. It wasn’t warfare, it was, it was murder!”

Many of the German guards who surrendered the camp had only recently been transferred to the camp in the final days of the war. Some were just teenagers from surrounding towns. Ironically, this young German guard even looks like the young DiCaprio. This young German was not a deliberate holocauster of Jews or anyone else but a young man tragically swept into the final days of the most brutal war in the history of mankind. The German soldiers surrendered, and with their hands up, the Americans shot dozens of captured unarmed German guards. And it didn’t happen in the heat of the moment either, as this movie suggests. In fact, the Americans actually brought the guards to the camp’s coal yard, got a heavy machine gun from their vehicle and brought it into position, and they had their army photographers take pictures of the event, as this photo and others prove. It was a war crime. The Americans played judge, jury and executioner. They even dragged German soldiers from a nearby hospital and shot them, even though they had nothing to do with the camp at all, let alone the death trains. Here is the testimony of one of the Americans involved in this murder:[48]

“I was not prepared for what I saw in Dachau. Nothing could prepare you for that. Nothing could prepare you for that type of slaughter that was carried on in that camp. […]

I never liked to see people killed unnecessarily, no matter what their stripe is or what they have done. We did kill some people there that I consider unnecessarily. However, given the circumstances, while I am sorry about it, it was just one of those things that no one could control. Actually, the people that we killed died a much easier death than the people that they tortured and killed as we subsequently found out. Torture and hangings and executions in various manners was a daily occurrence. So, in a way, we were kinder to them than they were to the people that they murdered.”

[65:05]

The only problem is that the people he helped to kill were not those who had run the camp for many years.

But evidence has come to light that the Germans did not lock prisoners inside the trains and machine gun them.

The bullets which tore through the trains full of prisoners were not German bullets but in fact the result of Allied war planes strafing the trains.

Here is a Jewish former prisoner talking about the Allies bombing and shooting his train, killing prisoners on the way to Dachau, explaining their condition:

“I was ordered to go march out to the railroad station back into the cattle cars, but this time they had open wagons and regular cattle cars. But the only difference it was that the railroad tracks, on one track, the Nazis were retreating with the heavy artillery, ammunition and all their hardware. In another track the concentration camp inmates in the train load. The Nazis were hoping maybe because we are there they will not be bombed.

It would have been a short trip, but it took us almost three days to get to Dachau. What had happened, we got hit by air raid. They bombed the both of the tracks, they machine gunned our train. And in the train were I was sitting – this time it wasn’t so loaded – we were all squatting down. Both of the fellows beside me got hit by machine gun fire. And I just, days… by then the guards were gone. We opened the railroad car and stumbled out of the car and walked into the woods in nearby, and hid there. Remember going out on the fields and dug off some potatoes for food. But they came back next morning or a day later with dogs, gathered us together and ordered us back to the railroad cars. They never removed the bodies. This is how we arrived to Dachau.”

This Jew’s train was bombed and shot by Allied planes. The prisoners the Allies killed were left inside the train. Prisoners who weren’t blown up or shot by the Allies suffered further malnutrition, in part due to the bombing of train tracks, delaying their journey.

The Allies were directly responsible for killing many on these death trains. Bullets from Allied air planes tore through the bodies of those prisoners shortly before the American infantry arrived at Dachau. American infantry, ignorant of the role of Allied bombing and strafing runs contributing to the deaths of the prisoners inside the death trains, put the blame on the Germans.

They lined the unarmed, surrendered German guards against a wall and executed them, committing a war crime, which has gone unpunished to this day. Misunderstandings, propaganda, falsehoods, blind patriotism, mistakes, rushing to judgement. How else could millions be driven to killing their own people, themselves essentially?

“It wasn’t warfare, it was murder.”

The Allies also directly bombed concentration camp prisoners, and today we are told this is proof of a German planned Holocaust.

This is another segment from the American propaganda film “Nazi Concentration Camps” which was shown at the Nuremberg Trials.

“The slave-labor camp at Nordhausen liberated by the Third Armored Division, First Army. At least three thousand political prisoners died here at the brutal hands of SS troops and hardened German criminals who were the camp guards. Nordhausen had been a depository for slaves found unfit for work in the underground V-bomb plants and in other German camps and factories.”

A deceptively captioned image of Nordhausen appears in Steven Spielberg’s The Last Days companion book. We see American solders walking past corpses strewn on the ground. The caption reads:

“The horrific scene of mass annihilation within the Nordhausen concentration camp.”

Let’s look closer at the photograph. We can see the buildings have been bombed. Testimony of former prisoners shows they were lucky to survive Allied bombing attacks.

This Jewish former prisoner and doctor describes prisoners laying in the camp hospital, sick of tuberculosis in the final days of the war.

“And there I had over 4 thousand prisoners laying on tuberculosis. Sick. What are you doing? It’s tuberculosis. No medications, nothing, hardly food, it was very meager already. The Germans didn’t have to eat.”

[70:18]

This former prisoner and doctor described conditions in the camp in the final days of the war. Sick prisoners didn’t have enough supplies. However, he points out the Germans themselves also didn’t have enough even to eat. Clearly, the Germans could have killed the sick prisoners at any time, yet instead treated them in hospitals.

“And all of the sudden, it was April 3rd at 3 o’clock, alarm, and American air force over us, and dropped the bombs just on our camp. And the whole camp was entirely destroyed. And out of this four thousand people, we were 200 survived. Because they died there. They were in the camps, you know. Hanging in the ceiling, their bodies and… It was awful. It was burning days and days. We were still…, the nurses, the doctors, the administration people, the working administration… we ran away.

 

And the Americans made a mistake because they didn’t know this is a concentration camp. They knew it is a military camp. They emptied the military the month before and in January they put us in, you see. So, they didn’t know. So, they came back at 9 o’clock in the morning and hit the whole city. The whole city they flattened. We ran away in the wood, in the fields, and when they emptied the planes, they came and strafed us with machine guns. They didn’t know who it is. They are Germans, you know. And we went into the woods, and we remained about a week in the woods. And we ate only the raw potatoes.”

British Royal Air Force bombed the camp, full of sick prisoners. They turned around and shot survivors running for their lives. They flattened the nearby town, full of innocent German civilians.

The British are primarily responsible for the scene of, quote, “mass annihilation.” But images of Nordhausen recently bombed and strafed by British planes are still used today as proof of a deliberate German-planned Holocaust.

And it’s important to note that most of those seen in this photograph aren’t even Jews but primarily non-Jewish political prisoners, including Poles, Russians and Jehovah’s Witnesses. These majority non-Jewish victims of Allied bombing at a former labor camp are used to sell a supposed Jewish Holocaust.

The Oprah program deceptively used two shots of the aftermath of the British air raid at Nordhausen.

“More than six millions of those human beings were Jewish.”

This victim of the Allies blowing up and strafing sick prisoners at Nordhausen being carried over rubble was in fact likely not Jewish. So, we’re looking at someone who is both not killed by the Germans but by the British and who is likely not a Jew.

Here is another clip of Nordhausen. The prisoners of the camp for seriously ill prisoners were blown up and shot by the British, and were buried in this mass grave. The soldiers standing at the edge are Americans. But we are led to assume they are Germans, standing at attention after a job well done.

“[…] that brutally wiped millions of people off the face of the earth.”

Actually, the British brutally wiped these prisoners off the face of the earth. The Germans put them in a camp with doctors and nurses.

What’s incredible is that you were shown these images as proof of an organized, planned, systematic extermination program going according to plan.

“A systematic mass murder meticulously planned and executed …”

…when in reality, this was the result of the total disorganization and utter chaos of a collapsing Germany which was still being bombed relentlessly into submission.

Rather than do the right thing and accept blame for what could be said is accidental collateral damage based on faulty intelligence, the Allies instead just blamed the Germans. Images of a camp full of sick prisoners bombed and strafed by British planes at Nordhausen are used as proof of a systematic, planned German extermination program. However, every single mostly non-Jewish prisoner in this imagery was killed due to a British bomb or bullet.

The editing of the film “Nazi Concentration Camps” was supervised by Budd Schulberg, born Seymour Schulberg, son of the head of Paramount Studios. Schulberg was Jewish and a member of the communist party USA until 1939.

[75:03]

All of these dead were murdered with British bombs or bullets. Yet no mention is made of that. Schulberg claims they died at the brutal hands of Germans.

“At least 3 thousand political prisoners died here at the brutal hands of SS troops and hardened German criminals who were the camp guards.”

This is a total lie and inversion of history. The final shot of the “Nazi Concentration Camps” film shows footage of a prisoner at Nordhausen who had his head blown off.

A prisoner account describes exactly how this happened and who is responsible:[49]

“THE APRIL 3 BOMBING. The accounts refer first of all to the Tuesday, April 3 bombing: ‘Right from the first blast, I took shelter under the concrete staircase of the Revier. A bomb hit the Block and the staircase was demolished. I ran to the middle of the camp, to a shelter dug right into the ground, where there were already a dozen civilians, women, children, and also an SS man – as green from fear as his uniform – who could only stammer: ‘Schrecklich! Schrecklich!’ (Horrible! Horrible!) And indeed, it was not a pretty sight; corpses every five or six yards, headless or their innards ripped open.”

Today, images of Nordhausen are widely used as proof of a Jewish Holocaust. Why is this particular image so popular? The bodies of those blown up or shot by the British, then pulled out of craters or the rubble of buildings and lined up in ordered rows by the Americans are meant to imply an orderly German method of mass murder. Apparently, they want us to believe the Germans lined all these prisoners up here in neat rows and shot them where they stood. If these dead people were German soldiers, the Brits would pat themselves on the back for a job well done. Instead, the Allies just blamed their bombing and shooting screw up on the Germans. What a horrific scam, pulled right in front of our very eyes. Imagery of tragic deaths which were the direct result of the Allies’ actions are cynically exploited to sell a lie.

[Footage showing historian Stephen Ambrose:]

“Adolf Hitler was pure evil. And he was in command of the most advanced technology and the best-disciplined people and the best-educated people in the world.”

“In the wrong hands, technology helped turn Europe into a slaughter house. This was a war that was also a crime.”

“Eisenhower, when he first encountered concentration camps, was shocked and surprised. He hadn’t been told about it. His immediate reaction was, ‘This is so horrible that there will inevitably become a revisionist movement some day to say ‘this never happened; this is propaganda; this is a figment of wartime imagination,’ so he insisted that every GI who could be marched through those camps and he said ‘bring your cameras with you.’”

This is a classic quote used to attempt to refute revisionists. Eisenhower said, there would be deniers in the future, so he ordered witnesses march through camps and film them. No one denies these are real bodies. But the false analysis of their cause of death deflecting all blame onto Germans is the propaganda. Every single shot in this news segment was taken at Nordhausen. All of the footage of murdered prisoners in the sick camp at Nordhausen shows prisoners blown up or shot by the British.

This is another example of the propaganda formula: supposed expert, deceptive imagery, plus calling those who question it evil haters. It turns out this master historian was later accused of plagiarism throughout his entire career.[50] He even lied about spending hundreds of hours with Eisenhower and meeting with him daily. Official records show he spent five hours on the record with Eisenhower. This is the mentality of these master historians, promoted to the forefront of the monopoly media. There was no plan to turn these prisoners into this condition. This was the result of the catastrophic end to the war. Not everything going perfectly according to an evil plan.

Up until this time these images of a bulldozer dumping naked emaciated corpses into a mass grave at Bergen-Belsen were the most horrifying imagery in the history of film. This film footage was shown to our grandparents’ generation on a big screen. It has been shown to you at a young age. What are you to believe? Some programs such as the Oprah presentation lead one to assume this is a German driving this bulldozer, making his quota of gassed Jews for the day, rather than a British solder pushing epidemic typhus victims into a mass grave.

[80:05]

Until the end of the war, Bergen-Belsen was not a death camp were Germans deliberately starved to death and murdered prisoners. In fact, it was originally designated as a recuperation camp, or Krankenlager, where sick prisoners were sent to improve their health. It wasn’t such a terrible place until the final days of the war, and there is evidence to prove it. Rose Kahn, a Hungarian Jew, was transported from Auschwitz to Bergen-Belsen in the summer of 1944. Before Auschwitz was abandoned, and Bergen-Belsen was severely overcrowded, she describes Bergen-Belsen as not such a terrible place.

“So, when we arrived to Bergen-Belsen, and they told us to get out, and the Nazis came with those big, big dogs, with their wolves, and they asked us who cannot walk, is sick, should tell ‘em, so they gonna put us on a bus. I was afraid to say it. I couldn’t walk, but I didn’t say it. And if I would say, would been good, because this was not a bad place. This was not at that time, at that time.”

“So in other words it wasn’t a trick?”

“No, no.”

“They really would have taken you by bus.”

“Yes, yes, yes.”

“I think you were right, though.”

“Yes, but I was so afraid, so my mother and my friends were holding me. We had to walk a few miles, quite a few miles to it. And we arrived there, and we lived in tents and straw, we slept on straw. And we weren’t treated badly. No, it wasn’t too bad over there. We were given nice meals. What happened? They wanted us strong to send out to work, so they didn’t want weak and sick people.”

Witnesses such as this help prove that Bergen-Belsen was not a specially designed death camp whatsoever. Before the catastrophic end of the war, prisoners were routinely fed and decently cared for.

The major trick of the Holocaust promotion industry is to show these horrible images of emaciated bodies and make you believe that prisoners were always like this. That the Germans immediately starved them to death, and this deliberate starvation had been going on for years as part of their plan of extermination. However, witnesses such as this and others prove that at times the concentration camps were not so terrible.

“This was not a bad place. This was not at that time.”

It was only as Germany was losing the war, surrounded on all sides by a terror bombing campaign from the west and marauding Soviets in the east, that conditions in camps such as Bergen-Belsen deteriorated disastrously.

“And then we stayed there until they started to build barracks for all the other Auschwitz people when Bergen-Belsen became hell.”

Bergen-Belsen became hellish at the very end of the war. The major cause of this was the Allied bombing campaign. As the Allies fire-bombed German civilian population centers, burning innocent men, women and children alive and shot at or bombed just about anything that moved on roads or train tracks, even the Germans themselves had trouble finding enough to eat at the time.

[Camp survivors interviewed:]

“…hardly food, it was very meager already. The Germans didn’t have to eat.”

“Food didn’t improve very much because, simple reason, they didn’t have very much themselves, so…”

“Did the civilians try to help you at all? Did they trade goods for things?”

“It’s as I say, we had almost everything what we wanted, from the soccer teams, from the civilians, from outside civilians.”

The spread of deadly diseases and severe overcrowding exacerbated the entire situation. Prisoners from areas in the east which were now being overrun by the Soviets were hastily evacuated west. After days or weeks journey, often on foot, they wound up in these overcrowded camps full of deadly diseases. And because the German infrastructure was being destroyed, this was catastrophic.

In early February 1945, a large transport of Hungarians were admitted to Bergen-Belsen while the disinfestation facility was out of order. As a result, typhus broke out and quickly spread beyond control. The hot-air delousing machine sometimes failed to work for several days. The worst killer was typhus. But typhoid fever and dysentery also claimed their lives.

There was a breakdown in order and communication throughout the German system as the Germans were losing the war and fighting for their survival. Trainloads of food were destroyed by Allied planes. At Bergen-Belsen, the final factor which guaranteed mass casualties was in the final weeks of the war: The Allies bombed the power plant which supplied electricity to the facilities that pumped water to the camp.

[85:12]

“Water too had been cut off. And so, the water cart was the most important thing to arrive. There had be no water supply for six days. The Germans pleaded it had been cut.”[51]

The electric plant which powered pumps supplying water to Bergen-Belsen was not cut by some unnamed force. It was blown up by the British. A destroyed system for providing clean water to the camp compounded already disastrous hygiene and medical conditions. Clean water, necessary to shower prisoners, wash clothing and treat dehydrated typhoid fever, dysentery and typhus patients was indeed cut off by British bombs.

“One might ask why all the inmates surviving were not removed out of the camp altogether to a large town, for example, where there would be feeding and housing facilities. The answer is simply the dread word – typhus.

A mobile bacteriological unit and all medical aid possible together with 90 medical students from London hospitals were rushed to the spot to deal with it.

Lack of soap and water brought lice to the inmates, and lice carry typhus. To get rid of typhus, one must first get rid of lice, so contaminated patients were removed from their huts and put through a laundry process.”

The British struggled to remedy disastrous conditions in Bergen-Belsen after liberation. Many thousands died after liberation. In the end, the British burned the wooden barracks, as they became infested with deadly epidemic-typhus-carrying body lice. Images of the disastrous situation at Bergen-Belsen are fraudulently used to portray a deliberate German extermination policy.

These post-liberation images of Bergen-Belsen as well as Dachau and Nordhausen have become symbols of German barbarism. But these people were victims of the larger war, not a deliberate German extermination plan. The Germans did what they could to keep people alive, and in some cases contacted the Red Cross for assistance and even turned over some camps to them. The shameful truth hidden amongst this Holocaust propaganda is that not only were none of these people gassed, but the Allies played a major role in their deaths.

As terrible as these images of emaciated prisoners are, images of union prisoners of the American confederate civil war camp Andersonville show liberated prisoners also appeared in a similar condition. What happened at Andersonville was a complete breakdown in hygiene measures due to inadequate sanitation facilities. Toilets in the overcrowded camp didn’t drain properly, exposing prisoners to filth and disease, in particular dysentery. Symptoms of dysentery include diarrhea and rapid weight loss. In extreme cases, patients may pass over a liter of fluid per hour. It’s easy to see how someone who is repeatedly defecating, vomiting and urinating would quickly lose body weight, especially if food supplies, medicine and water became scarce.

At Andersonville, as overcrowding increased, so did the death toll. The confederates also lost the war in a catastrophic way much like the Germans. So, there is a direct correlation between the images of Andersonville prisoners and the so-called Holocaust images.

Now, these people at Andersonville aren’t Jews, and never has anyone alleged the South aimed for a total genocide of Northerners. The photographs of Andersonville and for instance Bergen-Belsen are quite similar and correlate with the breakdown in hygiene, overcrowding, the spread of disease and one side of the war losing catastrophically. What you see in these images at Bergen-Belsen is primarily the result of typhus.

Typhus is a disease carried by the body louse which is similar to head lice. But body lice prefer to attach themselves not to the scalp but to the inner seams of clothing. Typhus was responsible for the deaths of millions throughout history. Typhus epidemics routinely occurred throughout Europe during war time. During World War I, more than three million people died from typhus.

What you see in these images are primarily typhus epidemic victims. The Germans did not intentionally starve them to death. We can see several people liberated from the camps. Although not in pristine condition, some appear well fed, some even fat. They simply didn’t have disease. The Germans in fact tried to stop the spread of disease. The insecticide Zyklon B was a pesticide used to kill these deadly typhus-carrying body lice.

[90:02]

There is nothing inherently murderous about Zyklon B. In fact, Zyklon B was used on the Mexican border to gas the clothing of Mexicans crossing the border. The delousing process went like this:

Prisoners entering a camp would strip their clothing and get a haircut to prevent any areas where deadly typhus-carrying body lice could thrive. Then they would take a hot shower. At the same time, their clothing would be put into specially designed fumigation chambers where fumigation crews would use the insecticide Zyklon B to kill deadly typhus-carrying body lice.

The prisoners would then be given clean, lice-free clothing, and enter the camp. It is easy to see how this life saving delousing process involving real fumigation chambers for clothing and real showers was misconstrued into wartime propaganda about showers of gas by prisoners spreading rumors as well as Soviet propaganda artists deliberately framing their enemies.

One of the final exhibits at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. sums up the importance of the information presented in this video.

Museum visitors are bombarded with film clips taken after the Allies captured concentration and labor camps. These films are meant to represent proof of a deliberate German extermination policy. But you have now seen many of these clips, explained and debunked.

Near the end of the museum’s main exhibit two banks of three video monitors flanking a fallen Nazi flag play film footage taken after camps were captured by the Allies.

Each of the three monitors is dedicated to one of the three major Allied powers: the Soviet Union, United States and Great Britain.

On this screen is US Army footage taken at Nordhausen, Dachau and Buchenwald. The caption reads:

“Local German civilians are ordered to tour Buchenwald Concentration Camp.”

This is an American army official gathering Germans around the supposed human-skin lamp shade and the table filled with propaganda props. Visitors are shown the Dachau death trains full of victims of Allied bombing and strafing attacks. Majdanek, the outside of a real shower facility, “Bath and Disinfection II,” and the inside of “Bath and Disinfection I” showing the real, working shower room. Again, the camera is angled away from the many windows. The caption reads:

“Soviet Army officers inspect chambers where prisoners were killed by poison gas.”

Today, every serious mainstream historian acknowledges this wasn’t a gas chamber with fake shower heads, it was a real working shower room designed to keep prisoners alive and free of disease.

Again, the bulldozer pushing epidemic typhus victims into a mass grave at Bergen-Belsen. A disaster, but not deliberate or planned.

On the last television screen, we’re shown footage of Nordhausen bombed to smithereens by 500 British warplanes over two days. Much like at the Nuremberg trials, the final shot we are shown before moving on to the exhibit on post-war trials is the victim of British war planes at Nordhausen with his exposed brains.

How sick to show gory imagery of Allied air attack victims as proof of the evilness of Germans.

Mothers rushing their children past this section never question the context of this imagery. This is powerful, trauma-based mind control used to brainwash, not by using logic and facts, but by searing these horror images into a captive audience’s mind, and manipulating emotions with mendacious narrations.

Real shower rooms, phony planted evidence like this lamp shade, and victims of Allied bombing are not proof of a genocide using gas chambers, disguised as shower rooms. We were manipulated, misled and lied to.

We were shown images taken during the final days of a destroyed and collapsed Germany as proof of a systematic, planned extermination program. Upon further investigation by the western Allies, these claims of extermination camps equipped with homicidal gas chambers in western-liberated camps have fallen by the wayside.

However, the powerful imagery of these western-liberated, overcrowded, disease-infested camps, devastated due to the Allied bombing campaign in the final months of the worst war in the history of mankind is still used to brainwash the public as proof of an extermination program of gas chambers disguised as shower rooms in camps captured by the Soviet Union.

In Part 2 of this documentary, we will explore some aspects of the most infamous of these camps: Auschwitz.

[94:55]

Disclaimer

This documentary is not meant to whitewash the National Socialist regime of Germany from any of its undisputed wrongdoings. Imprisoning people without proper due process is a crime. Any authority committing such a crime ultimately bears responsibility for those in its custody.

However, this crime was not only committed by the German authorities prior to and during World War II, but during the war also by the U.S. authorities who imprisoned many Japanese Americans as well as Italian and German immigrants. The biggest criminal in this regard, however, was the US’s most important ally of the Second World War, the Soviet Union, where millions were imprisoned and ultimately murdered prior to, during and after the war.

Unfortunately, this crime of unlawful incarceration is today again committed by U.S. authorities in Guantanamo Bay and other similar facilities.

[95:52]

__________________

Holocaust Handbooks, the world’s leading book series critically exploring what the powers that be don’t want examined. Mermerizing, comprehensive presentations, such as Lectures on the Holocaust, as well as cutting edge research results, such as The Real Case for Auschwitz. Read most of our books free of charge at holocausthandbooks.com, where you can also watch our riveting documentaries. All this high quality content was made possible by viewers like you. Please consider making a donation to help us create more of this content. We can’t do it without you! Thank you.

[96:28]

Notes

[1]

As of Oct. 2017, the following were found online (U = USHMM, Y = Yad Vashem): Auschwitz (U = “over 960,000” total, Y = “more than 1,100,000” total); Belzec (U = approximately 434,500, Y = 600,000); Sobibor (U = “at least 170,000”, Y = 250,000); Treblinka (U = “between 870,000 and 925,000”, Y = 870,000); Majdanek (U = “unknown”, “Between 89,000 and 110,000” “Most succumbed to starvation, disease, exposure, and the effects of physical torture or back-breaking labor performed under threat of violence”, Y = no number, total Jewish death toll “60,000” (Kranz), “200,000” (Łukaszkiewicz)); Chelmno (U = “at least 152,000”, Y = 320,000).

[2]

www.un.org/en/holocaustremembrance/docs/res607.shtml

[3]

Donald Trump, “Statement by the President on International Holocaust Remembrance Day,” Jan. 27, 2017; www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/27/statement-president-international-holocaust-remembrance-day (accessed on Oct. 4, 2017)

[4]

https://twitter.com/JGreenblattADL/status/825029350126936064 (accessed on Oct. 4, 2017).

[5]

The Guardian, Jan 27, 2017; www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/27/white-house-holocaust-remembrance-day-no-jews; Commentary, Jan 28, 2017; www.commentarymagazine.com/politics-ideas/the-white-house-holocaust-horror/;

[6]

Jake, “WH: No mention of Jews on Holocaust Remembrance Day because others were killed too,” CNN, Jan. 28, 2017; http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politics/white-house-holocaust-memorial-day

[7]

Louise Ridley, “The Holocaust’s Forgotten Victims: The 5 Million Non-Jewish People Killed By The Nazis,” The Huffington Post, Jan 27, 2015; www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/27/holocaust-non-jewish-victims_n_6555604.html; for more see Hadding Scott, “Anti-Gentiles Deny the 5 Million!,” Inconvenient History, Vol. 9, No. 2, spring 2017; www.codoh.comhttps://www.inconvenienthistory.com/9/2/4239/

[8]

Ron Kampeas, “‘Remember the 11 million’? Why an inflated victims tally irks Holocaust historians,” Jewish Telegraph Agency, Jan. 31, 2017; www.jta.org/2017/01/31/news-opinion/united-states/remember-the-11-million-why-an-inflated-victims-tally-irks-holocaust-historians/; The Times of Israel, Feb. 1, 2017; www.timesofisrael.com/remember-the-11-million-why-an-inflated-victims-tally-irks-holocaust-historians/

[9]

Deborah Lipstadt, “The Trump Administration’s Flirtation With Holocaust Denial,” The Atlantic Monthly, Jan 30, 2017; www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/the-trump-administrations-softcore-holocaust-denial/514974/

[10]

https://youtu.be/OxJZBrtFD6Y

[11]

Best resolution in two parts: https://youtu.be/6wJDlh5ozEY & … https://youtu.be/BQ0m-0AZ-m0

[12]

Ibid. starting at 1 min 23 sec.

[13]

Ibid. starting at 1 min 59 sec.

[14]

Caroline Sturdy Colls, Holocaust Archaeologies: Approaches and Future Directions, Springer, Cham, 2015, p. 3, footnote.

[15]

Matthew Day, “Nazis may have killed up to 20m, claims ‘shocking’ new Holocaust study,” Daily Telegraph, March 4, 2013; www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/9906771/Nazis-may-have-killed-up-to-20m-claims-shocking-new-Holocaust-study.html

[16]

https://youtu.be/_pQJ42ONPDo; starting at 45:18; see the authentications and explanation: IMT Document PS-2430: Nazi Concentration and Prisoner-of-War Camps: A Documentary Motion Picture, film shown at the Nuremberg Trial, 29 November 1945, IMT, XXX, p. 470;

[17]

www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005214

[18]

E. Kogon, H. Langbein, A. Rückerl (eds.), Nazi Mass Murder, Yale Univ. Press, New Haven/London 1993.

[19]

Document PS-3249, IMT, Vol. 32, pp. 57-64, here p. 62, quoted in IMT, Vol. 5, pp. 172f.

[20]

Document 159-L, IMT, Vol 37, pp. 605-627, here p. 621.

[21]

“Dachau Concentration Camp”; https://youtu.be/pIxOQdeCWX0; 18:00-18:05

[22]

Levi Mierau, “Dachau Concentration Camp,” Documentary, Part 2; https://youtu.be/MQvB3sLER34; 6:55-7:01

[23]

U.S. National Archives, Dachau Trial (Trial of Martin Gottfried Weiss), M1174, Reel 1, microfilm page 000135.

[24]

Nuremberg Document NO-3886.

[25]

Nuremberg Document NO-3887.

[26]

NS 21/319.

[27]

Levi Mierau, “Dachau Concentration Camp,” Documentary, Part 2; https://youtu.be/MQvB3sLER34; 6:00-6:13.

[28]

Ibid., 6:54-7:23.

[29]

https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa1154600

[30]

https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa23334

[31]

https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa1166433

[32]

https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa1058759

[33]

https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa1158576

[34]

https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa1174716

[35]

https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa1168298

[36]

Ludwig Gassner, “Verkehrshygiene und Schädlingsbekämpfung,” Gesundheits-Ingenieur, 66(15) (1943) pp. 174-176.

[37]

See Richard Irmscher, “Nochmals: ‘Die Einsatzfähigkeit der Blausäure bei tiefen Temperaturen,’” Zeitschrift für hygienische Zoologie und Schädlingsbekämpfung, 34 (1942), pp. 35f.

[38]

Paul Berben, Histoire du camp de concentration de Dachau, 1933-1945, Comité international de Dachau, Brussels 1968, p. 12.

[39]

Yad Vashem Archives, 1211/28, item ID 38051.

[40]

Yad Vashem Archives, 4029, item ID 57452.

[41]

http://www.historywiz.org/finalsolution.htm

[42]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IJ4mpCDVpE

[43]

3762-PS; IMT, Vol. 33, p. 68.

[44]

Russell Barton, “Belsen,” in: History of the Second World War, 109 (1975), pp. 3025-3029; cf. Barbara Kulaszka (ed.), Did Six Million Really Die?, Samisdat Publishers, Toronto 1992, pp. 175-180; www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres3/KULA.pdf (different pagination).

[45]

https://youtu.be/v8vGpqQBpNU

[46]

Jane Floerchinger, “Concentration Camp Conditions Killed Most Inmates, Doctor Says,” The Wichita Eagle, April 1, 1980, p. 4C.

[47]

John D. McCallum, Crime Doctor, The Writing Works, Mercer Island, Wash., 1978, pp. 57-60, 69.

[48]

Levi Mierau, “Dachau Concentration Camp,” Documentary, Part 1, 5:32-5 :49 (https://youtu.be/cCi_PLl-rJs); Part 3, 0-1:03 (https://youtu.be/Xpnl-YyafI).

[49]

André Sellier, A History of the Dora Camp: The Story of the Nazi Slave Labor Camp that Secretly Manufactured V-2 Rockets, Ivan R. Dee, Chicago, 2003, p. 291.

[50]

David Plotz, “The Plagiarist: Why Stephen Ambrose is a vampire,” Jan. 11, 2002; www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/assessment/2002/01/the_plagiarist.html.

[51]

“Memory of the Camps”, Alfred Hitchcock “documentary”; https://youtu.be/DY9y7cmmmFQ.

============================================

PDF Notes

Version 1 —

* Total words = xxx
* Total images = xx
* Total A4 pages = xx

Click to download a PDF of this post (x.x MB):

(Available later)

============================================

See Also:

The World’s First Anti-Holocaust Convention — Instauration Dec, 1979

An Open Letter to New Jersey’s Governor

Historians or Hoaxers?

House of Orwell

Misha: Surviving with Wolves or …

Bradley Smith’s Smith Report # 1

The Liberation of the Camps: Facts vs. Lies

The Plum Cake

Auschwitz: Myths and Facts

Powers and Principalities XI – Ewen Cameron, MK-Ultra, Holocaust Revisionism — TRANSCRIPT

Tales of the Holohoax – A Historian’s Assessment – Part 1

The Holocaust Lie — Made in America

Probing the Holocaust: The Horror Explained — TRANSCRIPT

Jim Rizoli Interviews Prof Robert Faurisson, Oct 2015 — TRANSCRIPT

Holocaust Eyewitnesses: Is the Testimony Reliable?

Alain Soral – My Homage to Robert Faurisson, Oct 2018 — TRANSCRIPT

Inside Auschwitz – You’ve never seen THIS before! — TRANSCRIPT

Amazion Bans 100s of Holocaust Revisionist Books!

AUSCHWITZ – A Personal Account by Thies Christophersen

Jim Rizoli Interviews Bradley Smith — TRANSCRIPT

London Forum – Alfred Schaefer – Psychological Warfare – TRANSCRIPT

The Realist Report Interviews Eric Hunt — TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice Radio – Germar Rudolf – Persecution of Revisionists & Demographic Disaster – Part 1— TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice Radio: Nicholas Kollerstrom — TRANSCRIPT

Red Ice TV – Ingrid Carlqvist – Scandal in Sweden When Ingrid Questions the Unquestionable — TRANSCRIPT

The Realist Report with Carolyn Yeager on Johnson vs Anglin debate — TRANSCRIPT

============================================

Version History

Version 3: Jan 27, 2020 — Added See Also links.

Version 2: Jan 17, 2020 — Re-uploaded images for katana17.com/wp/ version.

Version 1: Dec 28, 2017  — Published post.

[A fascinating discussion by Joe Atwill and Tim Kelly joining all the dots connecting the evil psychiatrist Ewen Cameron, CD Jackson, MK-Ultra, Fake News, Zionists, “Nazis“, Mind Control and Holocau$t Revisionism.

This discussion should be of great interest to “Holocaust” revisionists in that it places the “Holocaust” into a much broader context of a long term and on-going mind-manipulation program by the oligarchs, aka, organised jewry —  KATANA.]

_______________________

Our Interesting Times

Ewen Cameron, CD Jackson, MK-Ultra, Fake News, Zionists, Nazis, Mind Control and Holocaust Revisionism

Click this link to listen to the audio:

https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/tkelly6785757/episodes/2017-08-05T09_14_39-07_00

Powers & Principalities XI

Ewen Cameron, MK-Ultra &

Holocaust Revisionism

Published on Aug 5, 2017

TRANSCRIPT

[00:43]

Tim: Joe you’re back. How you doing?

Joe: I’m great Tim! How are you doing?

Tim: Very well. Doing very well. Thank you. Tonight you want to talk about, well an interesting character, Donald Ewen Cameron. Ewen Cameron, most people know him as. He was a psychiatrist, a very, I guess, theoretical, would you say, a “groundbreaking psychiatrist“, you could say? He was born in Scotland in 1901. He began his career as a resident surgeon at Glasgow Infirmary. In 1929 he moved to Canada to work in Brandon Mental Hospital. 1936 he became a director of research at Worcester State Hospital in Massachusetts, so he came to United States. In 1938 he was appointed professor of neurology and psychiatry at Albany State Medical School.

[Image] Donald Ewen Cameron.

Donald Ewen Cameron (24 December 1901 – 8 September 1967)  — known as D. Ewen Cameron or Ewen Cameron — was a Scottish-born psychiatrist who served as President of the American Psychiatric Association (1952–1953), Canadian Psychiatric Association (1958-1959),  American Psychopathological Association (1963), Society of Biological Psychiatry (1965)[4] and World Psychiatric Association (1961-1966). Notwithstanding his high professional reputation, he has been criticized for administering electroshock therapy and experimental drugs to patients without their informed consent. Some of this work took place in the context of the Project MK-Ultra mind control program. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Ewen_Cameron

So he has quite a resume! During the Second World War he began working for the Office of Strategic Services [OSS]. So here we have a member of the British, subject the British Empire working for the United States, working for the OSS. In 1943 he went to Canada and established a psychiatry department — that’s curious — during the war, at Montreal’s McGill University, director of the Alan Memorial Institute, which was later implicated in some infamous experiments on some patients, under the guise of MK-Ultra and also some other programs with the Canadian government.

Also a curious experience during the war. He apparently examined and interrogated Rudolf Hess, and worked for Allen Dulles in Europe. So he had that background.

And of course, under MK-Ultra, he tested his theories, I guess it was called “de-patterning” where he wiped, scrubbed people’s brains clear. He takes some patients that went in for some minor things like postpartum depression, anxiety, and destroyed their minds! And this was funded by the CIA through the Human Ecology Fund, I believe. And also through interest in some Department of Education grants, or Department of Health Education Welfare grants and some other government agencies, DOD [Department of Defense] of course.

Joe: Rockefeller, …

Tim: And the Rockefeller Foundation. So just it’s kind of a wide, … Also a lot of money from the Canadian government, as well. More money came from the Canadian government. And it’s said that he was operating in Canada because the CIA didn’t want to break the law in experiments on US citizens. Yeah, right! [laughing]

So anyway, that is Ewen Cameron. That’s his experience in MK-Ultra. He died in 1967, having a heart attack while on a skiing trip. So, where do you want to, how do you want to enter this discussion?

Joe: Well, he’s someone who really should be understood. I mean, just you couldn’t have an individual that’s more important, in my opinion. You have to get a good grip on.

Cameron is important, because he spans, and was integral to, two absolutely central narratives, basically. One of them was tangential, and that is the MK-Ultra stuff. And so basically, MK-Ultra even though, it has this concept of being, you know, studying basically individual psychological people. And the idea has come about that it was going to create, you know, a Manchurian Candidate, or mind control puppets.

[Image] Robert Gordon Wasson (September 22, 1898 – December 23, 1986) author and ethnomycologist. Photograph by Allan B. Richardson in 1955, Mexico. He was an American author, amateur ethnomycologist, and Vice President for Public Relations at J.P. Morgan & Co. In the course of independent research, Wasson made contributions to the fields of ethnobotany, botany, and anthropology. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._Gordon_Wasson

It was also against culture in general. Right? I mean, it was basically, when you look at the work of Gordon Wasson and the MK-Ultra funding, you can see that the science was going to be applied on a vast scale! And we’ve talked about where this vast scale psychological operation has various strands. You know, you can trace it back. But, Cameron was very famous, because he got caught!

And it really led to a lot of the research that has become the new history that is emerging through the alternative media, which is, that the whole counterculture was a government or “secret society” operation, right? And the reason why Cameron was so central, is that he got caught!

[05:08]

You know, it’s a kind of a long story, and it’s not kind of what I want to get into, but basically people were able to bring testimony – and there was enough corroboration that it was just inescapable – that Cameron had done this “de-patterning”, which was basically using humans to see if he could erase their mind, their memory, and then recreate a new human being, basically a new mind. This was done without their consent, obviously. No one would consent to this. So it was experimentation with a very strong moral authority, in other words Cameron was taking the position that, you know, my science is more important than your existence. Right!

This is the same moral authority we see in the creation of the counterculture. I mean, who would create the Grateful Dead? Who would have the idea of doing that and have them give out millions of tabs of LSD to teenagers which would produce, you know, wasted lives and in many cases just shattered minds? But some group does have this authority and Cameron was part of it.

Now, in Cameron’s case he got caught. They brought all this evidence, meticulous scientific evidence, you know, showing that here these people were, here are the symptoms, here is a corroborating, … Sort of, there was some documentation on what they were like when they left by other psychiatrists would examine them. And they brought their [law] suits and the CIA fessed up, and it said OK, you know, we’re going to give you a bunch of money. And so they basically bought off the victims of Cameron’s experiments.

So Cameron led to then, you know, a lot of research into MK-Ultra. And this then kind of began to bring about the idea of that MK-Ultra was really not just individual science, ah, science that we can affect individuals, but science on a broad scale.

And so, this was really troubling to me. And I’ve mentioned this a couple of times, Tim, I’ve said, you know, I don’t understand how Ewen Cameron could have done the things that he did, because he is the one who brought to the world the idea of the Germans as a nation that was guilty of atrocity.

Cameron was of an amazingly high stature in the world of psychology. He had, basically, he was running the whole science at this time. He was the head of some world organisation. He was the head of the Canadian psychological departments. And so, he was called on to provide basically the science that would underline what became known as the Nuremberg Trial.

[Image] Aerial view of Nuremberg’s “Palace of Justice” in winter 1945-46

And so, he wrote two books about the Germans. And basically they began, with some other events that we’ll go into in a second, but they began the idea that there was a problem with the German race. So you had, …

Tim: Like a congenital defect, or something?

Joe: Like it was a congenital defect, right! So he wrote these books, one of which he wrote before he arrived in Nuremberg, and the other afterwards. And this is what created the basis for the idea of “German collective guilt”.

He said that, basically, that we had to be certain that we would restructure the German psychology. De-patterning, right. So that it would never arise as a military threat.

So, it was Cameron, then, who basically, … And he used expressions like:

“Germany needed to become the ward of the world!”

Now that’s pretty chilling, given that the wards [patients] of his psychological clinic, didn’t end up too well, right!

But it was just background in psychiatric practice that formed the basis, right, of how the world then, you know, had his narrative that Germany and the German race were guilty of atrocity, mental illness.

[10:01]

Tim: Hey Joe?

Joe: Yeah? Yes sir?

Tim: I’ve got a connection issue. Can give you a call back?

Joe: Oh, sure.

Tim: Okay, thanks. We are back.

Okay, go ahead.

Joe: Okay. So I had this problem in that it was illogical. On one hand Cameron was saying he was one bringing us the understanding of the Germans as the nation committing atrocities and, on the other hand, he was committing the very atrocities he was accusing the Germans! It just made no sense!

And then I realized that it would be logical if what Cameron was doing was, in fact, part of the same operation that he was involved with when he was taking funding from MK-Ultra. Right? In other words, if he was creating basically psychological control for the organization, and he was creating the fake narratives! Just like you had the fake narratives in the counterculture.

You know you have the idea that Wasson was this individual who just was interested in mushrooms, who ends up in Mexico and, you know, find spiritual enlightenment with magic mushrooms, and then Henry Luce publishes his story. And the next thing, you know, here comes the counterculture!

You go into it a little bit and you can see the story is fake and the narrative is fake and it’s just being done to set us up! So that was the way that I thought, well if that’s the case with Cameron, who is part of this MK-Ultra system, then that would suddenly, … Then the fact that he boasts, was able to basically exterminate human beings. Because that’s it literally what he was doing!

And also accuse the German grounds of morality, would suddenly become logical. You see what I mean? In other words, now it makes sense that Cameron is simply creating a fictional narrative. His moral authority is such that he can lie, and he can exterminate human beings. And that would mean that Ewen Cameron was not a character from history that was deeply illogical, but rather he was just a lifetime actor. You know, we discussed this.

And so when I compared Cameron, I tried to look at sort of to the story that he brought up about the German atrocities. I looked for examples of the other aspects of the things that became the foundation of the German atrocity concept, right?

[Image] Charles Douglas Jackson.

Charles Douglas Jackson was born in New York City on 16th March 1902. After graduation from Princeton University in 1924, he joined the media industry. In 1931 he went to work with Henry Luce at Time Magazine. Influenced by the right-wing views of his employer, Jackson became President of the Council for Democracy.

During the Second World War Jackson served as special assistant to the Ambassador to Turkey before joining the OSS in 1943. The following year he was appointed Deputy Chief at the Psychological Warfare Division at Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF).

After the war, Jackson became Managing Director of Time-Life International. In 1948 Frank Wisner, who worked with Jackson in the OSS, was appointed as director of the Office of Special Projects. Soon afterwards it was renamed the Office of Policy Coordination (OPC). This became the espionage and counter-intelligence branch of the Central Intelligence Agency. See more here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/13700-charles-douglas-jackson-and-the-zapruder-film/

You have the Nuremberg trials. You have the atrocities that were listed. And when I studied them I found an interesting thing, that this character CD Jackson [Charles Douglas Jackson] had been involved with, … He was from the OSS.

He was later, someone who worked with the CIA, and he had been the head of the OSS Psychological Warfare Department. I’m butchering the title, but he was basically very high up, and he had a relationship with Allen Dulles. And he was sort of Dulles’ eyes on the ground, in post-war Europe.

[Image] CD Jackson at Buchenwald? Source: https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t988597/

And there’s a picture which purports to be CD Jackson and he’s at Buchenwald [concentration camp]. And there you have two of the components of the narrative! Of the German atrocity narrative. And they are “shrunken heads”, two shrunken heads, and a lamp that has a human skin for the covering of the shade.

So, next to it, is this picture of CD. He’s there next to the table. People can look at those, they’re online and you can see the photograph.

Now I have seen shrunken heads Tim, because I’ve lived in South America and they are from time to time for sale in, you know, street bazaars and whatnot. And I can guarantee you that the shrunken heads that are on the table are not of prisoners from a German POW camp! They are basically, they are legitimate shrunken heads, but they’re from South America. And it’s easy to tell by the hair cut that these heads have. They are not, you know, from anyone who is inside a POW camp.

And the lamp shade has, it’s a video and you can actually see that the lampshade does not possess any tattoos, which is the claim that they were human skin which you could verify, because there were tattoos. However when the camera moves and you can see that the lampshade doesn’t seem to have any. Now, both of these things, which are well-known inside the narrative of German atrocities have disappeared!

[15:17]

It’s amazing, because they would be probably, you know, some of the important historical artifacts in our history, but they have disappeared.

So the fact that Jackson was involved with them is very suspicious to me, because of who he was. He worked with Henry Luce he became the publisher of Time Life, where Gordon Wasson has the story of the magic mushrooms. CD Jackson is the individual who created the Bilderberg Society, the American branch of it, or the American participation in Bilderberg.

And then I think most importantly is he is the one who sequestered, who purchased and sequestered, the Zapruder’s JFK film, right?

So that line up is extremely curious! And it is made coherent by the fact that he was also part of Operation Mockingbird! Now this is where everything starts to clear up to my mind, because with Operation Mockingbird you are now deep into the kind of social control that the Secret Society was creating with the MK-Ultra science, right? Operation Mockingbird, pretty well vetted, you know, listeners can do their research, but it was basically taking control of the media by government intelligence for the purpose of propaganda. To creating fake narratives. And now when you look backwards and you see CD’s participation in the narrative of the atrocity, … For it to be logical it all has to be part of one system.

CD Jackson is another individual like Ewen Cameron that, you know, he had the moral authority to participate in Operation Mockingbird where the citizens are being fed false narratives for the purpose of propaganda.

He had the moral authority to, you know, basically sequester the Zapruder film when obviously, the population needed to see it. And so, when you see him involved with the beginning of the atrocities that become part of the Holocaust narrative, the way that this is logical to me Tim, is that you have, … It’s all part of the same process. That’s all just one narrative.

And then the last curious fact I’ll bring up, I’m sorry to be long-winded. But, you know we had another show we talked about Edward Bernays, and how he talked about propaganda. He talked about mind control, and we have examples of him setting up what becomes the counterculture. And incidentally he did work with Wasson, Gordon Wasson, for ten years — they were very close friends.

And so Edward Bernays, who is the weird double nephew of Sigmund Freud, he was clearly involved in what becomes the culturally debased, anti-family, anti-Catholic, anti-ethnic community. Pro-feminism, you know, feminism, or Gloria Steinem’s version of feminism, pro-drug use, and pro-single mom. I mean, in other words, and pro-pornography! Bernays particularly is important in the production of pornography. And so, you know, …

Tim: So that is the early twentieth century like with “Damaged Goods” [a play], …

[Image] The play “Damaged Goods” (click image to enlarge).

Joe: Exactly right. And he brings up Naginski [sp] who is miming masturbation on stage and he’s producing a play with Rockefeller money, mind you. At the very beginning of the twentieth century. And so, Bernays is clearly plugged into this whole process by which a narrative about, you know, what is good? Sex, drugs and rock’n’roll essentially, is being established. But now when you look for it, …

Tim: Back then, wasn’t it “drugs, sex and jazz”? [laughing]

Joe: Yeah! Exactly! Yes sir! [laughing]

Tim: Rock’n’roll hadn’t been invented yet. [laughing]

Joe: Yeah, rock’n’roll wasn’t, … Right, it was drugs, sex and, … But anyway, … Yeah that’s how far back goes. But anyway so, you know, Dave McGowan shows that there is a generational issue. And this is obvious, because we’re not looking at a, you know, a project that is, you know, MK-Ultra or the CIA. I mean, this is a vast project!

This goes back, certainly to Gyorgy Lukács, … wrecking the name!

Tim: Talked about, you know, Hungary.

Joe: At the end of World War One! Right? Where where he’s trying to, you know, produce a debased sexual education for the recently conquered Hungarian country, under the promotion of Bela Kuhn.

[20:39]

And so that then becomes a Frankfurt School, which then becomes the American jewish Committee’s “Authoritarian Personality”, which then becomes the Macy Conference, which then becomes MK-Ultra. And we’ve done other shows, and we’ve shown all these connections.

So Bernays is just absolutely plugged into it, and now when you come forward one generation, what do you get? Well, you get this weird guy Murray Bernays! He’s the nephew, … Right? Again, like, one nephew from Freud, and now you have Edward’s nephew, Murray Bernays. And who is Murray Bernays?

Well, he creates the Nuremberg Trial.

The Nuremberg Trial was never really intended, … I mean, obviously to be a kind of, you know, “actual trial”! It was a “propaganda”. And Murray was in the Special Projects branch.

And so he basically designed the Nuremberg Trial. And with the idea that they would just have the impression of an actual trial, but that none of the people could really bring evidence in their defense, and then at the end of it they would be, you know, made guilty, and then you’d have this propaganda moment. So, this is, .. See, this is very clear, unfortunately.

And when you look at CD Jackson, … And incidentally one interesting thing about CD Jackson, that I found in doing research, is that Jackson’s not his real name, his real name was Jacobson, he was jewish. Now there’s some dispute about this, but the source is primary, someone who lived next to him at the Dakota Hotel. And in a book about the Dakota, that individual is questioned and he has absolutely no reason to lie about it, I mean, it’s going to be in a public document and he goes —“well, you know”, he’s talking about CD Jackson his next door neighbor and he said:

“Yeah, it’s really interesting. CD, you know, his name wasn’t Jackson, it was Jacobson, he was jewish. And his father owned something called Jacobson’s Marble”.

And now this has been scrubbed! Very mysterious. I’d like to have some citizen researchers help with this, to vet this idea, [it’s] very important to know this. Because if this is correct, and I think it is, because of how primary and clear the, you know, the documentation is. And also the fact that CD Jackson stated that his father was in the marble business. He doesn’t say he changed the name, but the fact that he was in the marble business, I’ve been able to verify. So this looks pretty clear. So that’s why when you get to basically, the Nuremberg Trial, you have a very clear picture of a narrative being created.

Now, you know, people will talk about “Holocaust denial”, which of course, is illegal in many countries. Which, you know, is sort of suspicious in and of itself. I mean, if their evidence was good why does it have to be illegal to discuss it? But it is.

But, this really isn’t something that I think, you know, it’s sort of like the historical individual that’s kind of, has been, there’s a mythology that develops around [it].

People will argue:

“Well was the individual historical or not?”

And to me, .. Just so as I can explain this clearly, it’s like, you know, the person who created the cartoon character Donald Duck had a duck that his neighbor owned, who’s name was Donald, right. Okay, now does that mean that Donald Duck the cartoon is a historical character? [Tim starts chuckling] Well, that’s a semantical issue, and you can’t answer it. And it’s like well, in some ways he you could, but the fact is that the historical Donald could not talk! He couldn’t speak English! So it’s fiction! But it’s not completely fiction. And so you have this like, with historical characters, you know, Buddha, Jesus, you know, people are always arguing:

“Well, you know, can you prove it?”

When you know, you can’t! It’s just impossible. But what you can do is understand the genre.and a cartoon is not history. Right?

[25:27]

And so with the “Holocaust”, in terms of denying it, that seems to me like the position of negation of someone who’s saying, well the Buddha could not have existed, because we know that no one can live on one grain of rice, a day, for a year.

Right? Okay. Well, but wait, he could have existed, this could just be an embellishment. With the “Holocaust” you have these people try to attack those who want to understand what happened, to bring up the details, and facts that we know about these events, and try to see if they are, in fact, created in the right context.

And then they’re attacked on the grounds that:

“Well, this is ‘Holocaust denial’!”

And, so I think that is sophistry. I think that the people who want to revisit the “Holocaust”, because of what we have uncovered in terms of the government production of the counterculture, right? Are trying to determine not, whether or not, there were camps, or whether or not, there were jews in camps, or whether or not this was morally defensible. None of these things are even on the table.

The question to me is, were the events taken and placed into a fictional context, for the purpose of propaganda?

And that’s what I think, when you go through these three individuals that I’ve mentioned: Bernays, Cameron and CD Jackson.

I think that it is far more logical, I mean just clearly, you know, makes much more sense to look at these guys, and their activity, as part of a propaganda narrative. And not one that doesn’t end with the conclusion of the Nuremberg Trial, but never basically ends! One that just continues to go forward, until now we have, you know, even, and then, the last atrocity element, which is the gas chambers.

Which, when I try to do research into it, and I really have done the best I can, just makes no sense to me!

Tim: Yeah, yeah, this, it’s accepted as gospel, you know. I’m reading about MK-Ultra and they talk about the Nazis, “Paperclip Nazis” and it is treated as if MK-Ultra is some sort of virus that’s brought in, with the Nazis. As if, you know, … unable to xxx treachery, lest we bring in these Nazis to infect our, you know, our system.

And within this description they talk about the experiments, these things, which may, or may not, have happened, maybe they’re embellished as well, probably are, just like the other aspects of the so-called “Holocaust” are probably extreme of embellishments, to say the least. But they’re just, .. You’ll hear the thing about Zyklon-B, and IG Farben. And it’s almost as if people are forced to include that, lest they be accused of, you know, of being a denialist or, and having your reputation, or their careers ruined, because there really is no evidence once you look at it. Just to see, .. That IG Farben, that Zyklon-B was used, the gas chambers aren’t there. In fact, Dachau I think, CD Jackson and Hollywood directors actually constructed a fake gas-chamber, as a part of a post-war tour they’d give there, to dignitaries and senators.

Joe: Absolutely, the films ….

Tim: The films that were produced by Alfred Hitchcock and Billy Wilder, and just the footage we have of the bodies being bulldozed. A lot of those are air-raid victims, or typhus victims. And the reality is that all the film we have of the so-called “Holocaust” is from the Western camps, which even based on the official narrative, weren’t part of the “Final Solution”. That all occurred in the east, and we have no film evidence of that.

In fact the aerial photography from reconnaissance during the war, show no such activity going on. Nor are there any records, requisition records, fuel, you know, fuel requisitions, all this display??? Isn’t in the documentary, or physical evidence to support that narrative. So all we have are some horror stories, largely coming from the Russian side, which I would say isn’t a reliable source. So, there’s much there to be skeptical about this, to say the least.

[30:01]

Joe: Yeah, exactly right! And, in fact, I think that we have to put it now into the context of, basically, the revelations concerning MK-Ultra, and the fact that we know that our government engages in the production of “narratives”.

I think that Gordon Wasson’s exposé, is probably the most important thing the citizens have been given, you know, I mean, … Since the Roman Empire! I mean, this is really, really important for citizens to know that!

Because there’s when you can really verify, it is both completely fake, and absolutely central to an enormous social program, you know, the counterculture! You know, …

Tim: Yes, so it reverberates today…

Joe: Yes it still reverberates today. And that of course, can now, you know, when you look at like, you know, the things that you’ve shown about the assault on the cities. How the ethnic communities, the Catholic communities in America’s cities, were then, … These communities were deliberately attacked.

Tim: Hmm, hmm.

Joe: To break them up, and to push them into the suburbs, to create the vast deracinated middle-class, right? That would then be susceptible to the now: Sex, drugs, and rock’n’roll, at this point.

Tim: Yeah, you create the vast wastelands of suburbia, where people are all going into debt, with their consumer goods. And yet they still can’t find happiness, and they find themselves on the anxiety medicine. Because kids no longer have their parishes, no longer have churches, or their ethnic lineage, they are deracinated. You’re right, they’re cut off, and now they have no roots, nothing to appeal to, nothing to refer to, and they wonder why they are unhappy.

Joe: Yeah! Well they have no … got no capacity to resist the mind control. You know, they can’t resist pornography. And pornography, I mean, like the Germans are, you know, claimed to be, sexually deranged, in doing these kinds of activities, but then when you go forward and look at what’s being promoted by the government and the counterculture.

How the government is promoting xxx in the sixties and seventies. Then you can see that the charges against the Germans, to this regard. The charges, are just like the charges that Cameron made, …

Tim: Yeah!

Joe: About them, you know, being in fact, a group that was capable of atrocities. For heaven’s sakes! When you are actually doing what you’re accusing the other individuals of being guilty of! You just don’t have the moral authority! And yet they do it time and time again!

Tim: Yes! He’s standing in the rubble of a bombed out German city, lecturing the Germans on their atrocities…

Joe: Yeah!

Tim: … And you’re asking, well who bombed the city?

Joe: Yeah! Well who fire bombed? Who deliberately targeted civilians? And then you, you know… So you see, this is the thing, and it gets back to my little story about Donald Duck. Is that at the end of the day, I think you’ll find, a basically a foundation of truth.

I am sure jews were in concentration camps.

Tim: Yeah, yeah.

Joe: I’m sure many of them were mistreated, because there would have been tremendous antagonism between German soldiers, and I don’t think that they would have been sought out for any special atrocities. I can’t find any evidence of that.

Tim: It kind of depends on where you are, because you’re mixing, … When you talk about the “Holocaust” they talk about the camps, the labor camps, which are industrial concerns, you know, IG Farben, IBM, General Motors, Standard Oil, — all involved. But then they mix in, like these police battalions on the Eastern Front, or near the front, where they’re fighting with these partisans. And you can’t mix the two, because they are two different environments. [You] can’t mix, the battlefield, you know, this raging battle, to what was going on maybe in Poland, or in parts of Germany, — [they’re] two different things. Not, .. I’m not justifying, what happened to, you know, because these Einsatzgruppen, who would go behind the lines, police battalions to clear out, under the guise of anti-partisan activity; killed a lot of jews! And they wrote about it. Now, also that was their job, this is the “anti-commissar order” that was written up. But the way the Germans saw it, the Germans saw a lot of jews as being Bolsheviks.

[35:01]

So a lot of jews were going to be killed in that battle, in the carnage on the Eastern Front, that level of destruction, there was, ..

Joe: Exactly! Right, well said!

Tim: And not to mention he Soviet Union. They would carry out atrocities and blame them on the Germans! So it’s psychological warfare, it’s propaganda. Remember, the partisans would go out and they would kill German soldiers. So you’re going to have, … Germans aren’t going to be that sympathetic on the battlefield, or that discriminatory about who they kill. And if you want to know, if you want to single out the Germans for being particularly brutal in that factor, … Just look what happened in Vietnam with the Phoenix Program? The search and destroy missions and these things, …

Joe: Right!

Tim: … And multiply that by ten on the Eastern Front. Because it was a much larger war.

Joe: Yeah!

Tim: It is war! And the war itself was a crime, as you say, I mean, the war itself was a crime. And, you know, to pick out this here, as being somehow exceptional from some of the other atrocities, which is the war itself, to me, is well, it’s hypocritical! And you’re being highly selective in your, …

Joe: Well worse, it’s a fake narrative for the purpose of propaganda!

Tim: Yes! Because you’re singling out one side being particularly brutal, when just look at the, … Look at the landscape of Europe! It takes two to tango!

Joe: But, you know, Tim, what I’m seeing, is that the Germans are basically the sort of premier European people. And now you look at this false narrative that comes out of World War Two, and it starts long before any of the data, really, is coming in! I mean, the concept of the “German atrocity” were being developed in 1942 – 43! This is long before anyone, you know, has detailed information about what’s going on in the camps.

But the narrative is being established so, …

Tim: That is right! It’s being fed through, supplied through Harry Dexter White and Henry Morgenthau at the Treasury Department. Because they ran the War Refugee Board!

Joe: Right, and with Ben Hecht writing stories, you know, in Reader’s Digest, …

Tim: Yeah!

Joe: Where in 1943 he talks about six million jews at risk!

Tim: So you have a communist and a committed Zionist, creating the “Holocaust” narrative!

Joe: Right! And so, just like the gas chamber, and the shrunken heads, and the human head [skin] lampshades, the six million number is frankly demonstrably preposterous! It just is a metaphorical number, representing the jewish people.

I don’t know if you’ve ever seen any of the analysis of the use of the term, but “six-million” gets used, you know, thirty, forty times in the media, in the European media, before World War Two breaks out!

Tim: Yeah, exactly!

Joe: Representing the jewish people who are at risk from, …

Tim: They once blamed the Tsar for putting six-million at risk.

Joe: Right! Exactly! So, this is where, … But you see, you’re starting to develop a very clear understanding, because, you know, well the lampshades have disappeared, and they don’t appear in the movie to have any, you know, there’s no tattoos on them.

The human heads are just preposterous! I mean, the skin is black, and the idea that, that was, a POW from World War II, is just ridiculous!

The gas chambers make no sense! Just numerically, make no sense at all! I mean, … And also mechanically. I try to go through how they would kill all these people in these little gas chambers, and then get all the bodies out, and then have enough coal, or whatever it is, to burn them all. And then of course, then you have the question of habeas corpus! Where are all the bodies? Right?

Tim: That’s a whole lot of, a whole lot of bodies to bury, and lots of bodies to get rid of here.

Joe: Right! So, so again it’s you get to the idea, well they may have had gas chambers, people may have died in them, but they weren’t some kind of industrial genocidal machine! Right?

It’s just that, just isn’t any way that this can be true. And so you’ve got to the point where, you know, it’s like with the character Donald Duck, you now understand the genre of the story! We’re not being given history here. We are being given propaganda! And that’s my point Tim, is that we can be sure of that!

Tim: A good example is if you were a prisoner, an inmate, at one of these camps, labor camps, you probably saw a fair amount of brutality, people being treated harshly, even maybe summary executions. And that’s your perspective, you see that. All of a sudden you hear the story of the “Holocaust” and in your mind, you’ve witnessed the “Holocaust”! Although you saw something completely different. It wasn’t an attempt to annihilate an entire race, it was just the type of treatment you get in a labor camp, a slave labor camp, during a war.

[40:05]

Joe: Yeah. And, you know, when I read like the Red Cross reports which are very meticulous. People can contest one way, or another, but they do exist. And they actually have a number of 270,000 for the total mortalities in the camps during World War Two. And they say that maybe forty percent of the population were jews. Then you have, you know, it is a tremendous tragedy, but it is not the unique atrocity that then becomes part of a very powerful narrative propaganda.

Tim: Well it’s like this, what if in the United States, if we had the reality of the internment camps the concentration camps for the Japanese on the West Coast in the United States. And that was a tremendous injustice, to take their property, and in fact, I think the Hyatt Hotel chain is based on stolen property. [laughing] “Friends” within the Treasury Department gave it to them. The whole jewish mobster thing. But that was an incredible injustice to those xxx hundred thousand Japanese. Now what if, on that basis, because that is what it is, okay, They were interned and they were released their civil rights were violated. They lost their property, these things. But what if from that reality this narrative was spun that three million of them were worked to death, or murdered in an attempt to annihilate the entire Japanese people. Would that be a fair, …?

Joe: Exactly!

Tim: No that wouldn’t, …

Joe: Yeah. And that’s a great analogy, because that’s what’s happened. And you see the idea of “Holocaust denier”, this is just an expression to try to dominate the debate. You know, it places the person who is trying to bring this information forward as denying that jews died in the camps.

Tim: Or bad things happened to jews.

Joe: Yeah, right! Or that there weren’t even, you know, atrocities. Right?

Tim: Or that you advocate bad things! Which is illogical. [laughing]

Joe: Yeah. What I’m suggesting is that the better approach is to try to not permit that concept to be something which defeats, you know, intellectual exploration. What I think is that really you try to put on the table, particularly for the public, … Because, you know, in the alternative media I think these ideas can be discussed pretty objectively right now.

And I think that there really is a revisionism to the “Holocaust” that just going on. Because they are somewhat bad data inside of it. Unfortunately I think people are pointing out perhaps accurately that some of this is coming from a bad place in the heart. There is, you know, legitimate anti-semitism. OK? But, that has nothing to do with the idea of, are these details capable of being analysed? I mean, we should be able to have some kind of process where we come to, do the human heads look like Europeans, you know, [laughing] shrunken head? So, that the thing is, …

Tim: It looks like it would be less exasperating, you know, we’re all adults here, can we talk about this? [laughing]

Joe: Can’t even talk about it!

So, it’s just it’s just that we’re trying to find what genre are we dealing with. Is this a legitimate history, right? Or, was this propaganda? If we are dealing with propaganda then we need to go back and look at the details and recreate the narrative. Because otherwise we are going to have a false history, and a false history leads to catastrophe, as you pointed out, you know, a number of times.

False history leads to catastrophe! We need, …

Tim: But this is why the narrator has being spun though. The narrative is being spun and promoted not only, because so much of the postwar international establishment depends upon it. Particularly the state of Israel, the reparations which are billions and billions of dollars, the power of the jewish lobby the United States. A sort of moral extortion of the entire Western world, because this collective guilt has now spread from Germans to the entire world. That’s why you have these museums everywhere.

Joe: Right, exactly!

[Image] Location of Holohoax museums in the USA (click image to enlarge).

Tim: Specifically the middle European phenomenon, we have museums all throughout the United States! You know, they expect to put a museum in Iran for some reason! [laughing]

Joe: Right. I recently gave an example where it does ill to the culture, … A false narrative is always bad! Propaganda is always evil! Right? You shouldn’t use mind control, you should be able to express what you want honestly and then people can make their own minds up.

[45:08]

It was when the Hays Code was disbanded. Now that was the Hollywood production code.

I think it was always intended to be something that would be destroyed. I think Hayes was a set up. I mean, this is another body of analysis, but the code was good as it presented itself to the public. These were great principles. But in the early sixty’s it basically was done away with.

And you have to remember that the Hays Code was put into effect as a way to combat the idea that Hollywood was a jewish debasement of European culture. Because this is really what spawned the Hays Code. Is that if you look at, … I did an interview about this and I was reading a quote of just blatant and, you know, just attacking Hollywood as a jewish plot against European culture. This was after the Fatty Arbuckle event, you know, and where you had all this pornography and there were different scandals, one scandal after another.

And so they brought out the Hays Code, and they brought the Catholics, very famously. They brought the Catholics and basically, you know, it’s people who had been involved in the production of the code, because they wanted to, … Pardon?

Tim: Joseph Brean?

Joe: Yeah. And I’m not sure he was Catholic, but the Catholic Legion of Decency was vetting it. And so the public was being said:

“Hey look! We don’t have to worry about basically jewish depravity against European culture, because you’ve got this code which the Catholics have been involved with.”

But then in the sixty’s it’s disbanded. Now why? Well, I suggested that it was an example of the power of Holocaust, because it just became politically impossible to bring up these concerns about one culture attacking another.

Tim: You couldn’t be critical of any jewish organizations, jewish dominated industries without being accused of being Adolf Hitler.

Joe: Exactly right!

Tim: Well it’s interesting, because the movie that broke the production code was Rod Steiger a so-called “Holocaust” survivor, allegedly, in the “Pawn Broker”. It was a “Holocaust” movie, and it showed the topless, …

Joe: Was that Otto Premeger?

Tim: I think it might have been, I’m not sure [about] that, I’m not sure. But I do know that [in] the movie, the “Pawn Broker“, he was a “Holocaust” survivor and basically it was a “Holocaust” movie. And dealing with it, so a rather artfully, you know, well done movie, but it had that scene that the topless prostitute from the front. And think it was Cardinal Krole, I think, of Philadelphia who was writing about it. And they were trying to explain, the director was trying to say:

“This is art, you want to see the effects.”

He says:

“No. No. Don’t give me that!”

He’s kind of a streetwise priest. Its the thin end of the wedge here. It’s ridiculous. First of all, from a standpoint of art and effect, it’s much more artful to see his face! Rod Steiger’s face, his reaction to the topless lady, not her breasts! [laughing] you just want to show bare breasts because you want pornography in movies! Don’t give me this “art” crap. Degenerates always try to pass themselves off as artists, you know, that’s an old ploy.

Joe: Right! Well that’s fascinating, because that I was unaware of that. I didn’t know that it was a “Holocaust”film. But, this makes perfect sense, very logical, because, the one that I was familiar with, you know, when the code, the code actually was assaulted a number of times. The first time I was aware of was Ottor Premeger’s film. But, immediately after that was the “Pawn Broker“.

And so the Pawn Broker really can be seen — I have some information in front of me — as the sex scene was really kind of the end of the production code.

Tim: Yeah?

Joe: And this is a very, very clear example of what happens when you have the false narrative, right?

Tim: Yeah. By the way, it’s four years later, almost four years later, network television! The one movie that’s allowed to show nudity on network television is, [pause] “Schindler’s List”! [laughing]

Joe: “Schindler’s List”! So you can see the pattern, is that you have a false narrative that basically sets up a kind of psychological structure. That, from which, the population is intellectually impotent! They can’t defend themselves, because, you know, if you want to go after the “Pawn Broker” you’re basically, now wait a second, this is promoting the horrors of the “Holocaust”.

How can you possibly say this? Even if you are ratcheting down your culture into pornography. The “Holocaust” is clearly being used as the bulwark to prevent the population from responding in the way they did in the thirties with the production of the Hays Code in the first place! So there you have it, and that’s why I think it’s so important that we try to move the debate from one of “Holocaust denial” into the question of just —“what genre is it? ”

You know:

 

“Is this propaganda, or is this history? ”

[50:47]

Because when we look at it from that, we just say:

“Okay, what was propaganda? ”

And then you go:

“Oh well, I guess the gas chambers are propaganda”.

I guess that at the end of World War Two, when you look at CD Jackson sitting there with his two shrunken heads, and his human lampshade lamp, which are fake! Right! And, you know, damn well, the guy is producing propaganda! Because this is the guy who founded the Bilderberg, who sequestered, you know, I mean, the Zapruder film, and was a member of Operation Mockingbird — I mean his whole life is just a fake! His production of fake narratives, right? That control the population.

So here he’s in just in perfect logical character, he’s doing exactly what he always does. And so, you know, that these things, you know, you can rest assured that these things are just part of this idea of producing the concept that the Germans were, en masse, engaging in atrocities.

And this is being done to create a psychological intimidation, so that the Europeans will not then resist, the coming secret society control, vis a vis, the political system.

Tim: Yeah, of course, and you alluded to it earlier, you may want to expand upon how they were specifically targeting the Germans, because they’re central to European identity.

Obviously the “war guilt” has completely, psychologically, decapitated Germans, as part of ethnic pride, or national pride for the German State, the German peoples. And you see it today, now, because it makes you unable to articulate, if you’re German, without coming across as a Nazi, any discomfort with the migration of foreigners into your country, for a good example, …

Joe: I didn’t mean, … You made such an important point. I’m sorry I interrupted.

Tim: You alluded to it earlier, …

Joe: Yeah, but, you were pointing out that with the Muslim immigration — which is completely irrational, and culturally destructive — that the Germans cannot resist it, because they will be beaten down by the people who say:

“Well this is multiculturalism and you’re promoting racism, and this is Nazism and therefore [it’ll] be like a second ‘Holocaust’!”

Back to your “Holocaust”.

Tim: I was talking to a German lady, last year about it. And she was talking about these right-wing political movements rising in Germany. And she’s a pleasant, older lady, but she’s completely, you know, the product of post-war Germany. She has no sense of, I mean, she thought it was just horrible that some people would treat immigrant people, emigrating into Germany, that way, or be opposed to it. But of course, she’s not living there, but it’s, …

Joe: Yeah, right.

Tim:… And part of that is because she somehow thinks, her people, her country, are uniquely guilty of a horrible crime. And for her to express, …

Joe: She is victimized by the false narrative. It’s like you said, that if you actually compare it to a xxx For us to even everything that is known about German atrocities in World War Two, was equaled by the Allies, and then exceeded by the Russians! Right?

So the idea that there was some kind of, you know, possibility that the Germans were uniquely deranged, you know, the stuff that Ewen Cameron accuses them of, is simply preposterous! And the poor woman, you know, to live a life victimized by that false narrative.

I mean, hopefully, we can get enough information out, that people will start standing up for themselves, and start demanding that they, … People go back and learn the real history, and learn to distinguish between the false narrative, and the propaganda. So that they can have a clear mind, you know.

[55:00]

Because, when you look at, why are they bringing the Muslims into Europe? Well, they’re doing it, this is “weaponized immigration”!

Tim: Yeah!

Joe: It’s not going on for the benefit of anyone, not even for the Muslims who are coming in, this is going to be a gladiatorial pit!

Tim: There’s a book written, [by] Kelly Greenhill, “Weapons of Mass Migration”, that talks about this as a part of statecraft, and geo-politics. I mean, .. It’s written rather coldly, like, this is what you do. [chuckling]

[Image] “Weapons of Mass Migration: Forced Displacement, Coercion, and Foreign Policy” (2016) by Kelly M. Greenhill

Joe: Well, yeah! And the thing is when you get… you have, you know, the concept of weaponization, where they want to shatter the culture, for the purpose of control! What is the purpose of control for? Well it’s to genocide! Right?

So, when you look at them promoting multiculturalism.. Well multiculturalism is terrific! Feminism, seems like, in a lot of ways, terrific! What’s wrong with this?

Well if it’s weaponized, to be used as an element that is stated to be good, but is being inserted into culture, in such a way as to produce impotent citizens that can be easily controlled, and destroyed, and attacked! Then it’s wrong!

Then the citizens have to respond against it, and this is what we’re looking at, and that’s why I think that the stuff we’ve been talking about. With reviewing the elements of the German atrocities, to see what was used as propaganda after World War Two, is really very liberating! It makes for much clearer minds.

I was looking at a video, and it showed a very emaciated POW, and they were highlighting his leg, which was just emaciated, like he hadn’t had any food and was about to die of starvation. And then it suddenly stopped, and into the scene appeared Billy Wilder!
[Tim chuckling]

And then everyone is sitting and talking and it gets re-shot. Now this is propaganda! You see. Billy Wilder was not there as a historian, he wasn’t brought there to create an accurate history. He was there, because he creates fiction! He’s a propagandist! He’s also a Free-mason, and just a bizarre character.

But this is why he is there, and that’s why, you know, when you look at, … It’s just by an amazing quirk of history, it is another Bernays, who is structuring the Nuremberg Trial! Right?

You can rest assured you’re not dealing with a process that’s attempting to find the truth; it’s a process to create propaganda! This is what the family [Bernays] does.

So we have been, you know, been basically led into a debased and a weakened condition, by a system of propaganda that it’s easy to trace all the way back to György Lukács after World War One, and even before that.

So, people just need to find the energy to do the research, to verify everything that we’ve been saying, so that they can do their own research, and get information that’s now available, and clear their minds up, Tim!

Tim: And you mention, of course, CD Jackson and his role in Mockingbird, which I think dates around 1949, which is pretty much right after the CIA was created. So that program was instituted immediately after the CIA was created. Of course, you also have Frank Wisner, who referred to his effort, his ability, to manipulate the American people, through the media, the “Mighty Wurlitzer”. You play the people like a Wurlizter organ. And this is done through the control of the media, through CIA, Mockingbird, and also through the Time Life empire, which goes back to Skull and Bones.

[Image] “The Mighty Wurlitzer: How the CIA Played America” by Hugh Wilford (2009) and Frank Wisner (right).

“In 1967 the magazine Ramparts ran an exposé revealing that the Central Intelligence Agency had been secretly funding and managing a wide range of citizen front groups intended to counter communist influence around the world. In addition to embarrassing prominent individuals caught up, wittingly or unwittingly, in the secret superpower struggle for hearts and minds, the revelations of 1967 were one of the worst operational disasters in the history of American intelligence and presaged a series of public scandals from which the CIA’s reputation has arguably never recovered.

CIA official Frank Wisner called the operation his “mighty Wurlitzer,” on which he could play any propaganda tune. In this illuminating book, Hugh Wilford provides the first comprehensive account of the clandestine relationship between the CIA and its front organizations. Using an unprecedented wealth of sources, he traces the rise and fall of America’s Cold War front network from its origins in the 1940s to its Third World expansion during the 1950s and ultimate collapse in the 1960s.”

See also: http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKwisner.htm

All goes back to the same secret society that created outfits, which created things like the CIA. Which is sort of this consummation of the sort of incestuous relationship, that these families, the financial interests, the banks, have with government, going way back in history. At least in American history at that time. Because you saw that with the Spanish-American War. National City Bank worked with the newspapers, the yellow journalists to foment that war, so they could seize the sugar fields in Cuba, and also go expand into Asia, and then work with the Japanese, … [chuckling]

Joe: Yeah!

Tim: … For a while, until they turned on the Japanese.

[60:04]

Joe: I mean you have like the first, you know, like heads of the CIA. You’ve got Donovan, Dulles, and Helms.

Well, what is their, … you know, like common theme? Well, they’re all investment banking attorneys!

Tim: Yeah.

Joe: You know, well wait a sec. This is supposed to be, you know, international intelligence organization, that we can’t, …you know, how come every single one of them, basically is a manager of money using legality. It just seems preposterous, and then, of course, Donovan is working with the head of the OSS in Europe, with setting up things like, you know, the Nuremberg trial.

And this is Mellon, right? I mean, this is like General whatever, you know. Colonel Mellon, who’s like the scion of the Mellon family! I mean, the influence of the banking families, inside of this mess, is self-evident! And just another, … Oh, it’s just another clear point, that the public needs to recognize, to understand that it is an organized society. The democracy we have is fake! Decisions were being made, based on the propaganda.

I mean, the women you talked about, who believed that the Germans had somehow uniquely committed crimes against humanity. You know, that’s an individual that can’t participate in democracy, reasonably. Because they have a false history.

Tim: Because she can’t even, … She’s so, … Her guilt is so pathological, and so internalized, that the assault on her own community, her own ethnicity, she can’t even articulate an argument, she can’t even feel it!

Joe: Yeah, that’s right! And that’s like when you see, like college kids, women, who are, you know, victims of cultural Marxism, that you want to basically, physically defend safe spaces, that, .. So they can have just these culturally destructive organizations. The whole history of how these ideas came into that person’s head, needs to be exposed to the individual. So that then they can go:

“Oh, my gosh! I have been controlled! I’m heading off a cliff, …”

Tim: Well, these are like foundational beliefs. It’s very hard when you come across something as defining as the “Holocaust” narrative, and you find that it starts to crumble under scrutiny. All of a sudden your worldview starts to crumble, and what happens is you’re not going…

Joe: What are you going to do? Well, that’s, …

Tim: Oh, I got to start, I got to get to work! Because I can’t trust these institutions that educated me, that informed me, the media! So you have two choices, you can say:

“Now this is insane, and I’m not going to hear it, and I’m just going to go back to where I think the world is, because I’ve already put so many, … I’ve invested so much time into it, and it would require me to go back and re-evaluate so much. And I don’t have time, nor have the inclination to do this. I’m not going to do this. I’d rather, … I’m much more comfortable with the moralistic fairy tale I’ve been given, and so I’m not going hear any more!”

Joe: Yeah.

Tim: So, you let your world crumble, and then you realise:

“Huh oh! Why, you can’t rely on the universities to educate you, and why am I paying for it? you can’t rely on the constitutional legal authorities to protect your Rights. You can’t rely on government. You can’t rely on the media. You can’t read the newspapers, or the, you know, the mainstream media to inform you. I have to start thinking.”

I’m all of a sudden, you’re kind of stuck in a sort of a befuddlement, because now, where do you get your information from? It becomes very confusing and bewildering. And if you’re, … like most people, you just want the media to kind of distill the news for you, provide it for you, put it in a little package, wrap it with a little bow, this is how the world works. Most people want that, because they have to go to work, and then the leisure time, either do something with their family, or they want to be entertained.

And who has the time, who has the time to hold these psychopaths accountable?

That’s the big problem, no one has the practical time to hold these psychopaths accountable!

And this is why self-government; the rule of law; democracy; is such a sham! Because no one puts the time in to hold these crooks, and psychopaths accountable!

Joe: They don’t have the time, and they don’t have the capacity and that’s why, of course, the Internet is so dangerous to the oligarchs, because:

One, the citizens can communicate with one another. As for example, us now with the people who are listening to the show. And moreover, you can get vast amounts of information very quickly. And if people start thinking clearly, then it becomes very dangerous because, you know, I think when you have someone, for example, like the individual you were talking about who is confused, [it’s] hard to reach them, even with facts, and clear analysis. But as people start to move down the path you describe, it starts out with a little bit of humility, and it’s very humbling.

[65:25]

Oh my gosh! I can’t believe this, I’ve been fooled! Very, very humbling!

I remember when I spent like a very bad couple months looking at the building seven [WTC7] collapse. And I had to do this kind of bizarre mental-shift thinking, that I’ve been dealing with the “Government” and “My Nation”, the way I have been told about it, and then suddenly I realize, wait a second, it’s completely fake!

Tim: Yeah.

Joe: And that was very difficult, and it’s gotten better though, because now there are, at that time there really wasn’t, you know, the media hadn’t really blossomed, but now, it’s just, basically it’s spreading everywhere. And so groups are becoming established, people are resisting, and the basic natural capacity of the human intellect is being unleashed!

Tim: Yeah, if you don’t believe that buildings can be hit by airplanes, and aviation fuel can cause them to collapse, free-fall, and symmetrical collapse, you may doubt, you may be skeptical, when the doctor says, your new-born baby should be given hepatitis-B shot! [laughing]

Joe: [laughs]

Tim: I find the same people who don’t doubt babies being given hepatitis-B shots, under the cover of vaccines, also don’t, … have no problem with watching these buildings collapse free-fall, and symmetrical collapse, suffering symmetrical damage.

Joe: What a great analysis! In your interview with April Bowden?

Tim: Yeah.

Joe: You cover that point, and it’s just so profound! It’s like:

“Look if they’re going to be giving new-born males vaccines against sexually transmitted disease, then the whole system is completely fake!”

Tim: Why would anyone to touch me? Get away from me! You’re a quack, a nut!

Joe: Yeah! Just get out of there! And so that’s the moment. It’s when the citizen just, … I don’t know how to bring it about, I wish I did, Tim. I wish I could find some way of expressing the research I’ve done, or the thinking that I’ve done, about these things, in a form that would help people get their light turned on! Everyone basically has to go their own path, I imagine.

Tim: Yeah, well a lot of, … I guess as I talk about these things in mixed company, if you raise questions, ask something, they act as if you think you have the answer. No, what I’m saying is, I don’t! [chuckling]

Joe: Right.

Tim: I’m just pointing out these inconsistencies, these problems. Explain this to me in the context of the official narrative we’ve been given. I’m pointing out that the narratives that we’ve been given, are false!

Joe: Right.

Tim: And half-truths are outright lies! And the best lies are actually have truths, or partial truths.

Joe: Yeah. We’re trying to investigate, to determine the “genre”. I mean, truth is something that in the absolute sense, is something that isn’t even possible, we’re just trying to determine what is the damn “genre”!

Is it propaganda? Is it mind control? Or is it history? If it’s history, there’s a very precise scrutiny that it can be placed under, and it can satisfy the criteria of analysis!

There should be no prohibition of analysis of what is history!

The fact that all these countries have created laws against, you know, questioning the “Holocaust” is an ABSOLUTE assertion that it is propaganda!

Because history never has a problem being scrutinised! Propaganda always does!

And all we’re trying to do, we say:

“Look! We’ve got all of these elements that are built into this German maniac atrocity, story-line about their behaviour in World War Two in the “Holocaust”. And all of these details seem to be ahistorical, but they all work in terms of propaganda.”

So the question is: What is the genre? And it just, .. To me it’s just self-evident! And particularly when you show all these connections, and just, I mean, CD Jackson is a “propagandist” – that’s what he does!

[69:56]

Tim: In the entire post war network news establishment…

Joe: Right!

Tim: He slithered out from Office of War Information, OSS, Walter Cronkite’s, Sarnoff, William Paley, …

Joe: Herbert Marcuse.

Tim: Herbert Marcuse, [laughing] media, entertainer… the whole thing on how we are supposed to understand the world, is seen through their lens, you know…

Joe: Yeah!

Tim:… And to take it as gospel, is ridiculous! I mean, it’s just, … Think about it for a couple seconds.

Joe: Well it’s sort of like saying:

“Well gee, I mean, Bernays created the Nuremberg Trial, so I guess I should really treat it as objective history, …”

Tim: Yeah! Well we now know that people were tortured and coerced and, …

Joe: Yeah and also, … Well wait! Doesn’t this family just create propaganda? Didn’t they invent the term?

Tim: Didn’t he write a book?

[“Propaganda”, an influential book written by Edward L. Bernays in 1928, incorporated the literature from social science and psychological manipulation into an examination of the techniques of public communication. Bernays wrote the book in response to the success of some of his earlier works such as “Crystallizing Public Opinion” (1923) and “A Public Relations Counsel” (1927). Propaganda explored the psychology behind manipulating masses and the ability to use symbolic action and propaganda to influence politics, effect social change, and lobby for gender and racial equality. Walter Lippman was Bernays’ unacknowledged American mentor and his work “The Phantom Public” greatly influenced the ideas expressed in “Propaganda” a year later. The work propelled Bernays into media historians’ view of him as the “father of public relations.”
Source: https:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propagandation (book) ]

Joe: I mean, don’t they talk about how like a small group of people can control the ways that everyone understands history? Right?

So this in, and of itself, should just raise the red flag!

We’re dealing with propagandists! When they wanted to document, right, did they bring in a historian or a fictional filmmaker? I mean the people who created these videos, it’s Billy Wilder, folks!

I mean, this is the guy that created the scene with Marilyn Monroe on a street grill with her dress billowing up! This is what the guy does! He creates scenes for emotional effect, he’s not a historian!

[Image] Billy Wilder with Marilyn Monroe on the set of The Seven Year Itch.

“Marilyn Monroe mesmerized a crowd of lucky onlookers while her white dress blew suggestively above her knees—and sometimes over her head. It was 1954, and the director Billy Wilder was filming a scene of the film The Seven Year Itch on Lexington Avenue between 52nd and 53rd Street in New York City. In the script, Marilyn Monroe and co-star Tom Ewell exit a movie theater and a breeze from the subway passing below lifts Marilyn’s skirt. Instead of rushing to cover her legs, as any decent woman of that era would have, Marilyn exclaims, “Isn’t it delicious?”” Source: https://www.biography.com/news/marilyn-monroe-seven-year-itch-dress-photos

He’s not a historian! [laughing] It is not history!

Tim: It’s Steven Spielberg, he won the, … He brought us the movie about the “Holocaust”. Also brought us a movie about dinosaurs that are alive.

Joe: Yeah! That’s right! [laughing]

Tim: So, you know…

Joe: So it’s just, we have to flip the bit, you know, and just say:

“You know what? Too much propaganda! Too little history! We’re going to change direction here, and the citizens are going to, as a group, say: You know what! We want to revisit this whole thing!”

We want to go back and look at every single detail; and don’t hit us with the idea that, you know, we’re “Holocaust deniers”, we’re not! We just want to know the genre that we’re being subjected to.

Tim: Well that term wasn’t used until the seventy’s. I think Martin Gilbert wrote a book called, “The Holocaust”* and then there was the CBS mini-series “Holocaust”.

[*Sir Martin Gilbert (25 October 1936 – 3 February 2015) was a jewish-British historian and honorary Fellow of Merton College, University of Oxford. He was the author of eighty-eight books, including works on Winston Churchill, the 20th century, and Jewish history.

Author of “The Holocaust: A History of the Jews of Europe During the Second World War” (1987)]

[Image] Martin Gilbert and his 1987 book “The Holocaust“. Right — Gilbert being awarded an honorary doctorate at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Beersheba, Israel, 2011.

Joe: Yeah!

Tim: Prior to that wasn’t using the historiography of the Second World War. It wasn’t so, … centered around the “Holocaust”.

Now it is. Nazis, and jews, and the “Holocaust”. And you know, World War Two was a global conflagration and it meant different things to different people as they experienced it differently. Certainly it was different for the Americans on the Home Front than if you were in Europe, you know, than where it was being fought in Asia. It’s different if you were, … Your experience of the war was different if you were an air-raid victim in Dresden, or if you were an inmate at a concentration camp, or a labor camp, or if you’re on the, you know, a soldier at the Eastern Front. And your idea of who was good or bad differs!

I heard an account of some ethnic Georgians, I believe, during this, the 1942 campaign. The Germans, the Wehrmacht, liberated a train that was headed east to Siberia, to the gulag, and they liberated these people and saved their lives from the Russians. So their understanding of who was bad and who was good in that war is very different than maybe a jewish Pole, a Polish jew.

Joe: Yeah.

Tim: If you were an Indian, and starving to death, because of the British policies, when they were stealing all the food out of Bengal in 1943, to export it to England. And your family starved to death, because of the forced famine at the hands of the British. Your idea of who was good, and who was bad is different in that war. So it’s a very complex event, it isn’t simple.

And that should be obviously, that’s, …

Joe: Yes, that’s right. And what happens, … To me, it’s like, okay, so the question is how many of these elements have to go into dispute, or question marks. I mean the gas chambers. If you subtract that from the narrative? The lampshade? What about the human experimentation? Right? That seems to have been exactly the foundation of the MK-Ultra in experimentation, right?

And then the number of people killed in the camps, what about this the, like the Red Cross’ estimates for one hundred thousand jewish deaths?

In other words if the six-million goes away? If you start losing the details, if they start disappearing as historical elements, if they start being exposed as — well it’s just propaganda we’re trying, … How many of these things have to disappear before the “Holocaust” then, doesn’t have the psychological power, that the people who created the propaganda wanted it to have?

[75:04]

You know, how many of these elements, I mean, if we really… if people go:

“Well gee! Bernays created the Nuremberg trial. Is that something you can really trust?”

I mean, CD Jackson, the guy who set up Bilderberg; and who was, Henry Luce, Skull and Bones, who created the Gordon Wasson fake narrative to set up the “Counterculture”?

I mean, you can’t trust CD Jackson, right? And then Ewen Cameron, he’s writing these stories about the German people, as these atrocity creators, and there’s something deranged, — but wait a second, Ewen Cameron is MK-Ultra, human experimentations, that are so vicious, that it’s even hard to talk about them!

Tim: Right.

Joe: So I guess he’s gone too! Right?

Tim: Right.

Joe: Well then now, wait a second, what’s left of the propaganda?

You see, the propaganda power starts to disappear. You’re still left with the historical details, we’re not denying anything, we are simply going through, and trying to make sense of what has been asserted, and which can be, basically, put: As either false, or as a question mark.

And then looking at what’s left, to see, well how much “Political Power” does the propaganda – that tries to come from something that is closer to history – have?

Tim: Hmm, hmm.

Joe: And you see my point is that it has none!

And that’s really what people are afraid of and that’s why they’ve made these laws, you know, so people can’t study it.

Tim: Yeah.

Joe: And they try to, … they’re constantly trying to reinforce the power of the “Holocaust” with these films and stuff.

Because they know it can’t stand any real scrutiny. It’s simple! It’s clear as a bell, to me! It’s just they know it can’t, because they know that if one, or two of these details starts to collapse, and then people go:

“Well, I’m going to look at another detail.”

It doesn’t take many, for people to realize, it’s propaganda, it’s not history. And that’s why the shrunken heads, and the lampshade business, I mean, those are very valuable things, those are like the pay requisitions for MK-Ultra.

Tim: Yeah, yeah.

Joe: They are so obviously fake! And they show that there was an attempt to create propaganda, at the very day that the US arrove [arrived] at the so-called concentration camps, …

Tim: Yeah.

Joe: The very day! So they had this in mind, the propaganda has been going full-force since the very beginning!

Tim: Well to this day the camps are now, you know, the camps are now theme parks.

Joe: Yeah!